• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Incandecent Bulbs Made Illegal

Incandescent Light bulb ban.... do you care?

  • I care! The ban is foolish! I want my incandescent bulbs!

    Votes: 13 23.6%
  • I like the ban! Bring on new lighting technology!

    Votes: 17 30.9%
  • I dont care either way!

    Votes: 10 18.2%
  • I like incandescent bulbs and fluorescent ones. But dont make a law about them!

    Votes: 11 20.0%
  • OTHER / I dont know / Chimichanga

    Votes: 4 7.3%

  • Total voters
    55
Less, where have you been? The government has banned low mileage automobile fleets and low efficiency air conditioners. And, what is happening now is low efficiency trucks are being banned. And many of the manufactures of these things support the so called banes because their products will cost a little more and save a lot.

Where have I been? Well, I was born in Chicago, but moved to Missouri when I was... Oh wait, you were just asking a silly question. Sorry, my bad!

I am all for manufacturers improving their products. I have said that throughout these debates. What I am against is oppressive, authoritarian tyranny.
 
I am all for manufacturers improving their products. I have said that throughout these debates. What I am against is oppressive, authoritarian tyranny.
I'm also against oppressive, authoritarian tyranny. We have to not let that happen. But, I don't think air conditioner, car fleet, truck fleet, light bulbs standards are oppressive, authoritarian tyranny. They enable progress. Sorry, I'm an engineer and I understand what prevents improvement and why these laws are needed.
 
I'm also against oppressive, authoritarian tyranny. We have to not let that happen. But, I don't think air conditioner, car fleet, truck fleet, light bulbs standards are oppressive, authoritarian tyranny. They enable progress. Sorry, I'm an engineer and I understand what prevents improvement and why these laws are needed.

So explain to us what prevents improvement.
 
I'm also against oppressive, authoritarian tyranny. We have to not let that happen. But, I don't think air conditioner, car fleet, truck fleet, light bulbs standards are oppressive, authoritarian tyranny. They enable progress. Sorry, I'm an engineer and I understand what prevents improvement and why these laws are needed.

I know. I have seen this argument several times today. You know more than the masses. And the masses are stupid. I got your point, even if it is incorrect and that you know why oppressive authoritarian tyranny should exist.
 
Nope. Just arguing against the know-it-all elites who know better than the masses, but really don't want to take meaningful measures to reduce pollution and minimize energy usage.

There is a reason words such as "expert" exist in our vocabulary. You are confusing a know-it-all with an expert in a given field. Those who have less understanding of areas should respect those who have more. This holds for each subject independently. I will defeat the majority of masses you can toss at me in mathematics, whereas the masses will defeat me in an area such as cooking. Let me handle the jobs which require mathematical analysis and you can prepare dinner.
 
There is a reason words such as "expert" exist in our vocabulary. You are confusing a know-it-all with an expert in a given field. Those who have less understanding of areas should respect those who have more. This holds for each subject independently. I will defeat the majority of masses you can toss at me in mathematics, whereas the masses will defeat me in an area such as cooking. Let me handle the jobs which require mathematical analysis and you can prepare dinner.

Bernanke was an expert in finance when he told us that the banks were on solid footing.
 
What I am against is oppressive, authoritarian tyranny.

If you think that banning incandescent light bulbs is oppressive, authoritarian tyranny then you should probably take a trip to Syria right now.
 
Bernanke was an expert in finance when he told us that the banks were on solid footing.

The final quote in my signature block covers this argument. While an expert is not correct 100% of the time, their chances of being correct are significantly greater than a non-expert's.
 
There is a reason words such as "expert" exist in our vocabulary. You are confusing a know-it-all with an expert in a given field. Those who have less understanding of areas should respect those who have more. This holds for each subject independently. I will defeat the majority of masses you can toss at me in mathematics, whereas the masses will defeat me in an area such as cooking. Let me handle the jobs which require mathematical analysis and you can prepare dinner.

Ah, again you fail to understand. I love experts. I think experts are needed and add much to society. Their expertise can assist the "stupid" masses understand what products they should or should not purchase. The experts turn from experts to oppressive, authoritarian tyrants the moment they start to cram down the throats of the "stupid" masses whatever it is that they believe must be desired. Experts will tell you that a Smart Car gets better mileage than full-sized car, assuming they were even manufactured today. I don't want to own a Smart Car. The experts can provide statistics and reasons why they think a product would be beneficial, but that does not mean that for the individual, the Smart Car is the most beneficial. To force people to purchase it is oppressive authoritarian tyranny.
 
If you think that banning incandescent light bulbs is oppressive, authoritarian tyranny then you should probably take a trip to Syria right now.

No thanks. Just because there are grades of tyranny does not mean that tyranny does not exist. Try again.
 
The trouble of course, is that these better bulbs are so expensive...
So, naturally the people will buy the cheapest, as we have for the past 6,000 years.
I do not think that they are convinced that the LED is more economical in the long run. Of this, I am not convinced of either...
Our government tells us that the old bulbs waste too much energy...but far too many do not trust "our government".
Why ?
Advertising... the biggest lie in America...who will believe anything that they say ?
So we badly need reform here...truth in advertising...real reform...

Digital televisions were very expensive. Now prices have come down and nobody buys anything else.

I understand your point but if they are indeed better, it will be proven out and people will buy them. Part of the problem is with people like myself. I would continue to buy the ineffiecient made in the USA bulb over the more eficient and pricey made in China bulb.

It's funny how some bitch and belly ache about the big bad corporations sending jobs overseas until they no longer have a problem with it.
 
Lets be clear they have no obligation to protect your health or the environment in which you live. They only have the obligation to protect your rights and preserve your liberty. Big difference my boy.

Try reading the Preamble to the Constitution sometime, and I am not your boy, sonny!
 
Seriously? Then what exactly is the point of this argument, anyway?

People don't like saving money??? Beats the hell out of me. :sun
 
Where have I been? Well, I was born in Chicago, but moved to Missouri when I was... Oh wait, you were just asking a silly question. Sorry, my bad!

I am all for manufacturers improving their products. I have said that throughout these debates. What I am against is oppressive, authoritarian tyranny.

You obviously have not kept up with the facts presented in the thread because I have already posted documentation of the fact that the light bulb industry helped craft this federal legislation because they did want to have to deal with conflicting state regulations for energy efficiency.
 
So explain to us what prevents improvement.
I’ll explain again using a different example, air conditioners in Arizona. Actually heat pumps. To build a more efficient heat pump rather than the lowest cost heat pump there are simple things you can do to start. You can over size many of the passive components, e.g. heat exchangers, filter dryers, mode valves but keep the same compressor, blower and fan and you can some additional insulation. The next step takes fan and blower motors that have run capacitors, usually base models have run/start capacitors type motors in the compressor. Fan blade and blower design can be changed to be more efficient but the process for manufacturing these is more expensive. But not many individuals are interested in these improvements if they are replacing a unit, cost drives them. The cost of the unit is buried in the quote the home owner gets from the firm that will replace the unit. A slightly lower cost in the unit improves the profit dramatically for the installing company. The installing companies are not expert in the engineering of the units and they generally don’t know about efficiency. The builder of new homes knows that the sale of the home will not be dependent on the efficiency of the heat pump. So the builder is motivated to buy the lowest cost heat pump. When the effective date of the required federal standard was close at hand several builders in the Phoenix area purchased hundreds of lower cost earlier units. At the volumes Goettl would manufacture higher efficiency units w/o the fed requirement they would be prohibitively expensive and hard to sell and would have payback times that made no sense, so they did not make them. With the fed requirement the cost comes down dramatically. So when I replaced my heat pump I could get what I wanted, I’m an engineer, but I didn’t have to ask for it. Without the fed rules, I couldn’t get what I wanted because it wouldn’t have been made.
 
Well, I am out of here folks. I am satisfied the facts have been presented. You can buy incandescent light bulbs that meet the new standards that provide the same light, have the same shape, and can be purchased in a two-pack at Home Depot for $3. And they will save you money over the life of the bulb.

Anyone that thinks saving money is worth revolting over, have at it! :sun
 
I’ll explain again using a different example, air conditioners in Arizona. Actually heat pumps. To build a more efficient heat pump rather than the lowest cost heat pump there are simple things you can do to start. You can over size many of the passive components, e.g. heat exchangers, filter dryers, mode valves but keep the same compressor, blower and fan and you can some additional insulation. The next step takes fan and blower motors that have run capacitors, usually base models have run/start capacitors type motors in the compressor. Fan blade and blower design can be changed to be more efficient but the process for manufacturing these is more expensive. But not many individuals are interested in these improvements if they are replacing a unit, cost drives them. The cost of the unit is buried in the quote the home owner gets from the firm that will replace the unit. A slightly lower cost in the unit improves the profit dramatically for the installing company. The installing companies are not expert in the engineering of the units and they generally don’t know about efficiency. The builder of new homes knows that the sale of the home will not be dependent on the efficiency of the heat pump. So the builder is motivated to buy the lowest cost heat pump. When the effective date of the required federal standard was close at hand several builders in the Phoenix area purchased hundreds of lower cost earlier units. At the volumes Goettl would manufacture higher efficiency units w/o the fed requirement they would be prohibitively expensive and hard to sell and would have payback times that made no sense, so they did not make them. With the fed requirement the cost comes down dramatically. So when I replaced my heat pump I could get what I wanted, I’m an engineer, but I didn’t have to ask for it. Without the fed rules, I couldn’t get what I wanted because it wouldn’t have been made.

Todays units are far and away more efficient than units of yesterday. It's how you gain the advantage over the competition.

Today's televisions use far less energy than televisions of years ago. Nobody forced that. These television were also prohibitively expensive when they first came out.
 
You obviously have not kept up with the facts presented in the thread because I have already posted documentation of the fact that the light bulb industry helped craft this federal legislation because they did want to have to deal with conflicting state regulations for energy efficiency.

This does not contradict my argument and it does not show that I have not kept up with your postings. I said that I wanted manufacturers to improve their products and sell them to the people. I have never said that having an oppressive law was a good thing even if the manufacturers were pleased with the law. A bad law is a bad law.
 
Last edited:
ROFL!!! I have never said that the elite or the intelligent are stupid. People from your side of the argument have literally said that the masses, which include intelligent people, are stupid. Nice try to flip the argument, but you have erred.

Stop putting words in my mouth. Learn to speak truthfully, and then I might start taking you more seriously.

Thank you for making my argument that we should ban air conditioners and autos rather than lightbulbs. Lightbulbs use very little energy. The manual typewriter uses no electricity. The electric one does. Using the manual saves 100% of the energy used by the electric. If it doesn't save enough, it doesn't matter because real energy savings could be achieved, but your side does not advocate saving energy from the sources that use the most energy.

I don't even know what you're trying to say here, because I can't see the logic through all this petty sniping. Are you saying that electric typewriters, all 100 of them or so still in existence, consume the same number of watts on average that all the lightbulbs in all the countries in the WORLD do? Dude if you'd just cut the snippy comments, then even if I don't agree with one word of what you say, at least I might be able to understand you a little better.

I don't believe you understand the conservative argument. We favor research and development of all types of energy including wind, solar, battery, fossil fuels, nuclear, and hydro. If someone could make a car that gets 1,000 mpg gallon, please make it. Some people will buy it. If someone could make a lightbulb that could last 40 years, please make it. If someone could make a truck that can carry 50,000 lbs and get 100 mpg, please make it. Conservatives would be delighted if each of these were achieved.

I seriously question the truth value of these statements. You ever seen "Who Killed the Electric Car"? Do you not realize that Big Coal and Big Oil have a vested interest AGAINST cleaner energy? I am aware, however, of the unfortunate dilemma that dirty power tends to be cheap. That's a big part of the problem here. It's an even bigger problem when Big Oil companies spend only a tiny portion of their research and development on clean energy, relying instead on old, dirty technology.

Where we differ is that we do not believe that tyranny is the American Spirit. We do not believe that tyranny is patriotic. I agree that America can do anything better and I don't wonder about that at all. I have faith in the "stupid" masses as well as the elites, at least, those who do not believe in tyranny.

You are in absolutely no position to lecture me on this matter. The silent majority--get this--actually WANTS clean energy. They WANT society to press harder for developing clean, cost-effective sources of power. Do you? Or are you perfectly okay with Big Coal and Big Oil continuing to trash our seas and our skies? That's the status quo, Les. That's what we have right now. And you would fight to defend that? You think it's patriotic to continue polluting with no end in sight? Puh-lease! A fundamental part of the American Spirit is innovation. Innovation is what got us steam power in the first place, and weeded our dependence off of slavery. Innovation is what sent us to outer space. Innovation is what has given us cures to diseases that would have been an automatic death sentence just decades ago. Innovation is what will plummet the cost of clean energy far enough to put Big Coal and Big Oil out of business. Innovation is what will sharply decrease the grossly underrated health care costs due to dirty energy. THAT, sir, is what I think of when I think of patriotism. I could not be prouder of a nation that has come so far, primarily due to its innovation.

But I worry deeply that we have lost that focus. I worry that innovation nowadays is tarred and feathered under the guises of "big government." Had the Tea Party the influence back in the 1960s that it does now, I seriously wonder whether our spaceships would have even gotten off the ground. The USSR would have kicked our tails and made us look silly. And guess what? Quietly, that exact same thing is going on. Several other nations are leading the charge in clean energy--Denmark, Germany, Spain, China, and even India. Meanwhile, we sit on our butts and whine about some freakin' lightbulb and how it's about to become too freakin' efficient. Jesus, what have we come to? It is a BAD thing that public policy dictates that an appliance be efficient?? What the hell??

I really want to understand conservatives' position on the matter. I hear you when you say that the cost per megawatt-hour really should be the primary determining factor in terms of what energy sources we use. Disagree partially I may, but I do hear you. All I'm asking for is the same in return.
 
Pretty ironic post you have there Phys251. Obama is the one who shut down the space program.

You belly ache about LesGovt putting words in your mouth and then you go on this rant about how he's against innovation. Not once has he said that. His position is that just like with the vast majority of past innovation, it doesn't come from government mandates.
 
Pretty ironic post you have there Phys251. Obama is the one who shut down the space program.

Um, no he didn't. He allowed the space shuttle to cease operations, but NASA is still rolling on.

You belly ache about LesGovt putting words in your mouth and then you go on this rant about how he's against innovation. Not once has he said that. His position is that just like with the vast majority of past innovation, it doesn't come from government mandates.

No-sir! See--right there. That's the kind of crap I'm talking about. Do you libertarian/conservatives have the slightest interest in trying to get things done, or is it more important to you to engage in a piss fight with anyone who you don't see eye-to-eye with? Thank god that the Founding Fathers, even though they too quarreled like dogs at times, were able to put their differences aside in the end.
 
Um, no he didn't. He allowed the space shuttle to cease operations, but NASA is still rolling on.

Well the Middle East isn't exactly the moon or Mars, but yeah, O.K.

Obama’s new mission for NASA: Reach out to Muslim world

Read more at the Washington Examiner: Obama


No-sir! See--right there. That's the kind of crap I'm talking about. Do you libertarian/conservatives have the slightest interest in trying to get things done, or is it more important to you to engage in a piss fight with anyone who you don't see eye-to-eye with? Thank god that the Founding Fathers, even though they too quarreled like dogs at times, were able to put their differences aside in the end.

You've certainly got ranting down to a science.
 
Stop putting words in my mouth. Learn to speak truthfully, and then I might start taking you more seriously.

I did not put words in your mouth. I said "...people from your side of the argument...""...have said that the masses are stupid..." I don't see your name in that statement. You might want to reread it and then apologize to me for doing something I did not do. If you do not believe that people from your side have made such statements, please let me know and I will repost the quotes for you.
 
Anyone that thinks saving money is worth revolting over, have at it! :sun
Anyone who thinks the government should be choosing what we can have, what we can buy, what we can use, how we shall live, who we must buy health care from...is a government man and may be unsuited to live free.

May your chains rest lightly upon you.
 
Back
Top Bottom