Political Crossfire Forums

You would think it would iron itself out by the best choice becoming so dominant that people just quit using the other.

But you know people.

(hypothetical ideal society) I say let it work itself out, even if a public resource is involved. However everyone should be well informed in the costs involved. If saving from florescent translates to extra computer or electric guitar playing time I think people will choose fluorescent.

What are consumer rights?

The right to consume?

The right to consume without undue damage? Of course some products are inherently damaging to use.

Excess energy consumption isn't harmless though.

Seriously I understand the need for a national energy policy. At least to me national energy security/independence is huge. To that end banning certain products in favor of others or imposing CAFE standards is IMO ass backwards. Want peeps to use less, tax it, don't subsidize it.

Politically though... not popular to say the least.

I stand on lightbulbs. They break easily.