EU rules against powerful vacuum cleaners ban 'best' models

That sucks, man.

Who the hell are they to dictate what you can buy? Ever?

I feel like getting into the black vacuum smuggling business, just to spite the bastards.

It's been around for a while... we have "energy efficient" refrigerators, washer, driers and the like. Just try to buy one that's not energy efficient. Then there's all those government regulations that car makers have to follow for OUR safety and fuel efficiency and pollution reduction.

Now don't get me going on light-bulbs.

I'm your Huckleberry.



Tile floors, bitches.

Have to buy an Irobot that can wash floors.

Anyone have one ?


Fuck the EU.

we have "energy efficient" refrigerators, washer, driers and the like.

Yes. Our appliances use to routinely live for a quarter century have been replaced by the "new, improved, energy efficient" ones that barely make it to 5-7 years. I'll bet my bottom dollar that it's a hell of a lot less energy efficient to replace your refrigerator every half decade, no matter how little current it draws when it's running. This has all been a massive con job and the "Greenies" swallowed it hook, line and sinker. To have the government mandate (demand!) this kind of inefficacy, though, is criminal.

The free market will do a better job. If you want to pay a bigger electrical bill to run a fridge that was made in 1961, but still runs, it's nobody's business but your's. It probably takes more energy to make a new one than what the stickers tell you that you are supposed to save.

Let's not overreact. The article indicates that some of the top models are compliant with the new standards, so we know that it is possible. The top models that aren't compliant will surely be tweaked to meet the new standards.



And the old saw about "they don't make them like they used to" predates any 'green' or 'environmental' movement (not that it's so true a claim anyways). Manufacturers' 'planned obscolecense' schemes to move more product have been well known for 30 years or more. Moreover, its just a simple fact that technologically advanced and complex products typcially have shorter lifespan than less complex products.

And the rest of the 'how dare the government regulate anything' and 'the free market always knows best' is just a tired old saw as well. There is no market without government regulation...patent claim, trademarks or simple contracts don't exist where there is no government. Indeed, Corporations do not exist where there is no government since every corporation is a non-human entity that has been granted special privelages by government (to own property for example) and where the legal liability of the real humans (the owners and managers) is limited. Not to mention, that without a framework for market standards established by government(quality assurance, marketing claims, truth in labelling etc.) consumers would not really be 'free' at all.

The assumption that The Government must know better than the consumer in a free market because they are bigger and have more money to spend, is another old saw ...

First, understand that government has certain responsibilities that the consumer doesn't, managing energy consumption, supply and demand is but one example. And that's they key point here.

As a secondary point, undertand that any organization that is specialized in a particular field - be it a private business or a public agency - is by nature going to have more information about that subject than a random member of the general public who is not going to specialized in that field. When you employ hundreds of people whose full-time job is to study a subject area, you are going to know more about that subject than those who just occasionally google shit on their spare time. It's pretty simple really. True that knowing more is not the same as knowing better since personal preference and choice are factors. But in this case, consumers don't really give a damn about how many watts their vacuum cleaner uses as long as it does the job and is reliable. They don't really have a preference for watts - they might think they do, but only because they don't know what they're talking about.

So, you have no faith in the wisdom of "the crowd"? Don't like democracy, probably.

Seriously, those civil servant experts get things wrong all of the time. In this case, they helped drive North American manufacturers out of business with the "Enerstar" nonsense sending tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs offshore to places that don't give a flying feck about the extra energy expenditure to the planet of having to replace clapped out appliances at four or five times the rate as before. Our power utilities are satisfied that the draw on their output has been reduced but REALLY, we all lose ... jobs, money (having to replace our appliances far more often) and the World expends more energy "somewhere else", though, where it doesn't come into the government's area of responsibility. They have satisfied their own narrow criteria (without consulting their constituency, again) As I said, it is a scam.

p.s. The government has no business whatsoever managing supply and demand except in the Soviet Fucking Union ... and that didn't work at all, did it?

Seriously? I don't know which is worse - the fact that you think there is such a noble thing as "wisdom of the crowd" or that you think it is synonymous with democracy.


Seriously? That doesn't even make sense.

First of all, Energystar is just a voluntary labelling program. Appliances aren't required to meet the Energystar standards, but if they do, they can choose to use the Energystar label. I guess the 'wisdom of the crowd' didn't catch that fact.

Second of all, why would that even determine where the manufacturing is done? Why would a company have to spend the millions to move its factory offshore just to make Energystar-compliant products and ship them back here? Doesn't make sense.



It does when it comes to generating, transmitting and delivering electricity. Where do you think it comes from and how do think it gets to your home? You think all those hydro poles and transformers are just funny-looking trees? You think that new $1.5 Billion, 10km long, hydro tunnel under Niagara Falls just willed itself into existence?

Want to reduce energy use - price energy accordingly and let people make their own decisions how much they want to consume. The rating scheme is a good idea to inform the consumer - one rating scheme for effectiveness, one for energy use.

Same with cars. Don't mandate fuel economy, just tax gas according to it's real costs, from road building, to environmental damage, to costs to the medical system. Then let consumers decide.

This sort of approach is much simpler, doesn't require huge bureaucracy and is at least as effective as complicated regulations. Just be sure to put a big fuck you for whining on the pumps to tell people to deal with it.

They say tax what you don't want. Ie high energy usage, consumption taxes etc, rather than income taxes. Then they just need to figure out a way to make those taxes progressive rather than regressive. Maybe there's a way to do that with refundable tax credits.

Well here's what the guy from Dyson (arguably the best vacuums onthe market)has to say. He still doesn't like the methodology allowed for the efficiency label since he thinks it will allow companies to trick consumers ('wisdom of the crowd' and all):






http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... -want.html

Yeah, sure. My way will accomplish the same thing with way less bureaucracy and cheating. It's the same with carbon - taxes are a much better idea than cap and trade, and much simpler.

hey, free advertising.

No one here has an Irobot ?

Less bureaucracy? What good is it if you can't make an abundance of six figure paying positions for your buddies along the way?