[loldot_]

The ban is not negative; pretending it has lead to a meaningful reduction in plastic ocean waste is. I think the reason most people are negative to the ban is that a great deal of resources has been spent on something that tries to solve a minuscule problem (0.03% of plastic waste) while at the same time inconveniencing people with disabilities for example. These resources could have been allocated to for instance a small financial reward for turning in broken/abandoned fishing nets.

[wombatmobile]

> a minuscule problem (0.03% of plastic waste)

That's one metric. Are you sure it's the best way to understand this question?

https://www.strawlessocean.org/faq

[qmmmur]

Sure but I feel like it's just low hanging fruit which is why is so foregrounded

[creato]

You're ignoring the costs of these bans. They are low hanging fruit, but they also have almost zero impact. At the same time, there is opportunity cost in political capital as well as resentment against environmental causes. It would be nice if that resentment at least came with some substantial improvement and not symbolic hollow victories.