[tivodan1116]

Quote by: Cephus I have no need to adjust my position, thank you. In the modern world, electricity and gasoline are essential products, without which people die and society grinds to a halt. It's like putting people in a room with a limited supply of oxygen, people can't simply decide to stop breathing because the demand exceeds the supply. In the end, the supply is essential and when it's exhausted, everyone dies.

So I assume you advocate the same price controls and similar measures for food, clothing and housing, then? Obviously since those are essentials, we can't trust the market to provide them, right?

Close down the grocery stores - the government is going to outlaw competition in food now.

Quote by: Sonart . It's not a red herring. You suggested that simple economics would take care of the problem (meaning global warming) instead of compulsory regulation. I pointed out a great number problems that economics not only didn't take care of but caused in the first place.

None of which are analogous to the current situation. That is what defines a red herring. Some of them are too far removed in time, some of them were not solved through government intervention, and some were never problems.

Global Warming is yet another problem created by economics and which many economic interests have absolutely no interest is solving.

Really??? So all those companies were forced by the government to come out with hybrid cars? BP is being forced by the government to run ads talking about what they're doing, as an oil company, to protect the environment? People are forced to make millions in donations each year to environmental causes? Organic foods don't enjoy a successful free market, the government has to force them upon the consumer?

Shall I go on?

Funny... I've been saying exactly that for years. So why is it that such bastions of free market Capitalism as the American Enterprise Institute, the Cato Institute, the Hoover Institution, the Pacific Research Insitute, the Libertarian Party, or the Ayn Rand Institute all refuse to concede that global warming even exists?

Because it doesn't exist to the extent that enviro-nazis religiously push that it does.. And to the extent that it does, it is not caused or controlled by humans.

Is that their idea of the marketplace solving a problem? By ignoring it?

See above.

Having a market suddenly thrust wide open to new innovations won't be an incentive???? "Gosh, no more standard incandescent bulbs on the market... guess we better stop work on our LED idea." Beg your pardon, but who doesn't understand basic economics?

LOL... YOU don't. What motivation is there to innovate when your product is guaranteed a monopoly by government regulation?

Right now, CFL producers are competing with incandescent lights on many factors, foremost of which is the "quality" of light put out. They constantly strive to make their CFL's more similar to incandescent lighting. Now that incandescent lighting is being outlawed and consumers will no longer be able to choose based upon quality of light, why would they continue to attempt to "beat" incandescent light?

In which case do you run a faster race: Where your opponent is equal to you, or where your opponent shows up broken and forfeits, but the rules say you have to run across the finish line anyway. Go to a weekend of drag racing and let me know.