"Kevin T. Keith wrote re: If You Don't Hate the Cap and Trade Bill, Let Me Show You Section 304. on 07-08-2009 12:16 PM
You may have a point. But you're incompetent, wrong, alarmist, and tedious, so I doubt it, and I can't be bothered to do your homework for you.
To begin with, you haven't even read the bill correctly. Section (A)(vi) is not triggered by simply changing the name on a utility bill; it involves selling the building to a new owner, or, for commercial buildings, leasing it to a new operator. Nobody is going to inspect your home if your spouse starts paying the monthly bills.
("Dr." Melissa Clouthier seems to have the same problem. Since the bill mandates energy standards for new homes, it doesn't apply to existing homes. Problem solved, with the careful application of a new technology known as . . . reading comprehension! And as to how new homes can be made more energy-efficient than current ones, let me simply note that her failure of imagination is not an argument against the regulations. It's essentially equivalent to the creationist argument against evolution: she can't think of a way it could work, therefore it's impossible. For her enlightenment, I'll merely mention a few things other than "windows" that aren't currently widely used, but could be: passive solar; active solar and wind, 12-volt lighting, smaller total volumes, multi-generation homes . . .)
As for inspections, the energy assessment is coincident with things that already require inspection and permitting: new construction, renovations, sales, and the like. This just adds another dimension to the assessments already needed, which is something for the inspectors to worry about, not you. As you yourself note, you are not required to do anything in response to the inspection. It's hard to see how this is any burden at all.
As for your suggestion that the government providing subsidies to make energy-efficiency improvements is "like a couple mob heavies leaning on a witness in a Rico trial", I can only surmise that either your local mob heavies are unusually altruistic, or you're full of ***.
Regarding your boo-hooing that the state will only pay you half the cost of renovating your own house, were you intending to pay back the energy-cost savings to the state if they pick up the whole tab? Naturally you'll accept a tax on the difference between current and future energy bills after the system pays for itself - since, after all, you're all about cost equity, right?
Finally, the real problem here is the fundamentally childish viewpoint that motivates the whole post. What made you think you could live in any civilized community and simply "do what you want" with your property simply because "you paid for it with money"? The whole point to civilization is that we have rules that mediate the way people act, insofar as it affects the rest of the community. No, you can't "belch smoke" into the air and use twice as much energy as everyone else doing the same things, because the smoke pollutes the air other people breathe, and the energy you waste uses up resources that can't be replaced, and which also cause pollution. (In economic terms, you're generating negative externalities. In simpler terms, you're screwing up the place other people have to live.) When nobody knew how much damage that caused, and energy was plentiful, being fat, dumb and happy seemed like a workable strategy. Now that it's obvious what a cost energy waste and pollution impose, it's reasonable to ask people to limit the damage they do to everyone else's environment.
You want to waste energy? Fine. Just do so in a way that doesn't ruin the environment or harm the health or lifestyle of the people around you. Oh - there's no way to be an oblivious self-centered pig that doesn't harm other people? Then knock it off.
If you want civilization, then be civilized. You have obligations to the rest of the community. Being selfish, wasteful, polluting, and indifferent isn't workable anymore. You have an obligation not to do it, just like there are obligations to get your car smog-checked, and to use carbon-recovery devices on industrial smokestacks. Home energy is another big chunk of the puzzle - it's one we have to address. The fact that it inconveniences you to live as if your neighbors and the environment actually matter is an observation about you, not about the regulations needed to preserve what little resources we have left."
Super Snoopscold, that.
Wasn’t Kevin T Keith the poster who was accused by another poster, who claimed to know Keith personally, of being on welfare all his life and living in public housing?
Their real goal is to make large houses in the suburbs with pools and fireplaces too expensive to own. Throwing a pool party will cause a homeowner to go over their meager energy ration resulting in very high charges. This way leftists won't be as torn with envy having not been invited to the all those parties. They want to cap and trade the Joneses.