First WATER
Now, this: 
You have GOT to be kidding.
I started using energy efficient light bulbs and lighting a few years ago. I also try to use daylight color temp bulbs as much as possible.
Just common sense as I see it. No big deal.
What do we do with the excess bulbs this idiot wants to outlaw? Why throw them on his front lawn! Oh wait, his gardener will get hit with broken glass, which will end up with an unpaid emergency room visit...
The bulbs are great but not if I have to.
I remember reading on some lefty site where CFLs were being blamed for causing ailments such as chronic fatigue syndrome.
Maybe those folks can cause a health scare and override the "save energy or else" lefties.
I hate fluorescent bulbs. They buzz & hum & flicker. < :(
And in 2013 they will realize that all CFLs contain that eeeeeeeeeeeeeevil mercury...
All those roofs and paved areas are too dark, absorbing solar energy, increasing global heat.
We need to increase the albedo (reflectance) of man-made surfaces to counteract the melting of global ice, which is very reflective.
Pass a law to add a white dye to pavement, and require all roofing to be white.
This is not my original idea.
they will use global warming to control every aspect of our lives - how we live, what we drive, how we use electricity, etc.
A "Fantastic" Budget
|
Senator Tom McClintock
|
|
|
Date: January 19, 2007
|
|
|
Publication Type: Column
|
|
|
|
|
|
According to Gov. Schwarzenegger, California’s financial condition is “fantastic.” Spending has been brought under control, the budget has been balanced and our debt is being paid down. But as Churchill once said, “It is not possible to state the opposite of the truth with greater precision.” To the governor’s credit, he has proposed some long-overdue spending reforms, most notably conforming state welfare eligibility standards to federal law. But there’s very little else to praise about the Governor’s handling of the state’s finances. In fact, spending is growing faster than it did under Gray Davis, the state is now running the biggest deficit in its history, and the only way it can pay its bills is because of massive borrowing carried over from 2004, contributing to a doubling of the state’s debt burden in just three years. When Gov. Schwarzenegger claims the budget is balanced, he ignores his Finance Department’s own figures that report a $7.6 billion shortfall in the 2006 budget ($1 billion worse than Davis’ worst year in 2000). His proposed 2007 budget adds $1.9 billion more to the state’s ocean of red ink. The Governor justifies his claim that the budget is balanced by concocting a new accounting concept he calls the “net operating deficit.” Here’s how it works: to enable his claim that he is paying down debt when it is actually increasing, the Governor made some pre-payments during the last two years – akin to paying more than the minimum balance on your credit cards. But to hide the deficit he created on the other side of the ledger, he simply doesn’t enter those payments in the state’s checkbook. (Don’t try this at home, boys and girls, or you’ll be hearing from your banker). California can get away with such bookkeeping gimmickry for a while because unprecedented borrowing in 2004 and a revenue windfall last year allowed Gov. Schwarzenegger to begin the year with $10.8 billion in the bank. The state’s deficit spending will nearly exhaust that cushion by next year under the Governor’s proposal. Meanwhile, borrowing is now completely out of control. When Gov. Schwarzenegger took office, the percentage of the general fund required for debt service was three percent. Since then, that burden has doubled to six percent and will exceed eight percent next year. Put another way, our minimum credit card payment now consumes more tax money than the budget of the entire University of California. Ironically, the state’s debt service ratio never exceeded 2.2 percent throughout the 1960’s, when California was at its zenith in public works construction. The new budget purports fiscal restraint – growing the general fund just one percent (after a staggering 30 percent during the last three years). But this is based on some very shaky assumptions that are very unlikely to materialize. State revenues in 2006 were projected to grow just 1.2 percent, and actual revenues are now falling behind even his modest goal. The Governor’s 2007 budget is predicated on robust 7.1 percent growth next year. If the state’s economy merely does not deteriorate any further, it will produce a $7.5 billion deficit – placing the state on the brink of insolvency within 18 months. But even assuming that every one of the Governor’s calculations is correct, and the Governor’s budget is adopted intact, the condition of the state’s finances will be this:
The Oxford English Dictionary notes that the original meaning of the word “fantastic” as, “existing only in imagination.” Perhaps that’s what the Governor means. Senator Tom McClintock represents the 19 th Senate District in the California Legislature. His website address is www.sen.ca.gov/mcclintock. |
|
First WATER
Now, this:
ping
ping to you, too.
None.
Somebody turned the lights off, but there still isn't anyone home.
Well, there's still kerosene lanterns or producing light by burning the NY Times in the fireplace.
Those claims are overly optimistic. First off, when I've bought CFLs for my house, I've found that the light equivalency is WAY low. It seems that what they compare to a 60 watt bulb is about the same amount of light that a 40w bulb puts out. And I've had to replace 2 bulbs in less than a year.
Mark
Well, all I can say is that Arnold better veto this one!
They might as well decree “fire bad” and have done with it.
It is probabably the best idea that came from that State since 1908.
The reason incandesant works is lost power heating up the filament in the bulb to produce light,,it glows like an electric heater on the wall,,neon uses most of its' power starting the bulb when it's first turned on,after that it doesn't use as much as incandesant...go with gas , save you some money..
If you Kalifornians are looking for an investment opportunity, here it is. As with anything that gets banned, its market value will skyrocket. Just look at 5 gallon toilets, standard capacity maganzines (10>), and assault rifles.