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 07-12-2011, 10:58 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 36,923,642 times
Reputation: 15038

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenyo View Post
The GOP doubled down on protecting old outdated lightbulbs. Yep, no jobs bill, caved on the debt talk, can't reppeal "Obamacare"..What a joke.
Not only that, just as Fed regulation has done in the past it has kicked corporate American in the ass and a result guess what, suddenly companies are discovering that they can develop innovative designs that are actually more energy efficient and please to the eye. Sort of like car companies that couldn't figure out how to make fuel efficient vehicles until placed up against the regulatory wall. Funny how that works.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-12-2011, 10:59 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,885,654 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
So we still get a choice.

I'd rather not get the more expensive, more hazardous new bulbs thank you.
They're actually 10x cheaper when you consider the electricity they save.

But what I don't understand the stubbornness. The ban is on 100 watt bulbs. You can still buy 95 watt bulbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 11:01 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,174,115 times
Reputation: 27718
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
They're actually 10x cheaper when you consider the electricity they save.

But what I don't understand the stubbornness. The ban is on 100 watt bulbs. You can still buy 95 watt bulbs.
There is no ban.
And I can save more than $100/year other ways.

House to vote on repealing lightbulb efficiency standards
"Signed by George W. Bush, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 requires lightbulb manufacturers to improve the efficiency of incandescent bulbs by 25 percent. The law doesn’t ban incandescents and doesn’t require the use of compact fluorescent lightbulbs. All it mandates is that lightbulbs be made better. Doing so can save the average homeowner $100 a year in energy costs."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 11:05 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 36,923,642 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
There is no ban.
And I can save more than $100/year other ways.

House to vote on repealing lightbulb efficiency standards
"Signed by George W. Bush, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 requires lightbulb manufacturers to improve the efficiency of incandescent bulbs by 25 percent. The law doesn’t ban incandescents and doesn’t require the use of compact fluorescent lightbulbs. All it mandates is that lightbulbs be made better. Doing so can save the average homeowner $100 a year in energy costs."
Tell that to your buddies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 11:06 PM
 
Location: Imaginary Figment
11,449 posts, read 14,423,845 times
Reputation: 4777
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
By a vote of 233-193 the House GOP failed to repeal the light bulb efficiency standards. I know that doesn't seem like a jobs bill but it must be because the GOP promised that Jobs was going to be their #1 priority. And while it didn't seem to me that defunding Planned Parent Hood, repealing the Affordable Health Care Act, or slashing jobs at the federal, state and local level but I am sure they must know what they are doing.
That's weird, because I thought it was all about "job creation" for the GOP? Why would they not follow up on what they campaigned on?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2011, 11:09 PM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,907,407 times
Reputation: 7458
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLCPUNK View Post
That's weird, because I thought it was all about "job creation" for the GOP? Why would they not follow up on what they campaigned on?
What have your bosses in the Democrat party EVER done about job creation?

Answer: NOTHING. All your pals do is enrich the entitlement class at the expense of taxpayers to buy votes. You and they disgust me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 06:41 AM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,350,508 times
Reputation: 4798
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
They're actually 10x cheaper when you consider the electricity they save.

But what I don't understand the stubbornness. The ban is on 100 watt bulbs. You can still buy 95 watt bulbs.
No. You should really try comparing lumens per watt as opposed to whatever method you were using. They use about 1/5 less electricity to produce close to the same lumens.

That doesn't speak at all about what Kelvin rating it has.

Now it may be slightly even more efficient than that because of the power used to remove or add heat to the home with the higher rated wattage. It's certainly not saving you 1/10 the power though and the bulb makers don't even claim that.

As far as hazardous goes, most people were fine with a thermostat with 300 times more mercury in it before they even knew how an old mercury bulb thermostat worked. 5 mg isn't your biggest problem in this world.

Last edited by BigJon3475; 07-13-2011 at 07:44 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 06:53 AM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,350,508 times
Reputation: 4798
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
By a vote of 233-193 the House GOP failed to repeal the light bulb efficiency standards. I know that doesn't seem like a jobs bill but it must be because the GOP promised that Jobs was going to be their #1 priority. And while it didn't seem to me that defunding Planned Parent Hood, repealing the Affordable Health Care Act, or slashing jobs at the federal, state and local level but I am sure they must know what they are doing.
Why don't you educate people instead of banning crap?

Then the people will willingly buy the bulbs instead of fight you every step of the way.

Sort of like keeping people on welfare for their own good then all they do is learn how to stay on welfare and find more programs related to welfare.

If they had to feed themselves, house themselves and transport themselves to and from work they might actually learn something. Instead they actually learn to navigate through the federal bureaucracy which is amazing and says a lot about what they're capable of.

People are going to have to get used to much lower incomes. The rest of the world has been doing it for some time now and no, it's not because someone got rich. Those people get rich because the people who aren't willingly give up every red cent to them for stuff they don't need.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 07:01 AM
 
Location: Portland, OR
8,802 posts, read 8,866,810 times
Reputation: 4512
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
Since they voted it down, it means the Republicans can reject several things at once. Since they held the House since January, what have the Republicans actually passed?
Nothing. Which, again, is why they were elected. Why do you want chinese funded government jobs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 07:33 AM
 
9,732 posts, read 9,688,833 times
Reputation: 6407
Since when is it the job of Congress to create PRIVATE SECTOR jobs? The role of Congress is to promote commerce and stay out of the way.
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
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