View Poll Results: Incandescent Light bulb ban.... do you care?

Voters
76. You may not vote on this poll
  • I care! The ban is foolish! I want my incandescent bulbs!

    20 26.32%
  • I like the ban! Bring on new lighting technology!

    20 26.32%
  • I dont care either way!

    13 17.11%
  • I like incandescent bulbs and fluorescent ones. But dont make a law about them!

    19 25.00%
  • OTHER / I dont know / Chimichanga

    4 5.26%
Page 40 of 46 FirstFirst ... 303839404142 ... LastLast
Results 391 to 400 of 452

Thread: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

  1. #391
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:15 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,173

    Re: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychoclown View Post
    To my libertarian and small government conservative friends: Calling energy standards on light bulbs tyranny and oppression is overstating your case a bit.
    I disagree. Early in this discussion, I provided definitions for oppressive, authoritarian, and tyranny. They are perfect words to demonstrate what the left is doing with this law.

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychoclown View Post
    If you're are concerned about the size and scope of government, there are far more pressing concerns than one minor additional energy standard.
    That might be true; however, as the liberals turn up the heat on the water [minor instances of oppressive, authoritarian tyranny], one might not even realize that the next higher level of heat is just one more step closer to your demise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychoclown View Post
    To hear some folks here, you'd think we're on the verge of becoming a police state. Yes, you can argue that its not an appropriate use of federal authority. You can argue the government has overstepped its bounds as envisioned by the founding fathers. But shouting "Tyranny!" and saying anyone who disagrees with you hates freedom is a sure fire formula for most people to dismiss you as shrill, bombastic, and out of touch with reality.
    Did you just turn the heat up one level on the stove?

  2. #392
    Clown Prince of Politics
    Psychoclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hiding from the voices in my head.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,738

    Re: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    I disagree. Early in this discussion, I provided definitions for oppressive, authoritarian, and tyranny. They are perfect words to demonstrate what the left is doing with this law.
    Words have meanings and they have connotations. I could scrape my knee and call it a bloody wound and be technically correct. But when the average person hears the words "bloody wound" they don't picture a scraped knee. The average person imagines something along the lines of the kind of damage we'd see from a gunshot or a knife wound. When you say tyranny and authoritarian, people think of images of Hitler and Stalin and Hussien. They picture concentration camps and death gulags. So while you may be within the dictionary defination of tyranny, the connotations are clearly way beyond what we're talking about.

    That might be true; however, as the liberals turn up the heat on the water [minor instances of oppressive, authoritarian tyranny], one might not even realize that the next higher level of heat is just one more step closer to your demise.
    I agree that one reason the big government agenda has been so successful is becasue it has been done incrementally. I don't think its necessarily part of some grand scheme, but rather just people trying to address the issues of their day through government. Nor do I think its part of an exclusively liberal agenda. Conservatives are quite willing to use expand government to push their agenda as well. Both sides of the isle are guilty of falling in love with the coercive power of government.

    And I'm not saying don't oppose these new regulations. I disagree with them as well, as I explained in the rest of my post. I'm saying use arguments that people can take seriously. Running around screaming "tyranny" and such is going to cause most people to dismiss you as a libertarian chicken little. If your words don't persuade people, or at least make them pause and think, then you're wasting your time.
    Slipping into madness is good for the sake of comparison - Unknown.

  3. #393
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:15 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,173

    Re: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

    I doubt anyone will be persuaded one way or the other.

  4. #394
    Clown Prince of Politics
    Psychoclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hiding from the voices in my head.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,738

    Re: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

    Then why bother debating?
    Slipping into madness is good for the sake of comparison - Unknown.

  5. #395
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:15 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,173

    Re: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychoclown View Post
    Then why bother debating?
    It's a fun activity.

  6. #396
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychoclown View Post
    However in this circumstance, I don't believe there was a market failure. Many people, myself included, have already converted to the higher efficiency bulbs. And as companies compete and innovate to find new ways to lower the price, more and more people will make the switch. Decreasing the demand for the old less efficient bulbs until we reach the point where demand is so low, its no longer worth it to companies to manufacture them. We were already on this path. The market was working as intended. New, better technology was being introduced and it was slowly replacing the older, less efficient technology. Many supporters of this regulation have said the same thing. So why do we need the regulation in the first place? Why not let the market take its natural course? There is no market failure here, and therefore I see no need for government intervention.

    Plus, without this regulation, companies had a strong incentive to keep innovating to reduce the cost of these new bulbs, to attract new customers who had not yet made the switch due to the relatively higher price of the new bulbs. Now, with the entire nation forced to buy the current technology, there is less of an incentive to lower costs. Sure competition is still in place, so there is an incentive, but its probably less pressing without the possible reward of new customers. And that's the problem with many regulations. By picking a winner, even a product who was already more or less destined to win, the government removes part of the market forces that give incentive to innovate and lower costs.
    This is the only part of what you said that I have a problem with because it wasn't the American people as a whole who cared about the efficiency of light bulbs, it was the companies who make the light bulbs in the first place. They wanted this bill so that they all would be forced to innovate their light bulbs to a lower efficiency at once, most likely so that it wasn't just one or a couple of them taking an initial drop in their profits due to their having to do the research and charge more for their incandescent bulbs. If every company is doing it at once, then the profit loss due to the innovation is distributed amongst all of them.

    Now, I'm sure that most of those who are on the bill side of this argument could care one way or another about the bill itself. I, for one, don't care if the bill got repealed but I consider it a waste of time to do so, since it really has very little affect on any person's actual freedom. The bill isn't making the decision to move jobs to China nor is it forcing those companies to fire any Americans. Those companies were already losing money due to the more energy efficient light bulbs, which were completely free choice to buy. There are much more important things to be concerned with than the repeal of this energy efficiency bill or parts of it.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  7. #397
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    This is the only part of what you said that I have a problem with because it wasn't the American people as a whole who cared about the efficiency of light bulbs, it was the companies who make the light bulbs in the first place. They wanted this bill so that they all would be forced to innovate their light bulbs to a lower efficiency at once, most likely so that it wasn't just one or a couple of them taking an initial drop in their profits due to their having to do the research and charge more for their incandescent bulbs. If every company is doing it at once, then the profit loss due to the innovation is distributed amongst all of them.
    This is so ****ing stupid. How is it that only the light bulb industry that is incapable of making improvements on their own? Who forced improvements on our televisions? Appliances?

  8. #398
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:15 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,173

    Re: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    This is the only part of what you said that I have a problem with because it wasn't the American people as a whole who cared about the efficiency of light bulbs, it was the companies who make the light bulbs in the first place. They wanted this bill so that they all would be forced to innovate their light bulbs to a lower efficiency at once, most likely so that it wasn't just one or a couple of them taking an initial drop in their profits due to their having to do the research and charge more for their incandescent bulbs. If every company is doing it at once, then the profit loss due to the innovation is distributed amongst all of them.

    Now, I'm sure that most of those who are on the bill side of this argument could care one way or another about the bill itself. I, for one, don't care if the bill got repealed but I consider it a waste of time to do so, since it really has very little affect on any person's actual freedom. The bill isn't making the decision to move jobs to China nor is it forcing those companies to fire any Americans. Those companies were already losing money due to the more energy efficient light bulbs, which were completely free choice to buy. There are much more important things to be concerned with than the repeal of this energy efficiency bill or parts of it.
    I am sitting here in a pot of warm water and I think I just felt the temperature rise a degree or two.

    They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Franklin's Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775

  9. #399
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    No, thanks to our state vehicle inspection program.
    So you are saying they didn't crash into you? Where is the crime then?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Try reading the Preamble to the Constitution sometime, and I am not your boy, sonny!
    Tell me what you think the General Welfare clause means so I can correct you.

  10. #400
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychoclown View Post
    Then why bother debating?
    If you talking about the government doing less you almost have no chance against most people on here. There really is no point in debating here.

Page 40 of 46 FirstFirst ... 303839404142 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •