Schooling The Younger Generation Being Green

I found an interesting post on Social Media, that I thought we could dissect together. It basically told a story of the young cashier suggesting to a much older lady that she should bring her own grocery bags, because plastic bags are not good for the environment. The older lady then begins to school her on who the original recycling folks were.

The post was shared over 2+ million times



Here's the entire blub:

Checking out at the store, the young cashier suggested to the much older lady that she should bring her own grocery bags, because plastic bags are not good for the environment.

The woman apologized to the young girl and explained, "We didn't have this 'green thing' back in my earlier days." The young clerk responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment for future generations." The older lady said that she was right -- our generation didn't have the "green thing" in its day. The older lady went on to explain: Back then, we returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store.

The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled. But we didn't have the "green thing" back in our day. Grocery stores bagged our groceries in brown paper bags that we reused for numerous things. Most memorable besides household garbage bags was the use of brown paper bags as book covers for our school books.

This was to ensure that public property (the books provided for our use by the school) was not defaced by our scribblings. Then we were able to personalize our books on the brown paper bags. But, too bad we didn't do the "green thing" back then. We walked up stairs because we didn't have an escalator in every store and office building.

We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks. But she was right. We didn't have the "green thing" in our day. Back then we washed the baby's diapers because we didn't have the throw away kind.

We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy-gobbling machine burning up 220 volts. Wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. But that young lady is right; we didn't have the "green thing" back in our day.

Back then we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the state of Montana. In the kitchen we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us.

When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity. But she's right; we didn't have the "green thing" back then.

We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blade in a r azor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull. But we didn't have the "green thing" back then.

Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service in the family's $45,000 SUV or van, which cost what a whole house did before the"green thing." We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances.

And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 23,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest burger joint. But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the "green thing" back then?

Please forward this on to another selfish old person who needs a lesson in conservation from a smart ass young person.

We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to piss us off... Especially from a tattooed, multiple pierced smartass who can't make change without the cash register telling them how much.

Well she really showed her huh?

Now aside from personally attacking this young woman, on her physical appearance, and reprimanding her on an opinion, and diminishing her job capabilities; which generation created, profited, supported, and indoctrinated those younger than them with what we have today?

Who's to blame for where we are at?

a reply to: Realtruth

Everyone is to blame. We all got lazy and now we are all paying for it.

Let's face it, not many people want or have the time to dry clothes on the line.
I did it growing up and hated it. Same goes for a lot of green ways of living.
I like flushing the toilet.
I enjoy riding in a car.

I think there is a middle ground. We need to find it.

If you want to be green, you have to go for the root of the problem and not the leaves. The younger generation IS the root of the problem. The fewer of them there are, the less of an impact they'll have on the environment. So just use birth control and encourage the people who are already here to use birth control and not be stupid and there will be a smaller younger generation. This will automatically mean less environmental impact. THEN you can start thinking about reducing quality of life for environmental reasons once you've already done the easiest thing of all (nothing).

That's right. Doing nothing is good for the environment. You can't be destroying the environment if you don't exist. So the future generations will have profoundly less impact if they're never born. See how that works? And it's VERY easy and doesn't require any hard thinking or calculating or refraining from turning up your heat when you're cold. All you gotta do is just not make a baby and convince a few million other people not to make one either and you're done.

Boy. That's a pretty low tech solution to a problem that seems to be a big mystery to the billions of people who are worried about it while they're busy making more humans.

I know! Let's have 7 kids and 3 dogs and then try to figure out how to "live green" without making all their lives suck.

The customer is always right.

Business 101.

a reply to: Realtruth

She's not wrong....but she's leaving out things like:

Widespread use of DDT in her time, open air nuclear testing, use of CFC's in appliances, using dieldrin, chlordane and heptachlor, to try and wipe out entire species, multiple carcinogens and toxic chemicals banned today used in food production, lead in gasoline, paint, children's toys and other things, widespread use of asbestos, use of PCB's and dioxins, mercury in children's toys, radioactive milk....anyway...there's lots more.

originally posted by: dug88
a reply to: Realtruth

She's not wrong....but she's leaving out things like:

Widespread use of DDT in her time, open air nuclear testing, use of CFC's in appliances, using dieldrin, chlordane and heptachlor, to try and wipe out entire species, multiple carcinogens and toxic chemicals banned today used in food production, lead in gasoline, paint, children's toys and other things, widespread use of asbestos, use of PCB's and dioxins, mercury in children's toys, radioactive milk....anyway...there's lots more.

In all fairness, we were doing just that, testing. The things we now know are bad, we are still using. So I think the old woman's point still stands valid mostly.

originally posted by: CosmicAwakening

originally posted by: dug88
a reply to: Realtruth

She's not wrong....but she's leaving out things like:

Widespread use of DDT in her time, open air nuclear testing, use of CFC's in appliances, using dieldrin, chlordane and heptachlor, to try and wipe out entire species, multiple carcinogens and toxic chemicals banned today used in food production, lead in gasoline, paint, children's toys and other things, widespread use of asbestos, use of PCB's and dioxins, mercury in children's toys, radioactive milk....anyway...there's lots more.

In all fairness, we were doing just that, testing. The things we now know are bad, we are still using. So I think the old woman's point still stands valid mostly.

Actually, everything I listed was banned at some point and the dangers of those things were known, but ignored until people started getting pissed off.

originally posted by: Realtruth


Who's to blame for where we are at?

I'm going to throw two words at you and that is all.

Planned Obsolescence.

Link to explain to the younger crowd.

I've got to go get new tennis balls for my walker and batteries for my hearing aid.

I guess some people want groceries and not a guilt trip.

As far as who is to blame? I think it may have been ford who started this micro management stuff...

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: Realtruth

Everyone is to blame. We all got lazy and now we are all paying for it.

Let's face it, not many people want or have the time to dry clothes on the line.
I did it growing up and hated it. Same goes for a lot of green ways of living.
I like flushing the toilet.
I enjoy riding in a car.

I think there is a middle ground. We need to find it.

Haha. "everyone is to blame". My first thought to OP's question too. It was bound to get worse with corporations realizing they can just use plastic for everything with increasing manufacturing techniques and automation.

I know people hate big. gov., but I'm wondering if requiring your own bags could be a law. If you forget to bring a bag, then you pay for the store's bags and bring them back for a bag refund.

That's not to say that badgering an old lady like that is right..

Each generation can be blamed if you think about it.. "Back in our day everybody grew their food, what is this thing called a grocery store and why are you killing trees for paper bags?" What? You can't ride a horse? So see, each subsequent generation is going to think the newer one is lazy.

a reply to: network dude

Planned Obsolescence

Well they had to come up with a plan for goods to match darwin's theory. That way they could fit it all in the electric universe.

#zipfileearth

If things were so great "back in her day"...

Tell me why all of her generation stopped practicing these things?
And why are they all on fakebook bitchin about their glory days?
Shouldn't they still be using their one outlet for a radio?
Or hanging clothes to dry?
Canning all their vegetables?

Why is it, that all I see buying these new-fangled conveniencs gadgets are that generation? Maybe because our generation can't afford to keep up with the way they left us?


Right. Because even I know that convenience has a cost.
And I like canning things or hunting for foods.
Letting my clothes hang to dry.


Hypocrites. Practice what you preach.

I'm getting old, I remember those days. When I was young, I rode a bike and walked a lot, I would not get a ride if I went to boyscouts, it was only a mile from my house. Good exercise walking like that, no need to have exercise equipment or fancy fit bits back then. I remember the glass bottles and actually we were getting milk in glass bottles bottled here until recently, they quit making them. Now they are in plastic jugs. The organic milks are in cardboard cartons, we buy those, we use them to put scraps in on the counter when they are empty, that way if a crow gets the garbage bags, it is less of a mess. We usually get paper bags and always reuse them, we also reuse most of the plastic bags we get. We also have many cloth bags we use all the time.

I used to go shoot rats at the dump, there was not much plastic at the dump. Now, there is plastic everywhere. There was way less garbage those days too, too much packaging on everything these days, most of which is plastic. I get my cow wrapped in double freezer paper, no plastic. It is better for the environment, paper is better in the landfill than plastic.

This whole green movement is so messed up, sure it is better, but these new young are still putting unnatural chemistry on their faces which goes into the wastewater. Our society is pushing medicines that poison the wastewater too, many chemicals are being used that when combined in the sewer make chemicals bad for the environment. It was not nearly as bad back in the early sixties and before as it is now. I don't think the young can comprehend that it used to be better till people started to get entitled and wanted everything prepackaged. It is a mess today, the toxins in this plastic are really hurting the environment when they disolve and are hurting us too, endocrine disruptors are plaguing the environment.

I do not like what AOC is proposing, we just need to step back and put more businesses within walking distance in communities so people can walk. These big chain stores miles from people's neighborhoods are bad for us, walking to the store was good exercise.

originally posted by: rickymouse


I do not like what AOC is proposing, we just need to step back and put more businesses within walking distance in communities so people can walk. These big chain stores miles from people's neighborhoods are bad for us, walking to the store was good exercise.

Heck people don't even need to walk anymore just order from Amazon, and their local grocery store. smh

a reply to: Realtruth

Who's to blame for where we are at?

WWF for one - sets aside huge tracts of Land for the future - to the benefit of the Elite. Their co-founders the Royals also suggested that man is a blight that needs to be eradicated.

theconversation.com...

For example, as patron of the Tusk Trust Prince William said last year, “Africa’s natural heritage is the world’s natural heritage. We have to preserve places like this… not just for us, but for future generations.” Preserving African landscapes for “us” essentially meant wealthy Britons, for they were the audience. But whose lands are they? If they are part of the world’s heritage, then who in the world gave the Prince William the responsibility to lead conservation efforts? This is the sort of thinking which raises hackles and leads to phrases like “new imperialism”.

I love that a whole generation is being indoctrinated into believing that doom is inevitable - allows for the conditioning where the middle class is tasked with paying higher taxes and accepting back less in return from their governments.

When will people wake up from the delusion that the Elite pay their fare share. They accumulate at an unprecedented level, don't pay their way but wave their arms saying "look at us we are conservers - we've set up these Foundations" blah blah

Manufacturing process's dont allow for fridges to be repaired as 1 example, it's cheaper to throw away then repair. Who would spend about $500 ( parts and about 2-3 hrs labour ) repairing a TV when new it costs $500

Our taxes and profits to Corps and Governments go towards them finding cleverer ways to put up more cameras, employ more security with more firepower. We need "permission" in the form of permits from them to "protest". We're worked to death for 50 years and have little to show for it.

Its all a great "con", we've been hoodwinked with images of "crying bears" or tigers in cages and asking us to care and donate.

We fail to see the cages being built around humanity.

Voices of dissent are silenced from social media platforms. Censorship dictates what you are not allowed to see.

a reply to: BrianFlanders

Don't worry the elite use these principles in adding stuff to vaccinations in 3rd world countries to stop them breeding.

You are part of the problem if that is your simplistic approach.

a reply to: dug88

Yes we know that - but was her generation of Consumer creating that or the Manufacturers who sought greater profits for less work through additives?

Funny how the Government ( our taxes ) is left to pick up the health tab. Rarely will the source of the problem be made to pay the repair bill.