- Joined
- May 21, 2011
- Messages
- 3,665
- Reaction score
- 863
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Am I supposed to be surprised that you would think that? :sun
Should I care that you might not be surprised?
Am I supposed to be surprised that you would think that? :sun
Same with the new light bulb efficiency standards. That was his point.
we agree here! :sun
Here is how they are meeting those goals.
Production of Light Bulbs in US Dwindles As Factories Close
The 2007 legislation which bans incandescent light bulbs by 2014 is manifesting disagreeable consequences in manufacturing. Most major lighting manufacturers have spent the last few years refocusing their operations toward a more energy efficient end. Unfortunately for factory workers in the US, energy efficient light bulbs construction is much more manual-labor intensive. The increase in cost causes manufacturers to look for cheaper ways to do business, and one of the first things to be done is usually moving manual labor jobs to China.
Outsourcing light bulbs jobs to China is ironic considering the promises made by our government that the move to energy efficient lighting would create more manufacturing jobs.
Production of Light Bulbs in US Dwindles As Factories Close
So you can feel good about buying a light bulb for $7.50 while your neighbor loses his job.
This is actually a good point. New technology is causing book sales to fall all without the government interfering.
Which also in my view is not necessarily a good thing. I don't demean the technology, it's just that an iPad or Nook is cold, has not paper pulp and ink smell, and has the tactile similarities of a toaster. I like reading, experiencing, touching and reading all at the same time, sometimes with one hand and being able to lend that book out if I want to. Can't really do that with a e-book reader.
You can still buy paper books.
Yeah, but it's a little sad that they will sometime in the near future, no longer be made, or simply made as a novelty.
Same with the new light bulb efficiency standards. That was his point.
So now you admit I was right the entire time only to make another stance on a false claim. Answer me this, who is holding up those power plants you hate so much? I will give you hint, it starts with a G. Ask yourself this, why does the government bitch that the power companies won't invent new technologies but at the same time pay to make the business model profitable? To even claim for a minute the government has a reason to speak here is nonsense.
You have been right about nothing relevant to the topic. The light bulb standards are a way to reduce wasteful consumption and save money. Unless you are pro-wasteful consumption and unnecessary spending, this is a good thing.
You have been right about nothing relevant to the topic. The light bulb standards are a way to reduce wasteful consumption and save money. Unless you are pro-wasteful consumption and unnecessary spending, this is a good thing.
Actually, it should be none of your business if a person wants to do something that you believe is wasteful and costs money. Another person may not agree with you. You are far too much of a know-it-all and that is why you have tyrannical leanings. Now, go sell your car, purchase a bicycle, and come back when you are not quite so hypocritical.
Actually, it should be none of your business if a person wants to do something that you believe is wasteful and costs money. Another person may not agree with you. You are far too much of a know-it-all and that is why you have tyrannical leanings. Now, go sell your car, purchase a bicycle, and come back when you are not quite so hypocritical.
There's a fundamental flaw in this reasoning: If one person's mistakes affected absolutely nobody, that would be one thing. But we do not live in a vacuum. And when those mistakes involve the environment, then certainly mistakes affect others.
That's why there are pockets of resistance to Big Oil and Big Coal's aggressive expansion, even in VERY conservative pockets of America.
You're wrong when you say it is nobody else's business but yours if you are being wasteful, particularly when the wasted element is not solely your possession. The outlaw of littering has similar reasoning, i.e., the trash is discarded in a location that doesn't belong to the offender. There are even instances where the wasting of one's money should not be private, especially when they are receiving financial support based on tax dollars. If my tax dollars are funding the lunch money for another family's children then that family should not (at least morally speaking) be wasting money by purchasing items which are not of reasonable necessity.
Then quit being a hypocrite and sell your car and ride a bicycle. Also, rather than coercing the public to purchase lightbulbs that are more "efficient," why don't you look at the real drivers of the use of energy and shut them down now. How about air conditioning in the home? Does it use as much energy as the lightbulbs in the home? Again, how about the auto? Make there pollution standards by 0 and make them use 0 energy. That would end that waste and would save a ton of money. How about all the equipment in manufacturing plants? They must use a ton of energy.
But no, you just nickel and dime us around the edges so you can pound your chest and say that I am better than you. In the meantime, you drive your pollution producing, energy guzzling, ineffective costly cars and point fingers at us because we want to spend a couple hundred dollars a year on something we want versus something the know-it-alls say we can't have, but continue to drive those cars.
Phony-baloney-plastic-banana!
Actually I have been right about everything so far.
Facts so far
1) It is a ban since it takes a product off the market
2) The problem is the support of the power plants, not the light bulbs.
If you wish to talk about harm put the focus where it belongs. If take off the support of the power plants you will get you alternative energy wishes.
Massive, massive strawman in your arguments there. Can you please engage in a civilized debate instead of trolling like this?
There's a fundamental flaw in this reasoning: If one person's mistakes affected absolutely nobody, that would be one thing. But we do not live in a vacuum. And when those mistakes involve the environment, then certainly mistakes affect others.
BS to you!! You argue that spending a dime is wasting money and energy, but there are far more items that cost tens of thousands times as much money and energy. That is the truth and you tyrants need to look in the mirror and take measure of yourself and your ideology. You are all just petty tyrants who think you know better than the rest of us.
The vote in the House to repeal this sewage was not enough to pass, but it was a majority and a fairly sizable one. Hopefully, the GOP will gain the needed votes to carry the day the next time the vote comes up and hopefully, it will not be too late. The tyrants have probably already done the damage and it probably cannot be saved. That's a shame.
Now, stop being a hypocrite and sell your car and buy that bicycle. Show us that you really mean what you say. I doubt that you really mean it. You just say it to make yourselves feel important and better than the rest of us. You fail at both.
It's a safe bet that CFLs are a scapegoat for lost jobs. Were it not for the economic setup that has been causing job losses for years before CFLs were even invented, I don't think that that would ever be a problem. Furthermore, what percentage of job losses can be attributed to CFLs anyway?
Basically.
You can still buy paper books.
Interesting counterposition, but let me play devil's advocate with it: What is so bad about requiring multiple sources of light to have roughly similar efficiencies?
Strike two, son. Keep on trolling like this and you will be the second person I've put on my ignore list in the last 24 hours.
Furthermore, your utter refusal to address the more civilized points in this thread indicates that you have little, if anything, to counter them.
This reasoning is open ended and without limit. Its pretty much a useless argument. Attacking the instruments aren't going to solve the problem, attack the support. All you are doing is attacking everyday people that involved in power like you and me and forget to mention that doing anything like using your computer uses far more power than a light. Maybe you should ban computers? Or you could just take away the support...
Daddy, you may put me on ignore if you wish. That doesn't bother me. You'll still be a hyprocrite even if you cannot see me say it. Bye! Bye!