how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
| reply to Somnambul33t
Re: Government says $50 light bulb is cheap and affordable said by Somnambul33t:"The mandate is for minimum efficiencies per watt consumed OF ANY BULB."
And what gives the federal government the ability to create such a mandate? What if i want to use "inefficient" bulbs? Do i not have the right to pick my own light bulbs? i guess not. Do I have the right to burn tires in my back yard? How about drive a car that is 3 lanes wide to work every day?
The idea that the government knows which light bulb i should buy better than i do is the utmost of elitism.
Supply and demand will lower (or raise if no one wants them) the price of CFLs, LEDs, Halogen, etc over time. if people buy them, more money will be invested into R&D, better efficiencies discovered, and prices ultimately lowered. The government created this mandate and then realized the "dumb, neanderthal masses" werent buying the new replacements. HOW DARE THEY! Thus they came up with a typical government solution: subsidies and crony capitalism! that leads us to here.
I live in an apartment. if a light bulb goes out in my unit, i have to replace it myself. Why would i buy a $10 bulb, let alone a $30 or $50 one, when i'll be gone in less than a year or 2? How is that cost efficient for me? What if i live in a house and need to change a bulb in an attic, crawl space, shed, etc that is only ever turned on for minutes a year? I definitely want these dark spaces light up as bright as possible when needed, but 99% of the year the light is off. Why am i going to be forced, once the mandate is fully implemented, to pay 10, 20, 40 dollars for a bulb when $1.50 would have sufficed previously?
When the government takes away your ability to choose, you lose a piece of your liberty. it's really that simple. Whether they restrict which cars you can buy (mandatory average MPG standards for car MFGs), from whom you can take out a student loan (it was mandated that only Direct Loans can now issue "student loans"), how many gallons per flush your toilet uses, or the efficiency of your light bulbs, it's restricting your ability to make decisions for yourself. I dont like people making decisions for me, let alone some random faceless bureaucrat with only his job security in mind.
| |
sk1939Premium
join:2010-10-23
Washington, DC
kudos:9 Reviews:
 ·T-Mobile US
| said by fifty nine:I had CFLs in all of my apartments. I simply kept the old incandescents and when I moved out I put them back and the CFLs moved with me. Blown bulb? Oh well. Let the landlord replace it before the new tenant moves in. What is he going to do? Take $1 out of my security deposit? LOL.
Actually, if it was a LED bulb, it would be closer to $20/bulb. | |
| reply to fifty nine
"Shared resources"... Let me pay for what i want to use and leave me the hell alone! you have no right to tell me how to live, what to buy, or how far to drive. Supply and demand works EVERY time. It only "doesnt work" when statists prevent it from working. The free market hardly exists in gas prices. It works and is hindranced by governments at every level. When federal and state governments "make" more tax income from a gallon of gasoline than the oil company makes in profit from the same gallon there is a problem.
US oil "production" does not mean "oil extracted and refined" in the US, it merely means oil refined in the US. we import crude and refine it. we import a lot. we even import oil from overseas, refine it here, and then ship and sell it back overseas. Domestic oil extracted from Federal lands is down, considerably, over the last 3 years. It is up on state and private lands and in off-shore installations mainly because of this administrations refusal to grant Federal drilling permits. Supply decreased domestically while demand abroad is skyrocketing and we keep chopping off our own knees at home.
You can purchase whatever bulb you want for your apartment. that's cool. i'm not willing to spend more than a couple bucks for light bulbs i wont be taking with me. light bulbs arent something i plan to pack when i move, especially when a new apartment/house will come furnished with them.
"Actually it's not elitism. It's ensuring that we use a limited resource (energy) more efficiently. A lightbulb that converts only 10% of the input into light energy is obsolete by 2012 standards and should be phased out."
You say "actually it's not elitism" and then the next 2 sentences prove the complete opposite! "A lightbulb that converts only 10% of the input into light energy is obsolete by 2012 standards and should be phased out." If i dont want to be efficient, i shouldnt have to be. i will pay more in electricity, gas, water, etc. I dont like paying more for things, but light bulbs arent going to save me any money. i love driving my 18 MPG car, and i enjoy long showers. All to the point that i am willing to pay for them (for now).
Natural resources are limited, not shared. I do not own the oil found in the ground nor do i have any stake in it whatsoever. The company that pays to extract, refine, and ship it does until it's pumped into the gas station. then that gas station owns it before pumping it into my car. The oil was not shared since neither you nor i have a financial or labor stake in it's extraction, refinement, or shipment.
See the difference between you and i is fundamental: You think you know what's best for everyone and want to force these beliefs on everyone else, even if only indirectly. I want every person to have every option possible available for them to make their own decisions. I believe in liberty. The government banning light bulbs in the name of efficiency is not liberty, it is statism. The Federal government has no business telling me what light bulbs i can buy. | |
 marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:2 | said by Somnambul33t:Natural resources are limited, not shared. I do not own the oil found in the ground nor do i have any stake in it whatsoever. The company that pays to extract, refine, and ship it does until it's pumped into the gas station. Um, actually... you do. The company that pays to extract, refine, and ship it does not own it when it is in the ground. The collective citizens of the United States do (assuming it is in the United States) in most cases, since the vast majority of extraction now involves public mineral estates. It is only once the oil is extracted that it belongs to the company who extracts it (and, this will seem strange, not to the company who pays for the extraction, but actually to the company who physically extracts the oil).
If the oil is under private land, assuming an unsevered mineral estate, it belongs to the private land owner (though it can be extracted by an adjacent land owner, as long as they only drill/mine under their own property).
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher | | |
|
 Spork
join:2011-07-13
Methuen, MA | reply to Somnambul33t
said by Somnambul33t:See the difference between you and i is fundamental: You think you know what's best for everyone and want to force these beliefs on everyone else, even if only indirectly. I want every person to have every option possible available for them to make their own decisions. I believe in liberty. The government banning light bulbs in the name of efficiency is not liberty, it is statism. The Federal government has no business telling me what light bulbs i can buy. You want to force your beliefs as much as anyone else. You call yours 'liberty' and theirs 'statism' but both are beliefs that are being forced on people in the end. Indirectly everyone falls into the same bucket it's whether you see that or not.
--
"Every once in a while, declare peace....it confuses the hell out of your enemies." | |
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:You also have to realize that we live in a world with shared resources such as the energy grid and fuel supply. Liberty is nice but if we let everyone have free use of all of the shared resources, energy hogs will ensure that they are depleted at a rapid rate.
Then increase the cost of energy until demand falls, otherwise I want my electricity to be included free in my property tax same as with public school. | |
| said by patcat88:said by fifty nine:You also have to realize that we live in a world with shared resources such as the energy grid and fuel supply. Liberty is nice but if we let everyone have free use of all of the shared resources, energy hogs will ensure that they are depleted at a rapid rate.
Then increase the cost of energy until demand falls, otherwise I want my electricity to be included free in my property tax same as with public school. LOL, what? Increase the cost of energy? People are already demanding that the Government "fix" $4/gallon gas, yet continue to drive their single occupant 15MPG land yachts... Increasing the cost of energy isn't going to get people to change their habits significantly enough to make a difference. Been there done that. | |
| reply to Spork
said by Spork:said by Somnambul33t:See the difference between you and i is fundamental: You think you know what's best for everyone and want to force these beliefs on everyone else, even if only indirectly. I want every person to have every option possible available for them to make their own decisions. I believe in liberty. The government banning light bulbs in the name of efficiency is not liberty, it is statism. The Federal government has no business telling me what light bulbs i can buy. You want to force your beliefs as much as anyone else. You call yours 'liberty' and theirs 'statism' but both are beliefs that are being forced on people in the end. Indirectly everyone falls into the same bucket it's whether you see that or not. what belief or laws am i forcing on anyone? | |
 Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | Somnambul33t I wouldn't worry too much about what an anonymous poster says to your posts.
Unfortunately there are some on this forum that try to suppress anyone who doesn't agree with them. There was nothing at all wrong with what you said in your posts. | |
| reply to marigolds
said by marigolds:said by Somnambul33t:Natural resources are limited, not shared. I do not own the oil found in the ground nor do i have any stake in it whatsoever. The company that pays to extract, refine, and ship it does until it's pumped into the gas station. Um, actually... you do. The company that pays to extract, refine, and ship it does not own it when it is in the ground. The collective citizens of the United States do (assuming it is in the United States) in most cases, since the vast majority of extraction now involves public mineral estates. It is only once the oil is extracted that it belongs to the company who extracts it (and, this will seem strange, not to the company who pays for the extraction, but actually to the company who physically extracts the oil). If the oil is under private land, assuming an unsevered mineral estate, it belongs to the private land owner (though it can be extracted by an adjacent land owner, as long as they only drill/mine under their own property). you are incorrect. you own things either by title or through the labor involved to produce a product or service. before oil companies start pumping oil out of the ground, they have to obtain a permit from a government to lease the land above the drilling site. they are not purchasing an oil field, they are purchasing the right to drill on a piece of land. the state or federal government does not own that oil since they havent extracted it. the land is leased to companies to extract, upon which they own that oil. until then, it is in a neutral state. the act of laboring on the oil is what grants natural ownership over the oil.
This was the most basic foundation of Capitalism, espoused by Adam Smith himself, and applies to all natural resources. You can own the land and waterfall that could power a turbine and produce electricity, but you dont own that electricity until to build a plant and pay people to operate it. this is a natural resource, not owned by anyone until they exert the effort, property, and money to produce something out of, in, or with it. our country was founded on this principal. | |
marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:2 | The minerals, including the oil, are part of the estate of the real property. They are owned by the owner of the land, unless the mineral estate is severed from the land.
The lease is a temporary severance of that mineral estate; it is not a right to drill, it is a lease on the mineral estate which inherent confers a right to drill and extract. | |
|
