Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-14-2014, 11:21 PM
 
169 posts, read 123,748 times
Reputation: 82

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by natalie469 View Post
All I know is that LED'S has saved us lots of money and last way longer than incandescent. What does it matter what age I am. I just want to save money which I have with LED'S.
Great. I fully support your choice. Why do you want to deny others the choice of what light bulb to use?

 
Old 11-14-2014, 11:22 PM
 
Location: Meggett, SC
11,011 posts, read 10,986,291 times
Reputation: 6191
Quote:
Originally Posted by natalie469 View Post
Honestly, I don't care so much about businesses as much as I care about me and my family. It saves us a lot of money. Incandescents are money eaters.
It's an abuse of government power and really, you should care about that. Trying to explain, it's bigger picture than just light bulbs. But this was one of the most egregious examples that they didn't even try to disguise.
 
Old 11-14-2014, 11:23 PM
 
338 posts, read 419,873 times
Reputation: 340
Quote:
"Are you going to force someone to use a word processing capable computer rather than a typewriter just because you consider the typewriter to be obsolete?"
Even though I like my 10 year old Toshiba Tecra, I wouldn't mind at all seeing it go. However, I challenge anybody to pry my sturdy old Smith Corona-Marchant Electra 10 from my cold dead fingers!
 
Old 11-14-2014, 11:23 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,063,511 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel View Post
It's an abuse of government power and really, you should care about that. Trying to explain, it's bigger picture than just light bulbs. But this was one of the most egregious examples that they didn't even try to disguise.
And what makes all of this worse is that it had bipartisan support.
 
Old 11-14-2014, 11:23 PM
 
Location: Meggett, SC
11,011 posts, read 10,986,291 times
Reputation: 6191
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
And what makes all of this worse is that it had bipartisan support.
On that I agree.
 
Old 11-14-2014, 11:27 PM
 
Location: Oceania
8,610 posts, read 7,861,675 times
Reputation: 8318
Quote:
Originally Posted by voiceofreazon View Post
This is just another in a long line of boneheaded, knee jerk reactionary measures that are supposed to benefit the environment but were never thought through.

Let's make an “environmentally-friendly” green light bulb out of MERCURY – one of the most toxic environmental poisons in the world. It will require a special hazardous cleanup procedure if broken, it will
need to be disposed of at special hazardous waste facilities if you don't want the landfills to become contaminated with mercury.

Let's add an additive to gasoline called MBTE to clean the air except now it's being found in groundwater in many places around the country. Drinking Water | Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) | US EPA

Let's use Ethanol and LITERALLY BURN FOOD AS FUEL while there are food shortages and people are starving!

Let's switch to plastic bags to save the trees and generate 4 times the solid waste that can last up 1,000 years.

Let's ban DDT based on the alarmist book, Silent Spring
and watch Malaria spread needlessly.
We can watch termites eat our houses as well because DDT was the only real insecticide which worked against the evil bastids.
 
Old 11-14-2014, 11:27 PM
 
5,719 posts, read 6,430,057 times
Reputation: 3646
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Well there is already a law that has decided that incandescent bulbs are obsolete, so I don't have to explain to you how they are obsolete or who gets to make that judgement because it has already been explained and decided back in 2007. Were you not paying attention back then when both parties were in favor of this?
You are owning the hell out of this thread. Well done.
 
Old 11-14-2014, 11:28 PM
 
169 posts, read 123,748 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Well there is already a law that has decided that incandescent bulbs are obsolete, so I don't have to explain to you how they are obsolete or who gets to make that judgement because it has already been explained and decided back in 2007. Were you not paying attention back then when both parties were in favor of this?
No, the law did not make them obsolete, the law favored one type of light bulb manufacturer at the expense of another type of manufacturer, as southbel has already explained.

If you think that this was done because incandescent bulbs are obsolete, then it is your responsibility to explain why they are so.

The fact is that being obsolete was not the reason for the law. The only entity that can judge something as obsolete is the market, just like they did with 24Kb modems.

The only reason why incandescent bulbs were banned is because politicians picked CFL manufacturers as winners for political and profit reasons.

A RICO statute would cover the collusion nicely.
 
Old 11-14-2014, 11:30 PM
 
169 posts, read 123,748 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
I support this law because it limits the freedom of those who have some weird love for incandescent bulbs as if they somehow remind them of their youth or something.
Why do you want limit the freedom of non-threatening citizens?
 
Old 11-14-2014, 11:31 PM
 
1,824 posts, read 1,366,577 times
Reputation: 1569
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
You are owning the hell out of this thread. Well done.
Nah. That honor belongs to southbel for this post:


Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel View Post
Don't know how old you are so not sure if you remember how this went down. GE, primarily, had created the 'newer', 'better' light bulb, the CFL. They pumped tons of money, marketing, and energy into this light bulb that cost a lot more (yes, they used to be much more expensive) and thus would garner them greater profits. However, all of that marketing didn't work. People tried them and didn't like the 10 second delay for them to turn on or the harsh florescent light they cast and not to mention the cost. So, people weren't buying them. Along comes this bill. The bill, as we know, made the manufacturing of incandescent light bulbs illegal. GE, being one of the early adopters and biggest proponent of this bill stood to make a fortune because it would, effectively, make the biggest competitor in the light bulb industry - the incandescent - a non-issue. GE would be able to corner the market and all with the help of the US government. You should care this happened. You should care that businesses can do this. It's a bad law and should be repealed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top