I see why I'm confused. Yes. You're right, because you're talking about whether a product infringes. I'm not talking about whether you're infringing. I'm talking about whether the claims are valid in the first place.
A patent shall be presumed valid. Each claim of a patent (whether in independent, dependent, or multiple dependent form) shall be presumed valid independently of the validity of other claims; dependent or multiple dependent claims shall be presumed valid even though dependent upon an invalid claim.
For a patent to be valid, each and every independent claim must stand on its own, with no support.
Nope. Completely wrong. For a patent to be invalid, all of those claims must by invalid. Claim 2 is a completely different invention from claim 1. If an invention violated claim 17 and no other it infringes the patent
The paper bag in claim 1 is the paper bag as described in the description. The claim doesn't go into description because it is just explaining what the patent claims. That is; it claims the white paper bag described in the description.
It is much easier to suggest solutions when you know nothing about the problem.