Skip to comments.Is Obsolete Tech an Inalienable Right? (supporting tyranny)
Posted on 07/19/2011 6:18:23 PM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
Sam Biddle Today's superfluous political grappling comes via Texas, where Republican rep Joe Barton's incensed by legislation mandating efficient incandescent lightbulbs. Rather, he and his backers claim, Americans should be able to screw-in whatever they damn please. Is old tech really a liberty?
But to Barton it's not about efficiency. It's not about technology at all. It's about Ye Olde Blood Stained Tree of Liberty: the bulb law (and the push to repeal it) "Is about more than just energy consumption. It is about personal freedom."
Well, not so fast, Joe. Beyond anything but the most stringent enshrinement of free will, casting obligatory lightbulb efficiency as an infringement on American liberties is a tough sell. The law doesn't, contrary to Michelle's arm-waving, tell you what kind of bulb to buy. You can buy an (improved) incandescent, a CFL, or an LED. You can buy them from an array of companies, at an array of stores. You can put them anywhere in your house you'd like. Or, you can forgo lightbulbs altogether! Use candles! Whatever! There's not a single line in the efficiency legislation that tells you how to live your life, what to think, or what to say. The loss of the "freedom" to buy inefficient vampire bulbs is tantamount to the freedom we're all deprived of by not being able to buy weaponized anthrax or endangered birds.
(Excerpt) Read more at gizmodo.com ...
If the government comes around and says "you can buy x lightbulb, y lightbulb, z lightbulb, q lightbulb" my response is not then "Oh wow! Thanks for all those choices dear leader! Look at how free I am!"
That doesn't cut it. The fact that the government stepped in and took someone else's liberty means mine is in danger.
Old lightbulbs will go away when customers stop demanding them. Naturally. Without any dear leader coming in with a heavy hand. That old lightbulbs are still being made, means people are still demanding them. But government now won't allow it. There's your attack on liberty, right there.
If enough people want them the market will be satisfied. We can’t even prevent people from buying and poisoning themselves with heroin, so I’m pretty sure those who want incandescent bulbs will get them. There are even instructions out there for making your own if you want to run them purely out of spite.
The strongest clue that a new piece of tech isn't quite all it's cracked up to be is that it requires a policy change to make it sell.
I have never heard anyone discuss the stupidity of putting an expensive PFC (Poison-Filled Curlicue) or LED bulb in a closet that gets opened once or twice a day (or less frequently) for a couple of minutes. Yet, when all Edison bulbs are banned, people will be forced to do this. And how about the 40-watt bulbs used in ovens and refrigerators? These are also used for only minutes or seconds at a time. And no PFC or LED bulb can survive at all in an oven.
Oh. I forgot. Obama is going to ban stoves that use Edison bulbs, anyway.
BTW: Need light in your microwave? Just put an Edison bulb in there next to your coffee. It’s fun!
There is or was an enterprising individual in Germany selling incandescent lightbulbs as heaters - therefore making them apparently legal.
It’s going to be a LONG time before LED bulbs work in all of the temperature extremes that an incandescent bulb will work in. CFL’s? Forget it.
Here’s the original article on “Heat balls”
A bright idea! The EU may have banned old-fashioned bulbs, but sparky entrepreneurs have alighted on a ruse to keep selling them
Actually, yes, this is an infringement. If the government stepped in and said you can no longer listen to MSNBC (Still have CNN, ABC, CBS, NPR, etc) would that be ok? You still have a choice in which ones to watch, when to watch them, to watch them on a plasma or LEDTV or CRT (next banned though)!
And what about the freedom of the companies/workers making them to make a product?
I thought “progressives” were all about progress. That is making things better. Unless you are color blind, there is a world of difference between the light from a CFL and an incandescent bulb. No matter how hard they try, with tinted glass and all, CFLs still put out a sickly, eerie, dreary glow. It’s like having your house lit like a cloudy day. I hate them with a passion. I applaud people who can stand to use them, for the “savings”. More power to you. Just don’t force me to use them and call it “freedom”.
In liberal-land, the only unalienable right is the right to copulate with anything and everything, anyone and everyone. All other rights are subject to tests of practicality.
Sam Biddle, partisan hack, scribbling in Gizmodo, about incandescent light bulbs, instead of crawling up Zero’s tailpipe about Operation Fast and Furious, about Zero’s war against Libya, about Zero’s war on US energy supplies...
And abortion... don't forget that unalienable lib right.
Depending upon the ap an incandescent bulb can be “more green” than the mandated CFL. The “inrush” wattage to start one is generally more than the incandescent bulb some would demand it replace in my closets.
I’m counting on the market - if our congresscritters/watermelons leave it alone - to bring down the cost true color LEDs, too. >PS
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.