I've been following this bill for a while, because I think it represents the worst of our Government's fixation with nanny state overreach. However, its repeal is being debated now, but is unlikely to succeed. In the end, it's too little, too late and the jobs have already been lost to China. Anyway, I was wondering what you all think of the incandescent light bulb phase out? It starts with 100 watt bulbs on 1/1/12 and decends into banning lower wattage incandescent bulbs every year thereafter. One of my favorite blogs--The Volokh Conspiracy--has finally weighed in. It's not the blog itself that I love so much, but rather the quality of the comments that follow the posts. This one is especially good. http://volokh.com/2011/07/10/steven-chus-rorschach-test/ And for the record, the idea that Steven Chu is saving me from myself is as about as anti-American a concept as I can imagine.
More on the bill: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/170791-lightbulb-bill-likely-headed-for-defeat-in-house
I think an outright ban is silly. I could see maybe adding a tax to it to capture the true environmental costs of the less efficient bulb. But sometimes incandescents just make more sense. If you have a basement light you turn on for 5 minutes every month, it's just not cost-effective or environmentally sound to replace that bulb with a CFL. I don't tend to get my panties in a bunch over "nanny state" talk. I like the state ensuring we have clean rivers and safe food. I like the overall progress we've made in energy efficient appliances, some of it due to regulation. But I don't like government policies that are overly ham-handed when there are more nuanced options available.
It seems to me you have a semantic problem with "nanny state". I get it. However, at some point you have to say "enough"; we have to be free to live our lives. There must be boundaries on what the government can regulate. The incandescent light bulb ban is so miniscule, so silly, as to cross that line. If they're believe it's proper for them to regulate the light by which I read, what aren't they going to think they can regulate?
And the Washington Post's Editorial Board stands up for the nanny state: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...lb-standards/2011/07/11/gIQAWBXf9H_story.html Remember, it's for your own good. Don't worry about the job losses from these jobs going to China. Don't worry about the mercury in the bulbs and their impact on the environment. Don't worry that these bulbs don't last as long as advertised. Don't worry about the additional expense to replace your light bulbs. Don't worry that when you include the energy required to make the bulbs and properly dispose of them, that they are roughly equal with incandescent bulbs in terms of energy use. The Government knows what's best for you.
All things being equal, I wish they'd focus on the friggin' debt issue. I'm not saying this isn't an issue worthy of discussion, but compared to the debt ceiling this is very small potatoes.
Are fluorescent lights even better for the environment? I believe they have mercury in them and cause much more pollution than incandescent bulb. An incandescent bulb puts out its “wasted” energy as heat. Yes that is a waist in the summer or outside, but if it is in a heated home the additional heat lower the energy the furnace needs to output. Indoor lights are on more of the time in the dark cold short days of the winter.
don't really give a shit either way. I don't notice, they are fucking... lightbulbs 401(k) plans gay marriages estate taxes nutrients in food guns pieces of mail electric cars "renewable energy" projects space programs social experiments homeless people old people sick people etc... I understand that different people fall in different places on the "give a shit" spectrum. I'm also relatively certain that the 1920's Germans could give a shit about some whackjob in Bavaria...they were too busy worrying about the debt and inflation and hopelessness of the Weimar Republic. A decade later, people were being killed b/c of their race and lifestyle and conscripted into an army that took over Europe. Fucking light bulbs, indeed.
First we take your lightbulbs. Then we kill all the Jews. It's a two-stage process. barfo Edit: This was my 10,000th post here.
Light Bulbs are Spying on You [video=youtube;gHxZUb0VAa8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHxZUb0VAa8[/video] LightBulbs Now Spy Tools http://wearechangenewjersey.com/?p=840
I don't want the government telling me what I can and can't do! They want to tell me what I can't give my kids to eat too! I know what's good for my kids!
Like it or not, we have no right to interfere. Sometimes people make suboptimal choices, both for themselves and their children.
Oh I know we've talked about it before, but I just wanted to point out that sometimes the general public is not very intelligent on it's own.
oh and I just came across this. http://www.boston.com/Boston/whitecoatnotes/2011/07/health-panel-approves-new-nutrition-rules-for-mass-public-schools/Yfc3tbg44jZGIKZ57eytzL/index.html?p1=News_links
Maybe the same people that feed their fat kids hamburgers and go to worship nonexistent deities on Sundays do other things... like vote! It'd probably be best to nip that problem in the bud. For their own good. Ed O.
