Rand Paul OWNS Energy Committee, leaves woman speechless.

[SEO Monkey]

Thought this was funny and spot on.
YouTube - Sen. Rand Paul on Consumer Choice in Energy Committee Hearing

It is not spot. It would be a bit more spot on IF there were no restraints on abortion (ie. 3rd trimester) AND the legislation in question was stopping people from using light bulbs of any sort.

There's a limit on what you can tell a person to do with their own body and its workings. There's also a limit on what you can tell people to do regarding their energy usage. But no one is telling anyone not to use energy; they are being told to use more energy-efficient solutions, as this energy is shared with others and affects the energy grid, and the climate we all share. The energy grid and atmosphere are shared properties.

 

[JakeStratham]

There's a limit on what you can tell a person to do with their own body and its workings. There's also a limit on what you can tell people to do regarding their energy usage. But no one is telling anyone not to use energy; they are being told to use more energy-efficient solutions, as this energy is shared with others and affects the energy grid, and the climate we all share. The energy grid and atmosphere are shared properties.

 

[dreamache]

It is not spot. It would be a bit more spot on IF there were no restraints on abortion (ie. 3rd trimester) AND the legislation in question was stopping people from using light bulbs of any sort.

There's a limit on what you can tell a person to do with their own body and its workings. There's also a limit on what you can tell people to do regarding their energy usage. But no one is telling anyone not to use energy; they are being told to use more energy-efficient solutions, as this energy is shared with others and affects the energy grid, and the climate we all share. The energy grid and atmosphere are shared properties.

So "protecting the environment" is more important than sending people into further debt? Glad you're not a politician.

 

[SEO Monkey]

Leftist demand the right for women to TAKE a life from their bodies YET they turn around and tell me that I can't put salt and certain fat INTO my body.



Double Standards and Hypocrisy is why I can't take leftist seriously. They are still living and thinking as children.


Ridiculous.

Can you point out any specific people who do this?

Leftist demand the right for women to TAKE a life from their bodies YET they turn around and tell me that I can't put salt and certain fat INTO my body.

 

[SEO Monkey]

So "protecting the environment" is more important than sending people into further debt? Glad you're not a politician.

Actually, our archaic energy grid going down OR sea levels rising (as a result of climate change) and leaving people's houses underwater would also send people "into further debt"

But for the record, I do think there should be subsidies for this sort of thing if these costs are exorbitant as RP claims. If you tell person X they have to use X appliance which costs more than what they used to be able to buy, they should receive help. Here in CA there exist departments which help with this sort of thing, but I don't know how it works elsewhere. I have been using more energy efficient products for some time now and haven't noticed the ridiculous increases RP is talking about. Quite honestly, I wish I had more specifics on what exactly he is addressing. What kind of toilets did he have to buy? Stuff like that.

 

[JakeStratham]

This is going to seem irrelevant to the conversation, but it's a good read. So, I'm gonna drop it here. Note: it's a PDF.

Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis by Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Read it, enjoy it, wipe your bum with it. Ain't gonna debate it. Just thought I'd share.

 

[SEO Monkey]

We could say that the abortion could be of the fetus that grows up to be the person who cures cancer, and so affects everyone. Obvious nonsense.

Having a child means one more mouth to feed in the world, by your argument, people should have to get permission to have children or be forced to have abortions if someone else decides the child must die.

Seriously bro, think this stuff through before you post it.

That said, you're completely side-stepping my argument.

1. Who owns you? If you own you, then it's your choice to make.

2. Even if my actions affect others, that doesn't mean everyone can tell me how to act. If that was the case, none of us could self-direct ourselves, and we would spend our time directing others. It would be a completely irrational society where you tell me what to do, and I tell FTC Hater what to do, and he tells you what to do.

3. Who is so wise, intelligent and moral, that they know all the answers? The answer is no one. The notion of such a thing is called a "fatal conceit".

4. I assume you support democracy. How can people be intelligent enough to pick their leaders, who effect almost EVERYTHING, and not intelligent enough to pick their light bulbs? Do you see the cognitive dissonance here?

You're not smarter than me when it comes to my affairs, because in my life, I have one thing you do not. My own skin in my game. Likewise, you know better for your life, because you have your own ass on the line.

Consequences are the natural regulator of all behavior in nature. It is not biased, can't be bribed and operates blindly as justice should. Men controlling other men is hell on earth. Every single goddamn time.

I see a lot of non sequiturs here.

The energy grid (and atmosphere) are shared properties. Our energy usage directly affects both. Think of free speech. We are allowed to say what we want, but we can't libel/slander each other and more to the point, we can't yell fire in a theater. At some point, our energy consumption becomes closer to yelling fire in a theater than the the type of free speech that doesn't hurt others.

Picking the energy inefficient light bulbs has less to do with intelligence and more to do with our ingrained nature to save money. Even if it means $1.20 for a pack of light bulbs vs $.80. It's our nature to take the $.80. In fact, for our budget, the $.80 is the intelligent choice, but this contradicts what's intelligent for our energy grid and atmosphere.

In certain instances, our actions as individuals makes it difficult to accomplish anything as a society. This is when regulation is needed to get us going in the right direction.

 

[SEO Monkey]

This is going to seem irrelevant to the conversation, but it's a good read. So, I'm gonna drop it here. Note: it's a PDF.

Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis by Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Read it, enjoy it, wipe your bum with it. Ain't gonna debate it. Just thought I'd share.

Downloaded...thanks!

 

[Ar Scion]

I see a lot of non sequiturs here.

The energy grid (and atmosphere) are shared properties. Our energy usage directly affects both. Think of free speech. We are allowed to say what we want, but we can't libel/slander each other and more to the point, we can't yell fire in a theater. At some point, our energy consumption becomes closer to yelling fire in a theater than the the type of free speech that doesn't hurt others.

Picking the energy inefficient light bulbs has less to do with intelligence and more to do with our ingrained nature to save money. Even if it means $1.20 for a pack of light bulbs vs $.80. It's our nature to take the $.80. In fact, for our budget, the $.80 is the intelligent choice, but this contradicts what's intelligent for our energy grid and atmosphere.

In certain instances, our actions as individuals makes it difficult to accomplish anything as a society. This is when regulation is needed to get us going in the right direction.

As far as abortions, an individual is also a shared property, in that his contributions to his environment are shared among all of us.

 

[SEO Monkey]

As far as abortions, an individual is also a shared property, in that his contributions to his environment are shared among all of us.

Or lack thereof. There is no model for knowing what a person will grow up and do (there IS a model for knowing what energy usage will do to our energy grid and atmosphere).

Furthermore, with abortion you're literally telling someone what they can('t) do with their own body, and even then, abortion does become illegal (I believe at the 2nd or 3rd trimester) at some point. With energy usage, you're not telling people they can't have light bulbs. You're just telling them they have to use light bulbs that will use less energy.

 

[guerilla]

I see a lot of non sequiturs here.

You didn't point a single one out.

The energy grid (and atmosphere) are shared properties.

There is no such thing as a shared property. Property can be for common use, but someone, somewhere is in charge of controlling it, and only one person can control property at a time without conflicts.

In certain instances, our actions as individuals makes it difficult to accomplish anything as a society. This is when regulation is needed to get us going in the right direction.

This is nonsense. I am a methodological individualist. Society is just the aggregate of individual human action. Society cannot think, cannot feel and does not have values. Individuals can think, feel and have values.

Regulation is an excuse for some members of "society" to get to tell other members of "society" how to live or act. That's because it is impossible for "society" to act in everyone's interest simultaneously. Even Marx understood this, which is why he acknowledged that we would need a socialist man to emerge, one who could suborn his own rational self-interest for some greater good as defined by his peer group.

Ayn Rand explained that such a "my brother's keeper" society would be fundamentally irrational and totally self-destructive.

Also, Che Guevara was a mass murder and a terrible human being. I hope you have him as your avatar as a joke.

 

[Pulse]

I like clean water, it keeps me alive.

 

[1yerrot]

Then I guess all politicians are fucking retards.

You sir are cooooooorrect!

 

[SEO Monkey]

You didn't point a single one out.
You didn't point a single one out.

That's because each statement was guilty of such in the same manner. You simply repeated the same basic NS. I was responding to your argument as a whole.

There is no such thing as a shared property. Property can be for common use, but someone, somewhere is in charge of controlling it, and only one person can control property at a time without conflicts.

I see what you're saying, and property may be the wrong word. But we all share an atmosphere and a climate, and we can all affect it in our own minute individual manner. By doing so, our actions affect others who share the same climate (future generations included). Again, I refer back to my yelling fire in a crowded theater comparison. We have free speech, but at some point there exists the possibility of trampling on the freedoms of others.

This is nonsense. I am a methodological individualist. Society is just the aggregate of individual human action. Society cannot think, cannot feel and does not have values. Individuals can think, feel and have values.

The fact that our individual actions affect of our energy grid usage and ecosystem/climate exist regardless of what one chooses to label themselves. The aggregate of a society's actions do have an impact in this scenario. Hence, the need for regulation in this matter since individuals on their own won't do what's necessary and the end result will be disastrous for everyone.

Regulation is an excuse for some members of "society" to get to tell other members of "society" how to live or act. That's because it is impossible for "society" to act in everyone's interest simultaneously. Even Marx understood this, which is why he acknowledged that we would need a socialist man to emerge, one who could suborn his own rational self-interest for some greater good as defined by his peer group.

Indeed. I am sick of paying more for tires and brakes because some ivy league bureaucrat was bored and decided tell other members of "society" how to live or act by telling manufacturers they can't produce tires or brakes that will get me killed a year down the road.

Ayn Rand explained that such a "my brother's keeper" society would be fundamentally irrational and totally self-destructive.

I have more brain cells in my penis than Ayn Rand ever had.

Also, Che Guevara was a mass murder and a terrible human being. I hope you have him as your avatar as a joke.

[/QUOTE]

Share with the class. Who are the masses he murdered?

 

[Fatbat]

I'm afraid I don't understand what the problem here is. If you have an old appliance, continue to use said appliance. If you need a new appliance because you're building a new home or the old one is broken and can't be repaired, you have an entire appliance warehouse of choice. Top loading or front loading? Check! Stacked unit or side by side? Check! 5kg, 6kg, 7kg, 10kg capacity? Check! 1 door, 2 doors, and ice maker built in... fuck it even has a TV built into the door! Check! A choice of colours? Check! 10 brands to choose from, many made in America? Check! Cheaper than ever? Check!!!

They all hook up the same way, hose from water source, hose to drain, and all plug into the same electrical sockets. Nothing has changed except the use less power (gasp!).

WTF is the problem?

We have low capacity toilets. I've never had a problem here flushing my shit away in one go.

We use these new light bulbs too, because you simply can't buy the old ones anymore, and they all magically fit into the same sockets. They're costing less and less to buy as time goes on, as does any new technology, and our electrical bills are lower. They get recycled... everything here does, it's done at a massive automated sorting factory. Even if you do stick it in the trash it's not going in the ground because it gets intercepted before it gets there. It's not difficult to drop them in the light bulb collection box at the store though.

You aren't going to be able to get a plastic bag a grocery store here pretty soon. In fact some have already stopped providing them. Instead you buy these rip stop tarpaulin ones with reinforced bottoms and webbing handles for .50-€1 each that are reusable. They're actually pretty damn cool cause they pack easier, hold way more, are easier to carry, and don't tip over and spill and slide around in the trunk. It's probably the best thing that's happened to grocery shopping ever but when it comes to America some of your heads are going to explode. You'll no longer have the choice of paper or plastic, you'll bring your own bags to the store!

This isn't difficult and shouldn't cause you concern though. It's called progress.

 

[SEO Monkey]

I'm afraid I don't understand what the problem here is. If you have an old appliance, continue to use said appliance. If you need a new appliance because you're building a new home or the old one is broken and can't be repaired, you have an entire appliance warehouse of choice. Top loading or front loading? Check! Stacked unit or side by side? Check! 5kg, 6kg, 7kg, 10kg capacity? Check! 1 door, 2 doors, and ice maker built in... fuck it even has a TV built into the door! Check! A choice of colours? Check! 10 brands to choose from, many made in America? Check! Cheaper than ever? Check!!!

They all hook up the same way, hose from water source, hose to drain, and all plug into the same electrical sockets. Nothing has changed except the use less power (gasp!).

WTF is the problem?

We have low capacity toilets. I've never had a problem here flushing my shit away in one go.

We use these new light bulbs too, because you simply can't buy the old ones anymore, and they all magically fit into the same sockets. They're costing less and less to buy as time goes on, as does any new technology, and our electrical bills are lower. They get recycled... everything here does, it's done at a massive automated sorting factory. Even if you do stick it in the trash it's not going in the ground because it gets intercepted before it gets there. It's not difficult to drop them in the light bulb collection box at the store though.

You aren't going to be able to get a plastic bag a grocery store here pretty soon. In fact some have already stopped providing them. Instead you buy these rip stop tarpaulin ones with reinforced bottoms and webbing handles for .50-€1 each that are reusable. They're actually pretty damn cool cause they pack easier, hold way more, are easier to carry, and don't tip over and spill and slide around in the trunk. It's probably the best thing that's happened to grocery shopping ever but when it comes to America some of your heads are going to explode. You'll no longer have the choice of paper or plastic, you'll bring your own bags to the store!

This isn't difficult and shouldn't cause you concern though. It's called progress.

Yeah, to be honest I think a thorough fact-checking on Rand Paul's claims would expose him as another "Joe the Plumber" more or less making things up (by way of gross exaggeration). Rand Paul is more of a pundit with a pulpit than a true politician as far as I can tell. No matter what the facts are, that's what his message will always be the same: Govt. regulation is always bad and an unfettered free market solves everything and makes babies happy.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7l3O1t-rxM"]Joe the Plumber[/ame]

 

[tjewsky]

I don't know what kind of a toilet this guy uses; I've got an american standard 1.28 gpf that just rocks. Being green is more important now than ever. What planet is he from? Energy crisis, hello?

 

[ericchristopher]

i don't really care for the guy (RP), but he handled this lady, and the argument he makes is sound.

if the "new and better" toilets saved money AND worked, the market would move in that direction.

do i believe the gov needs to govern certain choice? yes. is toilet selection in the name of greening the planet one of these choices? no.

it's duplicitous for the gov to, on one hand, tolerate anti-green city growth like los angeles and NOT do a fucking thing, and on the other hand claim that they have a handle on product selection for the people down to the fucking toilet.

 

[music4mic]

great video, will share!

 

[dreamache]

I'm afraid I don't understand what the problem here is. If you have an old appliance, continue to use said appliance. If you need a new appliance because you're building a new home or the old one is broken and can't be repaired, you have an entire appliance warehouse of choice. Top loading or front loading? Check! Stacked unit or side by side? Check! 5kg, 6kg, 7kg, 10kg capacity? Check! 1 door, 2 doors, and ice maker built in... fuck it even has a TV built into the door! Check! A choice of colours? Check! 10 brands to choose from, many made in America? Check! Cheaper than ever? Check!!!

Inferior durability, Check!
Costs more to fix, Check!
Breaks down 75% sooner than older appliances, Check!

My dad has been an appliance repairman for 30+ years as I said earlier in the thread, it's no bullshit that all of the new appliances out there are cheaply made and they're built to break sooner. He can sell a repaired 15/20 year old washer that costs $200 that will outlast a brand new washer that costs $500.

The point RP is making in the video is these appliance/energy companies need to start creating products that WORK and LAST. People's reluctance to make the switch isn't because they think the green movement is bullshit, but because it's commonly known that new=cheap and old works.