And your infrequent used attic lighting requires US to make millions of them a year so you can buy one every few years? Yeah that is a good scale in economy...

Right. So in the same way it is wrong for government to regulate that we are suppose to buy car insurance before we can drive.

Sorry I am going to use your post as the soap box on how government should set the tone and directions on technological advancement, environmental protection/public health, and social standard through executive branch regulation and legislation. The government has the implicit power to set the direction and tone through its position in leadership. After all that is what leadership is about.

Also noted that the legislation in US does not specifically ban the production of regulator incandescent light bulb. Instead the language specifically address the efficiency of the new light bulb produced. If the combination of materials and manufacturing process would make non-gas filled incandescent to perform up to the efficiency standard it can be produced. Of course the manufacture will want to charge premium for the patent and manufacturing process. That's capitalist market working right there, taken advantage of people's desire of keeping with the old stuff.

The government has the capacity and ability to set the tone for either the welfare of the general public (environment and public health and safety). To regulate and encourage interstate commerce (the Commerce Clause) gives the federal government to set regulation on technological grounds that draws a more even line for fair competition that would otherwise not happening because the laziness of human nature or the extra expense that would not immediately benefit the merchant on a short-term basis, especially if individual business can choose to abide or not. Since the timing of the legislation in 2007 the manufacturing process is maturing for the newer, higher efficiency light bulb it is fair to set the new standard so that everyone doing business in United States are competing on a new standard that is fair for everyone. Where the old light bulb production is already on decline, this allows all the manufactures to focus their resources and energy on newer standard without the distraction of having the keep up with the old stuff. If this was enacted in 2001 I would agree that the government is forcing its hand on a non-matured, to be proven technologies without basis. But to say that government does not have the power to regulate because it can abuse it is like saying companies don't need CEO and Chairman because bad leadership can happen all too easily.

Oblig.

1910s, huh?

You're a troll.

The only difference between a "rough service lamp" and "traditional bulbs" is that the filament is more robust and is supported by more framework within the bulb.

A slight correction. My numbers compared states to Western Europe only. North and South are slightly higher in homicide rates, but still well below US averages and below all but one or two of US states

If you take a tiny handful of small neighborhoods out of the equation (places like Flint, Michigan) the United States is actually an extremely peaceful place

Your statement is completely false. Take a look at the murder rate by state and you will find that the lowest rate state is New Hampshire. Guess what? New Hampshire still has a higher murder rate (barely) than Western, Northern or Southern Europe. 42 of the 50 states have a more than double rate. 37 triple. 28 quadruple. 18 quintuple.

So no, taking a couple ZIP codes out of the equation will not get us to where civilized countries homicide rates are.

Joey, have you ever been in a... in a Turkish prison?

Anybody on Slashdot who doesn't know who she is ... get the fuck out, because you're on the wrong website.

You might try wrapping your head around this: obligatory XKCD.

Where did the "radioactive components" (fucking bananas are radioactive so just saying that scary word doesn't work on people with an education) come from? Underground, perhaps? But putting them back is a problem? Yawn. I bet you'd have signed the petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide.

Sorry, I misplaced all my caps and my wife's hair isn't big enough. Besides which, I have a hard time digging the music scene down there.

-_-

You dismissed out of hand real conditions in China, which I addressed, because they're like, you know, the fucking topic.
YOU brought up the topic of movie production being included in GDP. I addressed it because YOU brought it up, asshole.
I brought up specifics vs. aggregates because YOU started talking about the steel industry for no reason.

I addressed YOUR points, which often were off the original topic, and you fault ME for addressing YOU?

Then you foe me. Wow. That's special. Consider it mutual, you ignorant, time-wasting shithead.

As a native son of native sons, let me underscore this. Keep the bastards out!

Signed, Emmett Watson

P.S. If you really want to understand Seattle, you better start watching reruns of Almost Live.

This is exactly what I'm talking about, the realities of economics in China as experienced by actual Chinese citizens. I tell you people are being taxed years in advance, and you say "So what?" Yeah, you really understand and care about what's happening in China. Hell, you'd fit right into the Chengguan, which you probably don't even know anything about without looking it up.

GDP should contain movie production costs. Do you even know what GDP is? What makes you think making a movie and selling it is ultimately any different from making a John Deere tractor and selling it? It's the economy, stupid. Even if US GDP is fudged slightly (which could be said of practically any economic metric), the PRC's is drastic. At least 5%, and when you're talking about the second largest economy on Earth, that's hundreds of billions of dollars.

What point is there on zooming in on x or y industry? Sure there are growth sectors in any country, but we're talking about aggregates. I mentioned that the growth in usage of electricity in China doesn't match GDP because, most economists agree, electricity is one of those things that goes up in demand commensurate to the growth in all other sectors, because basically everything needs energy to run. As for specific economists, I'm not paid to be your research bitch. I've spent a lot of years following news and events in China, and if you really want to learn something do your own reading. The first several articles all deal with this issue.