"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
4...
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in
:

if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.

Freedom is important -- critical, vital -- with respect to what we
think, which people we associate with, which books we read, which
church we attend, whom we have sex with, etc.

It is of less than zero importance with respect to the cars we drive
or the lamps we illuminate our houses with. The economic stability of
this country is far more important. Those who scream "FREEDOM!
FREEDOM! FREEDOM!" are the ones doing the most to destroy this
country's economic vitality.

I disagee.
the ability to move freely about our nation is very important,
and private autos are one of the big successes of our nation.
They are very vital to our economic stability,vitality,and prosperity.

WHERE DID I EVER SAY PRIVATE CARS ARE A BAD THING, OR SHOULD BE OUTLAWED?
WHERE, WHERE, WHERE? SHOW ME.

Do you deliberately distort EVERYTHING YOU READ to fit your conservative
Weltanschauung?

The CAFE largely flopped, because it overlooked the fact that Americans have
traditionally loved big cars, and CAFE did nothing to FORCE people to buy
smaller cars.


And government is not the best for determining what is best
for people.Their track record in that respect is atrocious.

I know, I know... Let's get rid of the Food & Drug administration, so that
people won't be forced to purchase products that might be dangerous to their
health. And let's get rid of the Federal Safety Commission. After all, the
best way to find out if your child might strangle itself in a crib is to
give the child a chance and see what happens.

One of the purposes of government IS to regulate human behavior. But of
course, sending someone to prison when they commit murder is such a
/terrible/ restraint on personal freedom, is it not?


FYI,government has NO BUSINESS determining what sort of
lamps we must use,or how efficient our autos must be.
there's no power for that given to them in our Constitution.

FYI, there is. It's the Interstate Commerce clause, which gives the Federal
government pretty much carte blanche in such matters. (This is typical.
Conservatives generally have no idea of what the Constitution or Bill of
Rights /actually/ say.)

You know, during WW II there was rationing. People got coupon books that
controlled how much of particular types of food they could buy, how many
pairs of shoes and sets of auto tires they could purchase. This was
necessary to make sure our soldiers had the weapons and supplies they
needed. DO YOU OBJECT?

We are at war with countries who control a substantial percentage of our
energy supply, and have been involved in this war since the end of WW II.
What would you have us do about this? Wait until energy becomes so expensive
that people are forced to use less -- and American industry is further
damaged by high energy costs -- or FORCE people to use less NOW?

When this country is reduced to third-world economic status, enjoy your
precious "freedom" to choose the light bulb you want.

-----------------------

Just to clarify a point... The government should force people to use
more-efficient lighting, whether or not they like it -- the forcing or the
bulbs themselves.

It would be easy enough -- and an excellent idea -- for the government to
prohibit the manufacture & import of conventional Edison-based tungsten
lamps after, say, 2015. There are good CFL replacements for them /right
now/.

However... there are no satisfactory replacements for decorative lamps
(especially the smaller ones), nor would it make sense to use a CFL in a
refrigerator (or in any application where the light is turned on only
briefly). Except for chandeliers, there might be little point in replacing
such lamps with more-efficient versions, as they don't consume anywhere
nearly as much electricity as general lighting does.