"William Sommerwerck" wrote in
:

"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.

show me where I said that you said any of that.

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

why do you ASSume things that have not been said?

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.

that Safety Commission is one more thing(of many) Federal government should
NOT be involved with. If people want those services,companies will spring
up to provide them,like Consumer Reports.


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.)

Bull****.
regulating TRADE between the states has nothing to do with auto fuel
economy. that Interstate Commerce clause has been abused almost as much as
the "provide for the general welfare" comment on the Preamble.

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?

There was a WAR being fought. there's provision for that,it makes
sense,and it was for a limited time.

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?

DEVELOP OUR OWN ENERGY SOURCES. Instead of blocking them off.

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.

Our nation is being "reduced to third-world status" by people like you,who
have government interfere in everything. Our status began dropping when we
began accepting socialism.



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

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.

I disagree. the Federal government has NO BUSINESS in this area.


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.

Yeah,force people to change instead of building more nuclear power plants
and having cheap reliable electricity.

You need to move to commie-land.
Then you can force people to do as you want them to do.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com