And maybe it could be price adjusted for income, so everyone should do the same effort for the environment.
That would generally reward people so much for the good things you mentioned that they still could afgord the one bad thing...
So yeah, it's incredibly relevant.
Cloth being better is something else entirely, nor was I suggesting that disposable diapers be discounted with taxpayer money. The point was "Why does the poor in the richest country in the world have to worry about something as inane as affording diapers in 2018?"
I agree that people should use cloth - but the response to "Hey, this poor person can't even really afford to buy diapers!" shouldn't be "wow that damn government making her dependent on welfare bux, shes so dumb she doesn't even know about cloth too!". It just reeks of being completely out of touch with the poor experience in America. Maternity leave isn't really a thing for someone like her - should she maybe be working an extra job or two to afford better diapers? Even if she doesn't, how do you know she has the time to deal with changing and washing cloth diapers? Being a stay at home mom doesn't exactly work as well as it did in the 50s or 60s, and she doesn't have a husband working for a tech company or whatever who can support a family on a single salary.
I don't disagree with a discussion on how we externalize costs in cell phones, take out food containers, packaging for toilet paper, or whatever else. But however reasonable that discussion is, it was besides the point of this discussion.
Not everything is better because it happened in the past. God forbid you have to be a little bit more mindful of wanton consumption than people were in $CURRENT_YEAR - 50.
Calling a country third world because you can't throw away tons of disposable diapers... now that's a low standard, or just ridiculously privileged.