[LINK] US & fluorescent light bulbs

[Frank O'Connor]

Mmmm ...

Sadly we live in a democracy, and so do the citizens of the US.

That means that people who believe that evolution is heresy, global warming is a communist plot, immigration is bad news, people of differetn skin colours, cultures anmd languages are inferior, the death penalty should be bought back and little numbers like 'The War on Drugs' are achieving something ... are in the box seat.

The idiot element has a vote, and is noisy and aggressive about using it.

And they get manipulated by the 'powers that be' so that the rich pay an ever decreasing proportion of the tax and the yokels more, the yokels wages effectively lose value over 20 years (with the difference to their living standards being made up by massive borrowings and leverage that can more often than not never be redeemed), and the God given the rights to pollute, defraud and otherwise take advantage of said yokels are enshrined in some massive Libertarian and other mindless nationalist  movements that go by the names of the Tea Party, One Nation and the like ... whose pronouncements the yokels just lap up as their lives go down the toilet.

Our own Tony Abbot obviously subscribes to this state of affairs, being the democrat par excellence that he is. Last week he said that scientific evidence and impartial expert scientific and economic opinion was irrelevant to him ... as he represented the 'will of the Australian people' (presumably as expressed in the hundreds of thousands of polls that seem to be interminably produced.)

So ... mass (read 'bogan') opinion trumps science and experts in Australia too ... perhaps we shouldn't point the finger at the US.

And I'm not being elitist. If I'm feeling crook I don't poll thousands of people in the street to see what they think i might have ... I tend to present at a doctor's surgery for and expert diagnosis supported by science. But in these days of the shock jock and zillions of polls, even scientific theory (there are no scientific laws) is up for a vote ... rather than being promoted by evidence, peer review and the scientific method. Lets repeal the Law of Gravity, throw out that Evolution thingie and get back to the good old days.

Sometimes I'm with the bogans ... and do believe that we're living at the 'End of Days'. I mean, chronic moronic stupidity like this has to be evidence for the increasingly accepted hypothesis that as a species we don't deserve to survive ... doesn't it?

												Regards,
---
On 18/07/2011, at 3:11 AM, stephen at melbpc.org.au wrote:

> America has no federal policy on climate change .. and now, this.
> 
> Why do we in the real world accept a dangerous GOP without comment?
> 
> By IBTimes Staff Reporter | July 16, 2011 11:31 AM EDT 
> <http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/181438/20110716/fluorescent-bulb-
> incandescent-bulb-lights-100-watt-bulb.htm>
> 
> Analysis
> 
> The world lighting and engineer community is in near-universal agreement 
> regarding fluorescent bulbs ... they save a substantial amount of energy, 
> compared to tradition incandescent light bulbs ...
> 
> So what has the Republican Party focused on? 
> 
> Well, they made undercutting the fluorescent bulb implementation act one 
> of their priorities.
> 
> On Friday the U.S. House voted to withhold funding to enforce part of the 
> law that increases efficiency standards for light bulbs, The New York 
> Times reports.
> 
> The new standard requires most light bulbs to be 25 to 30 percent more 
> efficient by 2014, and at least 60 percent more efficient by 2020, and 
> that's something the new fluorescent bulbs can accomplish.
> 
> However, Republicans view increased energy efficient law as an 
> unnecessary intrusion of the government into private lives.
> 
> If the House measure becomes law, it would prevent the U.S. Department of 
> Energy from enforcing the new light bulb energy consumption standard in 
> 2012.
> 
> Energy/Public Policy Analysis: 
> 
> House Republicans view the light bulb law as the federal government 
> repressing the market.  
> 
> In reality, it shows just how extreme -- and out-of-touch -- the GOP has 
> become with respect to the typical person's daily life and struggles.
> 
> Incandescent bulbs are more than 130 years old, and are essentially the 
> same design that Thomas Edison refined a century ago. 
> 
> They are incredibly inefficient: only about 10 percent -- just 10 
> percent -- of the energy they consume is used to produce light. The other 
> 90 percent is wasted as heat.  
> 
> Fluorescent bulbs can be up to 65 percent more efficient than 
> incandescent, hence one can see the substantial reduction in U.S. energy 
> usage that would occur if they're used universally.
> 
> Why does the GOP want to turn-back-the-clock on light bulb technology? 
> 
> It's a symbolic issue that telegraphs to the party's conservative base 
> that the caucus has the power to check progressive policies and maintain 
> the status quo ... even if that status quo is regressive and hurts the 
> nation. 
> 
> For House Republicans, conservative values and policies, no matter how 
> regressive and short-sighted, are superior to the national interest and 
> progress.
> 
> And one can also see how counter-productive and progress-delaying the 
> House anti-fluorescent bulb legislation is: it will literally result in 
> tens of billions of dollars in increased electricity costs for the common 
> person, and for the nation.
> 
> Further, a fluorescent bulb bill does not reduce personal freedom: it's 
> an energy system improvement stemming from a smarter regulation -- 
> similar to the way increased federal miles per gallon requirements for 
> cars made cars more energy-efficient.
> 
> And, equally significant, the anti-fluorescent bill shows how out-of-
> touch the conservative House Republican caucus is ...
> 
> --
> 
> Cheers,
> Stephen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Message sent using MelbPC WebMail Server
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link