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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-02-2009, 09:03 AM
 
Location: Iowa, Heartland of Murica
3,425 posts, read 6,308,814 times
Reputation: 3446

Advertisements

What is wrong with the people of this state? I just heard that they are proposing a ban on HDTV's starting in 2011. A few days ago, I heard the news about banning black cars and I thought it was a joke at first. This is the perfect example of how irrational, stupid, utopic and insane Liberalism is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-02-2009, 09:25 AM
 
2,095 posts, read 2,581,287 times
Reputation: 1268
Al Gore is a hippocrat if he doesn't move out of his mansion and into a one room shack out in the woods to lower his carbon footprint.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 09:48 AM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,164 posts, read 27,225,839 times
Reputation: 10428
Sounds like a great idea regarding the TVs. What they're going to do is force the TV makers to make them more energy efficient, thereby saving consumers money:

"The program's 2013 second stage promises to reduce energy use by 49%. If they are enforced, the new standards are expected to save Californians between $18 and $30 a year per TV set in energy costs. As noted by the Commission, current LCDs use about .27-watts per square inch and plasmas use 0.36-watts per square inch.
This isn't the first time Government has stepped in to regulate the energy efficiency in a gadget. More than thirty years ago, regulations on always-on refrigerators were passed and were first seen by companies as oppressive. Those companies eventually adapted and the result was a more efficient product. Similar acts have managed the energy needs of air conditioners and other gadgets. "

Nothing new or unusual going on here. You see, big corporations never have the consumer's interest in mind, only their money. That's why we have government - to protect us from corporations, whose only bottom line is profit. If the government hadn't stepped in and forced companies to build more efficient refrigerators, air conditioners, cars, etc., can you imagine where we'd be today?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 09:52 AM
 
Location: Texas
870 posts, read 1,626,757 times
Reputation: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverian View Post
Sounds like a great idea regarding the TVs. What they're going to do is force the TV makers to make them more energy efficient, thereby saving consumers money:

"The program's 2013 second stage promises to reduce energy use by 49%. If they are enforced, the new standards are expected to save Californians between $18 and $30 a year per TV set in energy costs. As noted by the Commission, current LCDs use about .27-watts per square inch and plasmas use 0.36-watts per square inch.
This isn't the first time Government has stepped in to regulate the energy efficiency in a gadget. More than thirty years ago, regulations on always-on refrigerators were passed and were first seen by companies as oppressive. Those companies eventually adapted and the result was a more efficient product. Similar acts have managed the energy needs of air conditioners and other gadgets. "

Nothing new or unusual going on here. You see, big corporations never have the consumer's interest in mind, only their money. That's why we have government - to protect us from corporations, whose only bottom line is profit. If the government hadn't stepped in and forced companies to build more efficient refrigerators, air conditioners, cars, etc., can you imagine where we'd be today?
you can't be serious about it being a great idea!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 09:54 AM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,461,121 times
Reputation: 4799
Now the government is going to micro manage it's people and businesses. Obama thinks he is the CEO of everything. You'd think the socialist would understand this is the direct result of "spreading the wealth". Leave the money in the state that made it and they can pay their bills, ship it out to other states that couldn't raise it on their own or are inefficient.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 09:57 AM
 
Location: Fuquay-Varina
4,003 posts, read 10,840,583 times
Reputation: 3303
So they will save a whopping $1-2 a month, but how much extra will the new tv cost when they pass along the R&D expense it takes to create it? If the government never stepped in, the aforementioned products would probably be cheaper for us to buy. The government was created to handle our infrastructure and security, not get involved in petty business.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 09:58 AM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,461,121 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverian View Post
Sounds like a great idea regarding the TVs. What they're going to do is force the TV makers to make them more energy efficient, thereby saving consumers money:

"The program's 2013 second stage promises to reduce energy use by 49%. If they are enforced, the new standards are expected to save Californians between $18 and $30 a year per TV set in energy costs. As noted by the Commission, current LCDs use about .27-watts per square inch and plasmas use 0.36-watts per square inch.
This isn't the first time Government has stepped in to regulate the energy efficiency in a gadget. More than thirty years ago, regulations on always-on refrigerators were passed and were first seen by companies as oppressive. Those companies eventually adapted and the result was a more efficient product. Similar acts have managed the energy needs of air conditioners and other gadgets. "

Nothing new or unusual going on here. You see, big corporations never have the consumer's interest in mind, only their money. That's why we have government - to protect us from corporations, whose only bottom line is profit. If the government hadn't stepped in and forced companies to build more efficient refrigerators, air conditioners, cars, etc., can you imagine where we'd be today?
That'll go good with the $3600 in new taxes on energy per household...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 10:04 AM
 
4,989 posts, read 10,021,418 times
Reputation: 3285
Amazing. In a few years, I'm sure the residents of Ca will simply be reduced to staring at CFL bulb for 4 hours a day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 10:06 AM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,164 posts, read 27,225,839 times
Reputation: 10428
Quote:
Originally Posted by booker_one View Post
you can't be serious about it being a great idea!!!
Why wouldn't I be serious? If my electric bill can be lowered, what's the problem?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 10:06 AM
 
12,669 posts, read 20,445,519 times
Reputation: 3050
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverian View Post
Sounds like a great idea regarding the TVs. What they're going to do is force the TV makers to make them more energy efficient, thereby saving consumers money:

"The program's 2013 second stage promises to reduce energy use by 49%. If they are enforced, the new standards are expected to save Californians between $18 and $30 a year per TV set in energy costs. As noted by the Commission, current LCDs use about .27-watts per square inch and plasmas use 0.36-watts per square inch.
This isn't the first time Government has stepped in to regulate the energy efficiency in a gadget. More than thirty years ago, regulations on always-on refrigerators were passed and were first seen by companies as oppressive. Those companies eventually adapted and the result was a more efficient product. Similar acts have managed the energy needs of air conditioners and other gadgets. "

Nothing new or unusual going on here. You see, big corporations never have the consumer's interest in mind, only their money. That's why we have government - to protect us from corporations, whose only bottom line is profit. If the government hadn't stepped in and forced companies to build more efficient refrigerators, air conditioners, cars, etc., can you imagine where we'd be today?
A TV does not run 24 hours a day like a fridge, AC does
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:32 AM.

© 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