To reduce unnecessary electricity usage which is good for all of us.
I suppose you can pretty much do any stupid thing to bring violence on
Pushing a police officer is near the top of the list.
Selling untaxed cigarettes isn't even close to what brought on the
violence. Up until he started pushing all he faced was a fine.
(A well deserved fine.)
So, as far as "real point", looks like you missed more than one.
I bought my candelabra base 4.7 watt LED bulbs from Costco. You might
want to check your local Costco to see if they're still selling them.
The LED bulbs give a very attractive white light that doesn't take time
to come to full brightness.
'Mark Lloyd[_11_ Wrote:
Well, I could see a professional photographer preferring a film camera
because of their very much higher resolution that film allows if the
image is in proper focus. But your point is well made; digital cameras
meet our needs the vast majority of the time, and they do it without our
having to pay for film and film processing. Within my lifetime we have
gone from photography costing $6 for a roll for film plus $12 for
processing to digital cameras costing less than $100 that take as many
pictures as your camera's battery and spare memory sticks will allow;
literally hundreds of pictures per battery charge. I call that
progress, and I really don't see the government at work trying to seize
control of our digital cameras in any way.
On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 10:52:35 -0800 (PST), email@example.com wrote:
Actually you ARE if you can find them to buy and sell without
manufacturing or importing them. If you have a 60 foot trailer full of
them out behind the barn you are free to sell them to whomever you
please. You cannot make more or import them when you run out.
On 12/15/2014 04:03 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Buy our 95-watt bulb now and receive ABSOLUTELY FREE a 5-watt bulb
included as part of the structure*.
* - 95W bulb for 100% more. 5W bulb is integral and can not be used
separately. Offer void in California and where prohibited.
> On Monday, December 15, 2014 3:17:18 PM UTC-5, nestork wrote:-
No, neither my government nor yours did anything to ban the manufacture,
importation or sale of film based cameras or photographic film. People
migrated to them on their own. You can't even buy a film based camera
anymore, not because they're banned, but because no one is making or
selling them anymore.
Your point would be that if CFL and LED's are so much superior to
incandescents, no legislation would be required to get people to
And you do have a point.
My response would be that incandescent bulbs are more than just a
personal preference, cost savings or convenience. They represent a
large portion of the electricity used in the country, and hence a large
portion of the CO2 being spewed into the atmosphere at electric
generating stations. With lighting, people hoarding incandescent bulbs
and refusing to adopt CFL's and LED's as replacements has a direct
effect on the carbon footprint of the nation. I think it's THAT
environmental aspect that our governments felt warranted the use of
legislation to eliminate the continued use of incandescent bulbs.
Five gallon flush toilets are similar in that right now some cities in
the USA are facing a looming water shortage. Phoenix, Arizona, for
example gets it's water from an underground aquifer. Being a former
petroleum engineer, I can tell you that in general, underground aquifers
are absolutely HUGE compared to oil reservoirs. So much so, in fact,
that in Alberta, one of the forces driving the production of oil from
underground oil reservoirs is the pressure maintenance afforded by the
water in the underlying aquifer expanding as oil is removed from the oil
reservoir and the pressure in that oil reservoir drops.
We have come to believe that water is nearly incompressible, but here,
the volume of water is so huge as to partially maintain the pressure in
the overburden oil reservoirs as oil is removed and the water level in
the oil reservoir rises to encroach on that oil bearing rock because of
water expansion from the underlying water aquifer.
Still, aquifers are finite in size and cannot keep supplying a city the
size of Phoenix with fresh water indefinitely. They become depleted of
water just as oil reservoirs become depleted of oil, and that's
happening in Phoenix right now, where you can get a fine for watering
your lawn when there's a restriction on water usage.
Similarily, the water supply for Las Vegas is the Colorado River (IIRC)
and water is being pumped out of it to irrigate farm land in both Nevada
Both Phoenix and Las Vegas are facing an uncertain future because they
can't continue to provide water for their residents, and so water
conservation is far more important than someone's preference, cost
savings or convenience. I believe it's that concern for the future of
the American south west that prompted the laws concerning water usage of
Ditto for the gas mileage and emission standards imposed on automobiles
by the State of California.
Ditto for the ban on CFC refrigerants in refrigerators and in air
conditioning systems cuz it was causing a big hole in our ozone layer,
and that was resulting in Australians not being able to go outside
without exposing themselves to potentially dangerous amounts of UV rays
from the Sun.
Ditto for the ban on the pesticide DDT cuz it kept on killing long after
it was washed out of the soil and into the rivers and lakes by rain.
Laws to control what we do are sometimes necessary when the results of
our being careless about stuff can be disasterous. I realize that flies
in the face of the independant spirit which is the cornerstone of
On Monday, December 15, 2014 10:17:18 PM UTC-5, nestork wrote:
People were not refusing to adopt CFLs, LEDs. They were buying them.
They were selling them. The market was working. But that wasn't good
enough for the heavy handed govt. It had to go force people.
Why don't they force guys like Alec Baldwin and Al Gore to live in
smaller houses? Or stop flying in G5s? How much CO2 does AF1, the two
C17s, spew when Obama goes flying several times a week across the
country raising campaign money? If I have to give up incandescents
for my outside light, how about he cut back on some of his non-essential
travel? How about we put a ban on him?
I think it's THAT
Of course it was. And if you look at the change it made in global
CO2, it's spit in the ocean. Obama just went over to China, agreed to
let them continue to increase their CO2 emissions until 2030 and only
after that do they need to start reducing them. He hailed that as a
great victory, which of course is a joke. Why didn't he get them to
force their people to use CFL?
Then maybe it's a better idea for the people in those areas to have
their own states pass laws that solve their problems instead of the
feds shoving it down on the whole country. I do agree that in the case
of toilets it would be harder for the free markets to make the transition.
When you buy a toilet, for most people whether it uses 1 gallon or 2 isn't
going to make much of an impact on the buying decision.
I agree sometimes it's necessary. But it should only be done when
absolutely necessary. The market was adopting CFLs, they were converting
over, the price was dropping. People were putting them in applications
where they made sense. And continuing to use incandescents where they
made sense, eg a closet, outdoors where it's cold, etc. That is way
different than CFC or DDT. In the case of CFLs, it's
just that big govt wanted to force us to give them up, right now, by
their methods. Did Obama get China to give up their incandescents?
You think so?
Residential electricity use is a small percentage of total electricity use.
Lighting is a small percentage of residential electricity use.
So home lighting is a VERY small percentage of total electricity usage.
And electricity generation is a small percentage of CO2 generation.
So exactly how much CO2 was saved by banning incandescents?
Don't forget to consider the energy and resources needed to build a CFL/ LE
D bulb compared to an incandescent. That is reflected in the 20x cost.
Have you ever taken apart an LED or CFL light bulb to see what is inside?
Do you know that the heat from incandescent bulbs can actually be usefull i
n the winter, and that heat delivered near to where it is needed, allows me
to lower the thermosadt a few degrees? In the winter the incandescents sa
ve me energy and reduce CO2 if that is important to you. Yes, I swap them
out for CFLs in the summer. As I am sitting here typing this right now, a
75 Watt incandescent bulb is helping to keep my hands warm.
As a degreed engineer, I think I can decide for myself which lighting techn
ology is best for me to use in my home, not some politican in Washington.
Thats the point, freedom is what this country was founded on and it should
not be taken away so lightly (pun intended).
On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 16:12:58 -0800 (PST), trader_4
Do you watch Fox News? If so, do you find it "fair and balanced"? Do you
think their "reporting" as roughly as accurate as CNN or CBS or NBC or
the BBC? How would you rate the quality and accuracy of Fox News with,
say, The Economist?
On Monday, December 15, 2014 10:14:25 PM UTC-5, Jennifer Murphy wrote:
I'd say Fox is more fair and balanced than the other networks. They have
liberals on all the time and allow them to make their case. Folks like
Dennis Kucinich, Bob Beckle, Juan Williams, Allen Colmes, Charley Rangle,
Luis Guitierrez, Austin Goolsbee, Robert Reich, etc. They'd have more on,
but most of them are afraid to show up, Pelosi being an example. She and
many others have a standing invitation to come on, but won't.
As far as accuracy, there is no comparison. Yes, Fox has a conservative
leaning, but they are fair, honest on the facts. Compare that to the
crap on CBS from just last week. For two days CBS continued to call the
weapon the 12 year old was holding in Cleveland a "toy gun". It was
not a toy. It's illegal for a minor to buy one. It's illegal for a minor
to possess one unless an adult is present and supervising. That "toy"
can easily put a person's eye out at a distance. And close range, in rare
cases, it can kill. It's not a toy gun, it's an air pellet gun.
Now either CBS is incredibly stupid, or they are lying,
your choice. It's hard to believe that in two days, no one pointed out to
them that they had it wrong.
And while we're at it, another example from last week on CBS. They
had a panel of 6 everyday people, 3 white, 3 black to talk about race
relations. Half way through the reporter asks "How many of you were
involved in protesting Ferguson/Garner? All 6 raise their hands. He
appears incredulous, "All of you..." Good grief. The only possible way
he could wind up with 6 people who were involved in protesting those
events was to have hand picked them. In other words, A - it was loaded,
and B - he pretended it wasn't.
You want an example of outrageous bias that is easily provable by hard
fact? Look at the coverage hours that those networks gave to the IRS
scandal compared to Christie's bridge scandal. They spent 15 times more
airtime on the bridge lane closing in just a two days as they did in 6 months
on the IRS scandal. And which is worse? Closing some lanes that make
getting onto the bridge more difficult, or having the IRS target citizens,
use the power of the IRS, based on their politics?
I could go on, but you get the point. Now perhaps you can share some
factual examples about Fox to back up your claims.
I've consistently found that kind of
superior attitude, with you libs and
also the insulting snide digs.
I'll save you the trouble, I'm both
illiterate and also a racist.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
Is your retort a semantic argument or a hidden hypocrisy? Will you be
'illustrating' your views of the government as you illustrate them
here (Usenet) in your next talk at sacrament meeting when the bishop
asks you to speak on the 12th article of faith?
| Have you ever watched the BBC or read the Economist? Can you even read?
It goes both ways. You're calling conservatives
idiots. They call you an idiot. Conservatives often
think "the government" is instituting disempowering
socialism. On the other hand, liberals often think
rednecks are forcing everyone to live by a
particular, mono-paradigmatic, fear-based social
dogma. There's some truth to both accusations.
The other day I was watching Bill Moyers interview
a man who, if I remember correctly, is the editor of
Harpers magazine. The man pointed out that only
recently had the NYT decided to stop avoiding the
word torture in reference to Guantanamo and the CIA
in general. I can attest to that kind of behavior from
the NYT. I get the NYT. I don't read much of the news
section. I wouldn't say it's liberal, the way the Limbaugh
-ians fear. Rather, it's skewed in favor of power and
money, which has no political party. As the wealthy
political activists increasingly like to say: "I'm socially
liberal and fiscally conservative." Which means, "Who
cares how you people live, so long as I end up with
What I'm getting at is that to some extent, liberal
vs conservative is the bread and circuses of the age.
On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 9:54:12 AM UTC-5, Mayayana wrote:
Apparently he's an idiot:
"The Senate Committee's Report on the C.I.A.'s Use of Torture"
"A Scathing Report on C.I.A. Torture"
I can attest to that kind of behavior from
Sure, I believe that. The NYT treated Bush and Reagan the
same way they treat Obama. They treat the Koch brothers the
same way as George Soros. Who was the last Republican candidate
for president that the NYT endorsed? Eisenhower. In over
half a century, they didn't endorse a sinlge Republican presidential
candidate. Good grief.
As the wealthy
Which wealthy activists are you referring to? Are you as sure
about that as you are about the fairness of the NYT?
I'd say it's the determining factor as to whether the USA endures
as the great country and super power it has been, or descends into
the hell of becoming the next Greece.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.