Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
I actually wasn't suggesting that the government is right in requiring CFLs... just that the lack of quality in one brand's bulb is no reason to criticize that requirement.
Of course, you're always free to disagree for disagreement's sake... that's one of the cool things about this country.
|
I apologize if it sounded like I was responding in error to your post. I was responding with the purpose of disagreeing with you in regards to the lack of quality control (Not limited to one brand, this is what I'm waiting to see over more time and studies) as a reason to criticize mandated usage. This is certainly by no means my only criticism, but I was only responding to that one. I simply didn't elaborate because as many users (and some moderators) have pointed out that we (not specifically you and I) have a habit of yelling past one another in these threads and that reiterating points serves little purpose. I didn't want to 'yell', nor did I want to put down your beliefs so I just figured I'd leave off the point with a simple, "I disagree". Perhaps it is a bit cheeky, but I certainly wasn't just trying to disagree with you for the sake of disagreeing.
To elaborate that point, if the overall quality of a product is not known or is under question I don't feel that any authority would be in the right to make required usage of that product. On the overall topic I wouldn't feel mandating would be proper either but that would be an expansion of the point. I will concede that I think it is promising and the risks are
probably minimal which is why I am using them myself. In those areas where I cannot currently use standard CFL's in place of INC I will admit that cost prohibits me from using the higher priced CFL alternatives. I don't need a lecture about the cost savings and so on differential, let's just say I am struggling right now and
really cannot afford said bulbs and leave it at that, thanks.
-MJ