Home | Register | Login | Members  

Politics > The Inconvenient Truth....about....
New Topic | Post Reply
<< | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | >>  
101. Friday, October 16, 2009 12:25 AM
KahlanMnel RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....

 Moderator
 Member Since
 12/18/2005
 Posts:13606

 View Profile
 Send PM
Dunno. I figure that there are better things to worry about in life than lighting.


~ Amanda

"Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your slave..."

 
102. Saturday, October 17, 2009 7:10 AM
jordan RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....

 Admin
 Member Since
 12/17/2005
 Posts:2274

 View Profile
 Send PM
i have those squigly light bulbs in the garage. They take a minute or so to get fully lit up. These are one of the things I don't care about. We hardly have lights on anyway in the house so we go years without changing lightbulbs!


Jordan .

 
103. Saturday, October 17, 2009 9:58 AM
newraymond RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 2/18/2009
 Posts:291

 View Profile
 Send PM

OK then, just a bit bigger than the squiglys....

Per the L A Times: " It appears that California is poised to BAN big screen TVs! "           Oy gevalt. More business friendly stimulation for the debilitated California economy ? Loss of about $200 plus per set in state tax revenue, loss of jobs for the ship unloaders, delivery truck drivers, and Best Buy sales people, if not store closings ! But each set may save a buck or two a month in.... E-L-E-C-T-R-I-C-i-T-Y (thats from TP/FWWM :) )

And Kansas may be next Jordan.

 
104. Saturday, October 17, 2009 10:12 AM
nuart RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 12/18/2005
 Posts:7632

 View Profile
 Send PM
QUOTE:Dunno. I figure that there are better things to worry about in life than lighting.

 

 What?!  Are you kidding me?  Do you have any idea how awful you can look beneath the light of a cold squiggly bulb as compared to say a GE Reveal light bulb or an opalescent chandelier bulb?  Amanda, this is the stuff of life and really, I am shocked ... shocked and amazed... that you have yet to recognize this.  In a few years it will catch up with you though. 
 
Now I'm going back to my fetal lightbub worrying pod and wait for the end to come.
 
Susan
 
PS  Raymond you know that California (fast moving into my most unfavored state list after having been a champion of the Golden State for so long) also has a "Disposal Tax" that has been in effect since the beginning of this year for all electronic items from an iPhone to a energy-guzzling big screen TV ranging from $8 to $25  It is meant to charge you for the day that you dispose of that item you have just purchased.  Stupid, confiscatory and irritating.  But they keep finding new and innovative ways to tax&fee you to death out here.
 
Now I am really irritated.

 


     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

 

Ben Franklin

 
105. Saturday, October 17, 2009 11:24 AM
newraymond RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 2/18/2009
 Posts:291

 View Profile
 Send PM

Ha... that disposal tax will offset all the lost workers' former state income taxes paid as they hit the unemployment line I'm sure ! Oh well the store closings and idled trucks will really save on energy ;)

Oh wait this could also be a loss of property taxes and fuel excise taxes, registration fees etc. Oy. And people and businesses, also known as a er the tax base are leaving Cali on a daily basis.

Um let's see. penny wise, goose golden egg. ah any others? he he

Let's see. I've bought a phone and a compute this year and didn't notice the Prepaid Disposal Tax. Getting lacsidaisial in my old age.

 
106. Saturday, October 17, 2009 4:09 PM
nuart RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 12/18/2005
 Posts:7632

 View Profile
 Send PM

Raymond, with the 9.75% sales tax in CA, maybe the final price just didn't catch your attention. 

Don't even get me started on the free-for-all ticketing with the CHP and the LAPD these days -- moving and parking -- for every little minor abuse they can find.  It's truly a jungle out there!!!  I got two tickets in two days and one was in a 3rd level indoor parking structure.  Expired registration both times.  But can you imagine a city cop driving through mall parking lots just looking for expired plates?  That is how desperate this city is for revenue.

I'm leasing a new car on Tuesday and couldn't see spending the money on the registration for the one I'm turning in. Yes, guilty but geez.  I am getting paranoid to drive! 

And that is my inconvenient truth.  Also it was a HOT day today.  : (

Susan 


     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

 

Ben Franklin

 
107. Sunday, October 18, 2009 7:47 AM
jordan RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....

 Admin
 Member Since
 12/17/2005
 Posts:2274

 View Profile
 Send PM
Now with regards to the TV tax - that DOES bother me. A person should not be taxed for a big screen TV just because it uses more energy. It uses more energy, you're gonna pay for that extra energy - don't "tax" up front. That's just absurd.


Jordan .

 
108. Sunday, October 18, 2009 7:49 AM
nuart RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 12/18/2005
 Posts:7632

 View Profile
 Send PM

And the disposal tax is the electronic equivalent of death (estate) tax.  Pay in advance, pay while using and pay when dead and gone.

 

Susan


     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

 

Ben Franklin

 
109. Monday, October 19, 2009 10:31 AM
newraymond RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 2/18/2009
 Posts:291

 View Profile
 Send PM

Well guys, look on the bright side-or less bright in a way. At least there won't be any Death Tax on big screen TVs in Cali (other states to follow)--they will be banned !

How about a nice 19 inch black and white TV- mandated by the Law? sound good ? A cash for Big Screen TV 'energy clunkers', trade in that Big Screen for a modern efficient 19" Black and White.

The next underground crime growth area? -electronics/energy using politically incorrect devices.

The incandesant bulb - big screen TV mob is born. 

 
110. Wednesday, November 11, 2009 4:49 PM
newraymond RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 2/18/2009
 Posts:291

 View Profile
 Send PM

I read that Algore's Current Media is firing 80 employees. That is over 21% of the staff. It seems to me that if Al got rid of his fuel guzzling, air polluting kinetically used large private jet that could pay alot of those lost salaries.

Another question. Do the firings have anything to do with withering support for Al's cause? "The debate is over." Al proclaimed recently. If you say so Al that - is the final word.

 
111. Thursday, November 12, 2009 7:17 AM
jordan RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....

 Admin
 Member Since
 12/17/2005
 Posts:2274

 View Profile
 Send PM
The problem with one state banning TVs is that it has potential to cause ripple effects on other states. You get a couple of more states doing that and it might reduce the chances of any of us getting certain TVs, or the cost of those TVs going up. Any chance CA voters will wake up anytime soon?


Jordan .

 
112. Thursday, November 12, 2009 12:37 PM
bio_hazard RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 7/7/2008
 Posts:385

 View Profile
 Send PM

If anyone is interested in the actual CEC guidelines:

http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/tv_faqs.html

While i can understand a knee-jerk reaction to new government regulations, I've got to say this sounds like much ado about nothing.  For one thing, by BAN you really mean ban on sales by retailers after a certain date, not ban on use, or apparently sale of used TV's.  So it's not like you have to turn in your existing TV.

 Many existing plasmas will be sold into 2013, and many LARGE LED screens currently on the market meet the 2013 standards. Given the rate of innovation, there will doubtless be more models by 2013 when the stricter rules go into effect.  Critics suggest that fewer TV's will be sold, but, you know, this is the USA so I highly doubt that.  If you hadn't noticed, we kind of like out TV here! And the regulations are pushing innovation in this case, not retarding it. 

but if it makes you feel better to sulk in front of an old black and white CRT, by all means... :)

 

 

 

 

 
113. Thursday, November 12, 2009 2:49 PM
newraymond RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 2/18/2009
 Posts:291

 View Profile
 Send PM
I would definitely sulk in front of a b&w crt set, but will  "rabbit ears" still work? Maybe if i add some tin foil on them ?

 
114. Thursday, November 12, 2009 4:53 PM
bio_hazard RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 7/7/2008
 Posts:385

 View Profile
 Send PM
QUOTE:I would definitely sulk in front of a b&w crt set, but will  "rabbit ears" still work? Maybe if i add some tin foil on them ?

 good question :) I still get all my local channels, but I know that's not true for everyone.  Got to say I like the HD.

 
115. Thursday, November 19, 2009 5:38 AM
jordan RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....

 Admin
 Member Since
 12/17/2005
 Posts:2274

 View Profile
 Send PM

here's an updated story

Take a look at this paragraph: "On a unanimous vote, the California Energy Commission on Wednesday required all new televisions up to 58 inches to be more energy efficient beginning in 2011. The requirement will be tougher in 2013, and only a quarter of all TVs on the market currently meet that standard."

Anyone see the glaring "rich-person" loophole? (I'm not big on class warfare, but this paragraph just hit me up side the head.)


Jordan .

 
116. Thursday, November 19, 2009 9:12 AM
nuart RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 12/18/2005
 Posts:7632

 View Profile
 Send PM

Argh, I just read the story in our morning paper, Jordan.  Yesterday I saw that California is NUMBER 1!  Number 1 highest state in default.  Yay for us!  This should help.

Not sure how it is supposed to work.  They manufacture TVs in Asia and a part of each factory is designated as the California Energy Saving corner.  Those TVs require extra retrofitting.  Will they cost more too?  Prob'ly.  I foresee many trips to nearby Arizona, Oregon and Nevada for TV purchases.  That should help our economy along with the huge benefit of all these green sets sold in California!

Meanwhile the kidlettes at UCLA are out with their Yasser Arafat neckscarves today and yesterday protesting the raise in UC tuition.  One sign read "Smash Capitalism."  Give it time.  We're working on it.  That should work. 

Argh.

This poor state.  I'm voting for Meg Whitman for Gov.  Arnold announced he will not run again.

Susan

PS  Just noticed this in your clip, Jordan:

"On a unanimous vote, the California Energy Commission on Wednesday required all new televisions up to 58 inches to be more energy efficient beginning in 2011. The requirement will be tougher in 2013, and only a quarter of all TVs on the market currently meet that standard."

 

Is the way around this buying a 60+ TV?


     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

 

Ben Franklin

 
117. Thursday, November 19, 2009 11:25 AM
bio_hazard RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 7/7/2008
 Posts:385

 View Profile
 Send PM

If anyone finds a cost analysis showing the equivalence between a 60" TV and an X" efficient TV (2011 or 2013 standards), I would be interested in seeing it.  I wonder what the breakpoint will be.

 Susan- fyi Arnold is term-limited out, not that he'd have much chance this go-round.

 

edit- does this remind anyone of the mileage/emissions requirements for cars, but not big trucks? I guess there was better justification for exempting truckers than big TV's...

 
118. Thursday, November 19, 2009 3:01 PM
jordan RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....

 Admin
 Member Since
 12/17/2005
 Posts:2274

 View Profile
 Send PM
i can understand exempting truckers. BUT exempting 58+ inch TVs that are probably purchased by the most wealthy (which include those millionaire politicians)?

It's obvioius the cost of doing this is going to increase the cost of TVs for ALL of us.

Thanks you, California.


Jordan .

 
119. Thursday, November 19, 2009 9:03 PM
newraymond RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 2/18/2009
 Posts:291

 View Profile
 Send PM
Yes, by all means copy the lead of the most progressive states and their enlightened programs. Massachusetts and it's Romneycare state public option health care. Just a few short years and the program is waaay over the projected budget, can you multiply?   Bankrupt already and it  has the state in a financial bind.  AND very few eligible free healthcare candidates are signed up --the vast majority of the uninsurred remain....guess what? ....uninsured. I'm sure the Fed govt. program, if God forbid it passes, will put Massachusett's page turner Rube Goldberg bill to shame.

 
120. Thursday, November 19, 2009 9:43 PM
newraymond RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 2/18/2009
 Posts:291

 View Profile
 Send PM

 Let California's wise lawmakers show the country how it is done. Bankruptcy that is.

These state canarys in the coal mine are dropping like ...flies? Dropping like basket cases.

Now we are ready for a countrywide fiscal 'castastrophy' the likes of which will be destruction by government of the late great U S of A.. 

No government spread the whealth program has ever worked. After time we find that the Social Security System is a long winded Madoof ponzi scheme. It is now ,...bankrupt. Medicare's original cost projection was 7 times less than the true cost-it is bankrupt. The Post Office, who are actually the best preforming agency and actually DO something, are in the hole 8 billion dollars this year.  

O, return the Stimulus money not already stolen by your inside circle of jerks to the Treasury. Enact tax cuts for the working stiffs and for small businesses. Do what works. John kennedy did it and nipped a recession in the bud. Forget these ill timed, job killing Healthcare and Cap and Trade con games. Do something right, for once?

 
121. Thursday, November 19, 2009 9:44 PM
nuart RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 12/18/2005
 Posts:7632

 View Profile
 Send PM
QUOTE:

 

 Susan- fyi Arnold is term-limited out, not that he'd have much chance this go-round.

 

 

Yeah, I knew that but this is what I meant.  Saw this out of the corner of my eye this morning.  Or yesterday.

 

Gov. Schwarzenegger says he won't run for office after his second term ends

November 18, 2009 | 11:35 am

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has already lived several celebrated chapters in his life: Bodybuilder, action movie star and California governor. But Schwarzenegger, speaking to reporters today in Milan, Italy, ruled out another run for office. Associated Press has the details:

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger won't say what his plans are when his term expires next year, but he won't be running for another office.

"I have never labeled myself as a politician, so I am not going to run for anything else," Schwarzenegger told reporters in Milan on Tuesday.

Schwarzenegger, a Republican, is restricted by California law from seeking a third term as governor when his tenure expires at the end of 2010.

He has previously indicated that the only other political office he would be interested in seeking is president, and he can't run because he was born in Austria.

The governor said he will spend the next year trying to solve problems including a projected $21-billion budget shortfall through next year.

 


     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

 

Ben Franklin

 
122. Friday, November 20, 2009 12:44 AM
12rainbow RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 12/19/2005
 Posts:4953

 View Profile
 Send PM
oops wrong thread

 
123. Friday, November 20, 2009 12:36 PM
bio_hazard RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 7/7/2008
 Posts:385

 View Profile
 Send PM

I guess I'm the only one here at the moment to have a contrary view, but here goes...

 I think it isn't fair to call California's problems a result of government "spread the wealth", since so much of the spending is due to direct popular votes for programs. You can't blame the government when its actually the citizens who brought the programs into existence. California's budgetary system is unwieldy in that citizens can vote in a $999 gadzillion program by 50% of the vote, but to pay for it (or realistically, to pay for the other things that it is taking money away from), there has to be a supermajority in the legislature. I think one could make a pretty good argument that if the (representative) government was actually in control of both parts of that system, that CA would be in much better shape.

SS and Medicare are fairly broken now (bankrupt is a legitimate word).  One point of view is that because they are broken, they have no value, and should be scrapped.  Another point of view is that they do have value, and should be fixed.  The environments in which they both were forged were very different than today, (life expectancy, demographics, medical costs etc). These programs were not designed with enough adaptability, but that by itself doesn't make their purpose any less valid in my opinion. In other words, I think the discussion of value and implementation can be separated. I do think it is a legitimate gripe that people are so afraid to touch programs like medicare and SS that long-anticipated problems are left to become much more serious.

Re: post-office- if you like businesses, including small businesses, you should like the post office.  We are subsidizing bulk mailings, and rural routes that UPS/Fed Ex won't carry (it's common for these shipping companies to contract out to USPS for rural delivery, meaning they give packages to USPS to take on the final leg of the journey). Also, much of the bulk mail sorting is contracted out, so a lot is private sector.  Not to say we shouldn't be concerned about how much it costs or how efficiently it is run, but it is valid to consider this a service (like roads, like the military) worth a $40 annual fee.  The cost of stamps is really not that high- people complain every time it goes up a penny which I really don't understand.

 

 
124. Friday, November 20, 2009 1:52 PM
jordan RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....

 Admin
 Member Since
 12/17/2005
 Posts:2274

 View Profile
 Send PM

More inconvenient truth ?

it's hard to be sure right now, but at least some of the recent emails leaked from climate scientists indicate that there's been a less than scientific approach at proving global warming.


Jordan .

 
125. Saturday, November 21, 2009 6:21 PM
newraymond RE: The Inconvenient Truth....about....


 Member Since
 2/18/2009
 Posts:291

 View Profile
 Send PM

I heard a talk by Al Gore with some crazy "facts' about the temperature a few kilometers  below the earth;s surface. But I can't find a link to it . If i find it, I will post.

Ah yes, The temperature inside the earth is "several million degrees"  The fucking core is estimated at between 5 and 7 thousand degrees!! 

Here is the brilliant Scientist in his own words. ( Just 40 or 50 seconds in )

http://www.hulu.com/watch/108745/the-tonight-show-with-conan-obrien-al-gore-part-4

 

New Topic | Post Reply Page 5 of 7 :: << | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | >>
Politics > The Inconvenient Truth....about....


Users viewing this Topic (1)
1 Guest


This page was generated in 2340 ms.