Anyone have any liberal acquaintances or family members that deny that such a ban exists?
I find it “illuminating” that they deny such a thing,
because it shows that they don’t believe that government
would overstep to that extent.
It’s an opening - drive the point home.
Should the government decide what light bulbs you can use and why?
It just came to me: “Trickle Down Tyranny”
We need to mock them ceaselessly-—and never buy in to their ridiculous bulls**t.
13% of power plant usage is for lighting.
Conventional incandescent bulbs produce 10% light, 90% heat.
The government gets involved in requests for new power plants and their associated infrastructure (power lines, etc.). The government also gets pushed to create a wise energy policy (allow drilling, fracking, pipelines, etc.). So, yes, the government mandated more efficient light bulbs.
I’m not a big fan of CFLs - we have a few in the house. However, I love LEDs. As quickly as they develop LEDs which fit in our budget, we replace our conventional bulbs.
I’m not a big fan of our local power company. Why give them more business than I have to?
Except that this was the work of REPUBLICAN Fred Upton and REPUBLICAN George W. Bush (follow the CFL lobbying money...)
LED bulbs contain Arsenic, and fluorescent bulbs generate Ultraviolet light.
Arsenic in landfills yields arsenic in groundwater plus skin cancer from fluorescent lights - - - hmmmmm? Forward!
Looks like Obama Socialized Health Insurance Tax (OSHIT) has arrived just in time to “fix” the planned poisoning by the Liberal Lightbulb Law (LLL)! Forward!
The Obamacrats have thus discovered even more unintended Scientific consequences in their Utopian Obamanation! Forward!
FORWARD! FORWARD! FORWARD!
( Obamacrat John “Benghazi Coverup” Boehner must so proud - - - . )
Bottom line is, they don’t believe in the free market or freedom of choice generally (see Obamacare).
So even when they happen to stumble upon a good idea, they ruin it by making it mandated by the federal government.
Just yesterday here in Minnesota, a democrat state legislator introduced a bill to make the app that allows you to track down your missing cellphone MANDATORY. You and I would say, let the manufacturers treat it as a feature to attract buyers to their product versus another one, but they see themselves as the arbiter of what you need and so you don’t get a choice (even if it raises the price of the item).
I find it hard to believe that FedGov would regulate something as absurd as what kind of light bulb we can use. That’s as absurd as if they regulated how much water a toilet can flush or how big a soft drink we could buy. No one really wants that much government in their lives, do they?
This is the original one:
This one shows (using their data) how much energy is "saved" by putting individual homeowners through this crap:
The sheep don’t know anything anyway. Over the last couple years when I was buying up my lifetime supply of incandescent bulbs I always asked the clerk checking out my order, “Do you know that these bulbs will not be available at the end of the year?” The answer was always a blank stare. This was not just a couple clerks, it was maybe 20. They know nothing and don’t care to know anything about the world going on around them. Their progressive teachers have taught them well.
I think that they are typical no-nothings who, if they get any news at all, they get it from the network evening newscasts.
It should be noted that this is simply an extension of the process whereby the government mandated certain mileage requirements for vehicles.
As with the mileage, the regulations do not specify the technology to be used, only the energy use per lumen minimum that must be met.
I don’t think you should be forced to make the same decision I did even if I know I’m right. trying to save money, yes.
I don’t think you should be forced to make the same decision I did even if I know I’m right. That is my new tagline.
Ignore the last post, not sure what happened.