Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Ban the Bulb?

Do I still want to live in California?

I actually asked myself that question after reading about the latest lizard-brained idea from Sacremento. One of our liberal, Democrat, environmentalist-wacko, Gore-infected legislators introduced a bill to ban the incandescent light bulb in California. The bill would phase in the ban, which would take complete effect in 5 years.

And the pundits say it’s likely to pass, and almost certain to get the Governator’s signature.

This is completely plausible to me. The sheeple of California (meaning the majority of adults of voting age: left-leaning, uninformed, and apathetic) will likely listen to the bleating about how incandescent bulbs are guilty of wasting an enormous amount of energy, about how compact fluorescent bulbs put out the same amount of light but use much less energy, last longer, and cost less. They’ll hear all that, and then like the unthinking, uninformed, and unobservant sheep that they are, they’ll say “Yeah, that sounds good!” and re-elect those same legislators again — those legislators that are, brick-by-brick, building a nanny state that is removing one freedom after another from us.

"What on earth is Tom ranting about now?", some of you may say. Well, for background, read this. But here’s the bottom line: incandescent bulbs are superior to compact fluorescent bulbs with respect to the quality of the light they emit. To use simpler words: our artificially illuminated world looks better with incandescent bulbs. But if the legislators prevail (as it appears they will), I will be forced to use inferior lamps, or risk criminal prosecution after the “light bulb police” catch me using bulbs I bought from another state.

The right way to handle this would be to allow the market to control the “problem”. Many people already choose to use compact fluorescent lamps — either as a replacement for all their incandescent bulbs, or only for those where the aesthetics don’t matter much. They do it, I’m sure, to save money. I do this myself in my home. The higher the price of electricity (and therefore the greater savings from compact fluorescent lamps), the more people will do this. That’s the right way — let each individual make up their own mind, based on the value of high quality light to them.

For example, when I’m working on my hobbies, the quality of the light is vital to me. Sacremento is going to tell me that I can’t have my halogen desk lamp. That means that I will either have to work on my hobbies only in daylight (doesn’t work well in the winter!), or I will have to become a light bulb criminal.

Or leave.

Enough of this sort of crap, and I am outta here. I wonder which state is the least likely to engage in this sort of nanny-statism?

1 comment:

  1. In the old blog, Bob Clay said:
    The environment would be better off if we could reduce the large amounts of methane coming out of our elected 'representatives' in Sacramento.

    ReplyDelete