Am I The Only One Stocking Up?

[Backroads]

There are positives and negatives to all the types. I tend to care about the environmental costs. CFLs may last longer, but they're dead nasty to the environment.

[MormonMama]

And I'm really happy for you, but that does not negate that there are people out there who will suffer from this and have had the choice took away from them. There are many people whose migraines are triggered from fluorescent lighting and there are many epileptics who are light sensitive that have to avoid them.

I still believe that this is one choice that should not be removed.

Well, my migraines are stress-induced. Does that mean I should expect the rest of the world to cater to me and do everything they can to enable me to avoid having stress in my life? We don't always get the choices we want in life, not even the ones that would make our quality of life better.

That goes both ways. If it's so insignificant, a "freaking LIGHT BULB", then why force everyone to use a certain type.

I highly doubt that the government is even bothering to tell us what kind of lightbulbs we have to use if there isn't some significance to it. It's your argument that I think is insignificant. If you have issues with the government, tell it to them. Utilize a proper method and forum for trying to make change and the governmental level. Whining about a lightbulb on a Mormon forum isn't exactly a way to change the world.

I can't believe that Mormons of all people are so willing to give up hard won freedoms.

I didn't realize anyone "fought hard" to win the right to use incandescent lightbulbs. I'm pretty sure that's not on the minds of our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan right now.

I'm too lazy to go back and quote people but I saw these comments on this thread:

1.) If you don't like the law leave the country.

This is the problem with democracy... because in a country of 5 wolves and 2 sheep, democracy is great unless you're the sheep. So yeah, saying this popular mantra is basically telling people - my needs are met, sorry sheep, you can move to China.

If all you want to do about a problem you have with the government is whine about it and then bash anyone who doesn't agree with you, then yes, you can leave the country for all I care. If you're someone who is willing to take REAL action and petition the government in a rational and well-reason manner for redress of your grievance, even if you are unsuccessful, then you have my full support. But the OP doesn't seem interested in doing that.

I stand by what I said.

To the OP: if you can provide me with solid evidence that incandescent bulbs are no more harmful to the earth and people than CFL's (and I'm talking health issues, economic issues, etc.), and if you can show me that the government has no truly valid reason for this ban, and if you're willing to create a petition to attempt to stop this ban, if you can do all of those things, then I will happily sign your petition and lend my support to your cause. But if all you want to do is whine and then attack those who disagree with you, then I'm done with you.

Edited April 4, 2011 by MormonMama

[zippy_do46]

There are positives and negatives to all the types. I tend to care about the environmental costs. CFLs may last longer, but they're dead nasty to the environment.

True Backroads, and because you are up on the environment you know just what kind of hill we are climbing. This is where the wolves come in that look like sheep and act like wolves.

CFLs were an answer to what we considered a problem, "Cutting back on fossel fuels ". As we start using them, problems started.

I guess it is one of those days, because my wicked sense of humor just hit me. I vote lets go back to horse and buggy days. At least the by product could be used on the nearest field.

I guess what I am trying to say is the only thing we can really do is research, do your part, and take care of as much as you can.

[MormonMama]

I vote lets go back to horse and buggy days. At least the by product could be used on the nearest field.

Every time I fill up my gas tank I start thinking along these lines. But then again, how much does it cost to feed and keep a horse, keep the buggy in working order, etc? The vet bills alone might negate any savings on gas, lol!

[zippy_do46]

Yes MormonMama's and it would be my luck my beautiful horse would really be a nag with a wicked sense of humor and likes to bite. :)

[MormonMama]

And would the "exhaust" from that many horses cancel out the drop in exhaust from cars?

[Sali]

Well, my migraines are stress-induced. Does that mean I should expect the rest of the world to cater to me and do everything they can to enable me to avoid having stress in my life? We don't always get the choices we want in life, not even the ones that would make our quality of life better.

.

You choose the way that you deal with stress. There are stress relieving techniques and therapies around that you can use to change your mindset in dealing with it. People with photosensitive migraines and epilepsy do not choose these illnesses. How would you suggest that they light their house? I'm not saying that incandescent light bulbs should be provided just for them, I'm saying that the choice that will affect their life greatly should not be taken away.

I'm just hoping for all these people that will be affected in a negative way that there will be affordable choices available to them.

[zippy_do46]

Sigh, there goes that wolf again. Where would you put your by-product in New York city?

We, to some degree are along for the ride in this life. We do the best we can do. We can only control out lives and how we live. We can vote and we can do for our communities. We can not force anyone to do otherwise.lol Here we go again.

"You can lead the horse to water, but you can not make him drink. "

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Sounds like you missed part of my first post: There is an economic benefit to you and me personally, to convert to a more efficient light bulb.

That I understand, and I would have no problem with the marketplace offering options to save money, but this isn't going to be an option very shortly. I don't like CFL's because that type of lighting is, in my opinion, stress inducing and not homely, so it's worth paying a little more for the type of lighting I like.

So, it made good economic sense back in the mid '90's. It makes even more sense today with electricity costs going up, and CFL prices going down. (Although the average modern CFL only lasts 5-7 yrs). I figure we save a hundred bucks a year or more using 30 CFL's (including outdoor lighting) than 30 incandescants.

Which is why there will always be a market for these types of bulbs, even without government cohersion.

Take a 2nd look at my analogy /w buggy whips. As America retooled itself from horse-drawn transportation to horseless carriage transportation, our road system on the federal, state, county, and local level did indeed effectively help destroy the buggy whip industry.

Not only has horsedrawn transportation never been outlawed, but hitching posts and watering troffs have been available in many towns and cities all the way up to the 1960's

Amish communities are almost exclusively accomodating to equestrians and carriages even today. In no sense has government ever compelled the transition from horses to automobiles. There's a difference between industries dying a natural death due to antiquity and dying an artificial death due to public policy.

Does anyone here still feel the bite of unjust government regulation because they can't hitch up their horse and drive the buggy to the grocery store?

LM

As long as one's buggy is properly licensed, and they clean up after the horses, there is probably not a town in America where somebody can't hitch up a horse and drive to the grocery store. This is why I've said that your analogy simply doesn't fit.

[NeuroTypical]

As long as one's buggy is properly licensed

They sell buggy licenses? A fruitless dozen or so searches of my county's website doesn't support your assertion.

and they clean up after the horses, there is probably not a town in America where somebody can't hitch up a horse and drive to the grocery store.

What, there wouldn't be a traffic issue on a road with a 35 or higher speed limit? Or even 25 or higher? You don't think a cop would write a ticket for obstructing the right of way, or some such thing? Yeah, it took a hundred years, but modern American thoroughfares (designed and operated by government entities, and paid for with tax dollars) are no longer set up for horse-drawn carriages. The govt did indeed do its part in killing the buggy-whip industry.

Maybe you need to think this through a little more. I'm still thinking my analogy still fits. Horseless carriages didn't cause migraines, but they sure had enough stressful and dangerous things about them to make the analogy fit with the current CFL health complaints. Anyone wanna compare mercury to battery acid?

[Madriglace]

Candles .... oh and lamp oil and wicks ... the way things are going who's going to to be able to afford the electricity to run the light bulbs. As for the toilet paper ... someone once asked me if I had to choose between good TP and good peanut butter which would I choose .... good peanut butter every time.

To OP if you don't like the way the issue is being handled do something about it where it may count ...

[Guest]

They sell buggy licenses? A fruitless dozen or so searches of my county's website doesn't support your assertion.

What, there wouldn't be a traffic issue on a road with a 35 or higher speed limit? Or even 25 or higher? You don't think a cop would write a ticket for obstructing the right of way, or some such thing? Yeah, it took a hundred years, but modern American thoroughfares (designed and operated by government entities, and paid for with tax dollars) are no longer set up for horse-drawn carriages. The govt did indeed do its part in killing the buggy-whip industry.

Maybe you need to think this through a little more. I'm still thinking my analogy still fits. Horseless carriages didn't cause migraines, but they sure had enough stressful and dangerous things about them to make the analogy fit with the current CFL health complaints. Anyone wanna compare mercury to battery acid?

C'mon LM... do you really not see the difference between an OUTRIGHT ban of a specific product to the natural progression of industry?

It's okay to disagree, but let's be honest about the disagreement, ok? Let's not put a tailspin on something just to make a point.

[Dravin]

C'mon LM... do you really not see the difference between an OUTRIGHT ban of a specific product to the natural progression of industry?

It's okay to disagree, but let's be honest about the disagreement, ok? Let's not put a tailspin on something just to make a point.

A better comparison might be the banning of CFCs. Now of course one can debate the enviromental benefits of incadenscent versus compact fluorescent lamps, but it's at least it is the same type of situation (hypothetically, if there is no benefit, or it is negative it isn't the same type of situation). That's why I was curious of the actual numbers involved, if it's a wash then economics should take care of cost of operating incadescents verus the cost of operating CFLs. Though a law or policy mandating the US Government make use of CFLs wouldn't be uncalled for.

[mordorbund]

The prophecy - it's fulfilled!!!

[Mahone]

The prophecy - it's fulfilled!!!

From now on, you shall all know me as professor Trelawney.

[NeuroTypical]

C'mon LM... do you really not see the difference between an OUTRIGHT ban of a specific product to the natural progression of industry?

I do. I don't support the ban. I have sympathetic thoughts about what govt should and shouldn't do. I've stated such several times in the course of this thread.

But like buggy-whips, the incandescent lightbulb is on it's way out regardless of government action. I'm too busy basking in my couple extra hundred bucks a year, and dreaming fond dreams of cost-effective LED lighting, to shed any tears about what the govt is doing. Again (for the third time), I pick my battles.

No, I'm not stockpiling.

No, I'm not seeing a slippery slope here.

No, I'm not even particularly outraged. Because I only have so much outrage in me, so I want to make sure it gets pointed in useful directions.

[Wingnut]

The prophecy - it's fulfilled!!!

Okay, I want to know how you remembered that -- pretty impressive!

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

They sell buggy licenses? A fruitless dozen or so searches of my county's website doesn't support your assertion.

Maybe you're looking for the wrong thing. Hitched trailers of all sorts have to have registered plates and you need to be looking at your state's DMV.

What, there wouldn't be a traffic issue on a road with a 35 or higher speed limit? Or even 25 or higher? You don't think a cop would write a ticket for obstructing the right of way, or some such thing? Yeah, it took a hundred years, but modern American thoroughfares (designed and operated by government entities, and paid for with tax dollars) are no longer set up for horse-drawn carriages. The govt did indeed do its part in killing the buggy-whip industry.

Your example cited a trip to one's local grocery market, not a cruise down the interstate. Let's keep the analogy consistant, shall we? BTW, I've seen precisely the senario you describe, people running errands using horses for transportation.

Maybe you need to think this through a little more. I'm still thinking my analogy still fits. Horseless carriages didn't cause migraines, but they sure had enough stressful and dangerous things about them to make the analogy fit with the current CFL health complaints. Anyone wanna compare mercury to battery acid?

Your analogy doesn't fit and that's not a matter of opinion. There was no government cohersion compelling the change from horse drawn to motor transportation, yet there is cohersion to force the public to a different type of light bulb. How is this hard to understand?

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

To OP if you don't like the way the issue is being handled do something about it where it may count ...

You mean like contacting government officials and you're assuming that I haven't already? And didn't the OP state precisely what I am doing in response to this law? Your statement makes no sense.

[Guest]

You mean like contacting government officials and you're assuming that I haven't already? And didn't the OP state precisely what I am doing in response to this law? Your statement makes no sense.

Saintmichael... I've been called out that same way before too - about whining on an internet forum "instead" of exercising our democratic power through the proper government channels.

It's a bad comment that has no other purpose but to shut somebody up. Because... EVERYBODY knows that "whining" on the internet forum is nothing but an outlet - finding some ears to listen to your thoughts. Of course we don't expect anything to change because of it! Well... okay, maybe some readers will learn something from it...

There's no LDS.NET rule that says - if you have contacted your Congressman you cannot bare your thoughts on LDS.net anymore... or vice versa!

[estradling75]

Saintmichael... I've been called out that same way before too - about whining on an internet forum "instead" of exercising our democratic power through the proper government channels.

It's a bad comment that has no other purpose but to shut somebody up. Because... EVERYBODY knows that "whining" on the internet forum is nothing but an outlet - finding some ears to listen to your thoughts. Of course we don't expect anything to change because of it! Well... okay, maybe some readers will learn something from it...

There's no LDS.NET rule that says - if you have contacted your Congressman you cannot bare your thoughts on LDS.net anymore... or vice versa!

True there is no LDS.NET rule that says that... But there is also no rule that says that when you bare your thoughts on LDS.net that everyone else is jump right on your bandwagon and agree with everything you say.

You are allowed to share your thoughts, but when people disagree and don't rally the way you want then we get accused of being 'poor stewards, apathetic to the government take over and all that stuff. When you say those things you have crossed over the line from just sharing your thoughts to trying to prod action. Then you get redirected to places more approach to rally and agitate for political change

[Jayhawk2421]

Now that everyone has gotten worked up over the government banning incandescant lightbulbs and mandating that everyone use CFL's instead, it should be clarified that neither is true. Incandescant lights are not being banned and no one has to switch to CFL's. The government is implimenting efficency standards for all lightbulbs. If you can make an incandscant that is meets the standard (which has been done by using halogen gas in the bulbs) then you can still use them. Any other type of bulb that meets the efficency standard can be used, be it CFL, LED, or anything new that one can invent and make work.

So those stocking up are not doing so becuase they like one type of bulb or another, but because they oppose using the resources of this earth efficently. No technology is being banned, we are instead being required to be more efficent.

[TheMightyQuinn]

So those stocking up are not doing so becuase they like one type of bulb or another, but because they oppose using the resources of this earth efficently.

Do you seriously believe that?

I replaced my globe incandescent bulbs with CFL globes in my bathroom. Within a years ALL the CFLs were dead. My incandescents last longer and are significantly cheaper than the CFLs. How is that more efficient?

[NeuroTypical]

Quinn - your experience sure doesn't match the rest of the world using CFL's.

Back in 2002, I thought I was being clever in writing the install date on every bulb and saving the packaging and receipts. So far, only two out of around 20 have gone out. My experience is the norm.

That's how it is more efficient.

.

Now that everyone has gotten worked up over the government banning incandescant lightbulbs and mandating that everyone use CFL's instead, it should be clarified that neither is true. Incandescant lights are not being banned and no one has to switch to CFL's.

Cool Jay - got link?

[Backroads]

Y'all realize that efficiency is going to be a very individual thing based on individual needs, preferences, and experiences? What's efficient for one will not be for someone else.

THat's why I'm opposed to the law.