California appears poised to be first to ban power-guzzling big-screen TVs

LA Times BUSINESS ^ | Oct. 14,2009 | Marc Lifsher

[Fedupwithit]

....and we love every second of it!!!

Live Free or Die, baby!!

[Moltke]

My Krell Class A power amp (one of the older, smaller models) sucks a healthy 1.5 kW from the grid - for simple aural pleasure. “Molon labe!” Any time soon now.

[MAexile]

Yes, that's right. It's all coming back to me now. Do they expect that a court will order NH business owners to positively establish the residency of any buyer for everything that they sell, and then collect the appropriate sales tax based upon that buyer's residency? Are they all on crack cocaine? The cost of doing business for a NH merchant would skyrocket. Of course, when has that stopped a liberal from doing anything?

I haven’t heard a thing for a while. The whole thing sounds like it violates the commerce clause of the Constitution. At least that's what I'd argue.

Cocaine isn't the drug of choice for the Massachusetts General Court. Alcohol is.

[Pilated]

It will be one of the first states to be handing out “Soylent Green” nutrition to their populace. Stay away, as far away from this state as you can.

[nascarnation]

I think the law will have an exemption for the new model that only gets one channel:

“Baraq 24/7”

[aquila48]

I wish it was just PR.... They’re little dictators who think they know what’s good for you and they’re going to shove it down your throaty whether you like it or not.

[no-s]

bootlegging big screens from outside Cali for major profits

I predict a black market in banned items is in fact poised to become a growth industry in California. Handguns and handgun ammunition, Electronic cigarettes, recyclable beverage containers, fuel, frozen chicken breasts, un-taxed marijuana, cleaning products, surfboard blanks, over-the-counter pharmaceuticals, the list of banned and soon-to-be banned items is increasing rapidly.

And we know the apparatchiks and nomenklatura will not be interested in making do with within the limits of what they propose for everyone else. In fact there will also be a hefty secondary market in items and services which conceal one's deviation from the official requirements.

This is my new fallback retirement plan;)

[Hodar]

They are going to tear down 3 or 4 hydro-power dams on Klamath River... wonderful heh?

It's even more twisted and perverse than you can imagine. It is a FELONY for those damns to produce electricity at a profit. That is correct, the dams are only allowed to produce as much electricity as is necessary to maintain their infrastructure and pay the employees - after that they water is diverted away from the Generators and allowed to run though flood control systems. The dam MAY NOT produce power beyone what is necessary to maintain their upkeep.

Congress mandated this, because the Electric companies protested saying "How can we compete and sell electricity, when the taxpayer financed and funded dams produce electricity without any capital?" And they have a point, in that no person or individual company can install a damn and have a huge reservior, so how can a coal, fuel oil, solar, wind or natural gas tubine electrical generation facility fiscallly compete with a taxpayer funded dam?

Just another case of Congress getting in the way. If I were King, I'd use the dams to produce 100% of the power that they could, and use the fossil fuel, wind and solar companies compete for the excess electricity demands we need.

Imagine, Hoover Dam is running less than 2% of capacity, with most of their tubines removed from the dam, because of Congressional interference. Nice, huh?

[GeronL]

That is just insane.