Bureaucrats Controlling Your Thermostats: The Possibility Is Real

Patterico's Pontifications ^ | Jan. 08, 2008

[Tennessee Nana]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Shades of President Nixon and his 68 degreees and wear a sweater....

[AGreatPer]

California has been using up too much of the energy for years. Do it. This method will never come to me.

[Reeses]

If Hillary is elected President women will control the national thermostat. Venus here we come.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

If Kalifornis is using “too much” energy, charge them more for it. They will find ways to save energy if they’re paying through the nose for it. No need to control their thermostats from some building in Sacramento or a bunker in the Sierras.

[Stegall Tx]

President Nixon and his 68 degreees and wear a sweater....

Wasn't that Jimmy Carter? I vaguely remember a SNL skit with He & Rosalyn in sweaters and Miss Lilian on a bike that ran a charger hooked to the TV.

[Tennessee Nana]

No it was President Nixon who did it first

Carter is an Algore wannabe...I invented the wheel LOL

Nixon also put the speed limit down to 55 nation wide to save lives...

[MarkL]

Better yet, de-install the gov't thermostat once the work is finished...

That kind of thing happens all the time, already.

Oh, you can bet that if this sort of thing becomes mandatory, once the device stops communicating with the public utilities, a repair crew will be dispatched.

If it's found that the device was tampered with, you can bet that there will be a fine, and I wouldn't put it past them, criminal charges.

Mark

[CSM]

“Big Media is good for focusing attention on outrages like this. Once people get the idea that California bureaucrats really want to control our thermostats, it will very possibly be all over talk radio.”

Um, I hate to break it to the author, but talk radio is the antithesis of big media. Big media wouldn’t touch this story with a ten foot pole.

[CSM]

“...spread the cost of these idiot regs over the cost of many buildings.”

Can you explain to me how you spread variable costs via economies of scale?

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

Definitely going to happen. All this hype over GW isn’t for nothing. It’s designed to prepare us for ridiculous laws like that and the one about light bulbs. Only a matter of time.
First, buildings owned by the gov. Then private businesses that contract with the gov. Then all businesses, then homes where an occupant receives gov money. Then all homes.

[CSM]

“Can we isolate CA, let them have their own socialist economy, and let them trade with us as if a foreign entity?”

Wasn’t that the point of federalism? Of course the USSC has bastardized the commerce clause to eliminate that principle.

[stand watie]

PONG!!!

free dixie,sw

[svcw]

The best example would be a home owner building their home verses a developer building 100 homes.
The 100 homes are essentially the same, energy calcs, would only have to be done once for the 100 so each home would have that cost at 1/100, where as the signle home bears the total cost. Hopefully, I explained it a little better

[HKMk23]

If I paid for it; it’s mine, and I can do what I like with it after the Inspector leaves.

Most likely, I’d beat it to S#$%! with a sledgehammer, and send the pieces to the Governor’s office along with handwritten instructions for it’s successful reinstallation as an integral part of his anatomy.

And, yes, I’d be willing to pay for that priviledge.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

I call him Health Nut Huckabee.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Is there actual evidence that the libs are deliberately moving out into other states to drag them leftward, or is it that they’re just idiots who cannot leave their morally bankrupt ideologies with the states from which they flee?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Nixon also put the speed limit down to 55 nation wide to save lives...

I thought the double nickel was imposed to save oil. The "saves lives" argument, of course, is quite convenient for perpetrating tyranny.

[gidget7]

It is both. Homosexual activists do it purposely, in an effort to bring homosexual marriage to other states via attempts to divorce once they are married in states that allow it. And to bring activism to parts of the country that are strongly pro traditional moral values. Others move to conservative areas, preferring the atmosphere more but proceed to move those areas left and in effect change the dynamic to more reflect the areas they left. In some cases, it is done unknowingly, but in others it is not. Together, they are becoming more and more successful with time.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

So, what can we do? People have freedom of movement in this country. And whatever happened to that (yes) deliberate plan to move 20,000 libertarian conservatives into a small state and drag it rightward.

That stunt, by the way, proves your point. If we can think of such things, so can they.

Our way is superior, because we mostly leave them alone, while they, on the other hand, try to impose their will on us.

[gidget7]

I agree with you, and don’t know exactly what we can do. I don’t think the idea that a lot propose, which is to write off states that are socialist, is the answer, for sure! Giving up land to socialists by writing off or simply moving out of those states will only in the long run, leave us eventually, with nowhere to go. We do need to get children out of the public schools thus raising conservatives instead of indoctrinated, mind numbed little robots. And we do need to educate people about the implications of electing socialists and activists to office, and WHY conservatism works. The errors in the socialist mind set etc. How to do the latter? If I knew the answer I would tell you. A start may be to get folks listening to Rush and referring people to excellent Conservative books. They sure aren’t going to learn it in public school or college.

Also with young people, in an informed manner, point out the hypocrisy of socialist mind sets.