bk3k wrote:You bring up a good point, but this only leaves the following truth about their judgement: they either morally or intellectually unqualified to make these determinations. Either way, the result is the same. Personally, I believe the green movement (at the top, not the average Joe who feels that they're doing good by going green) is more about money and power than anything.Quiklilcav wrote:You could argue incompetence with that(unless you think the energy saving benefits outweigh the potential harm aka pros outweigh cons), what would their agenda be? Holding stock in CFL bulb manufacturing companies? That's the best I could think of.Take Back the Republican Party wrote:Finding nefarious and sinister motivations behind their actions is downright silly. They are charged with protecting the environment. Lead is one of the most poisonous common compounds around. It's been eliminated from nigh every product it was found in previously, with a couple of notable examples including gasoline and house paint...If you truly think the EPA is all on the up-and-up, how would you explain their supporting of CFL bulbs, which have more of a chance of causing environmental and health issues than lead?
Quiklilcav wrote:bk3k wrote:You bring up a good point, but this only leaves the following truth about their judgement: they either morally or intellectually unqualified to make these determinations. Either way, the result is the same. Personally, I believe the green movement (at the top, not the average Joe who feels that they're doing good by going green) is more about money and power than anything.Quiklilcav wrote:You could argue incompetence with that(unless you think the energy saving benefits outweigh the potential harm aka pros outweigh cons), what would their agenda be? Holding stock in CFL bulb manufacturing companies? That's the best I could think of.Take Back the Republican Party wrote:Finding nefarious and sinister motivations behind their actions is downright silly. They are charged with protecting the environment. Lead is one of the most poisonous common compounds around. It's been eliminated from nigh every product it was found in previously, with a couple of notable examples including gasoline and house paint...If you truly think the EPA is all on the up-and-up, how would you explain their supporting of CFL bulbs, which have more of a chance of causing environmental and health issues than lead?
Quiklilcav wrote:Maybe a link can be drawn to people in power that benefit through the increase in sales of CFLs, maybe not. This leads me to ask this: if legislators of such regulations and their friends are found to have such vested interests, will the same people screaming "Halliburton" about the Iraq war be willing to scream such conspiracy claims about the liberals who push the green laws?