Yes, it is a Dept. of Energy proposal, (which does not affect all gas powered water heaters) not a law. Also, since the only source of this story seems to be Fox News/The NY Post (or at least refers back to NYP) , I am somewhat suspicious about the interpretations.
respectfully, i think you need to go back and review what the proposal means.
It only bans certain nat gas heaters/furnaces.
ps, heat pumps do work below 32, but it is recommended to have backup heat in extreme drops in temps, well below freezing.
Yes, it is a Dept. of Energy proposal, (which does not affect all gas powered water heaters) not a law. Also, since the only source of this story seems to be Fox News/The NY Post (or at least refers back to NYP) , I am somewhat suspicious about the interpretations.
Well Joe is doing his best to burn down the house on his way out the door hurting as many people as he can.
Banning nat gas furnaces and hot water heaters hits the poorest the hardest.
Heat pumps begin to fail when the temp gets below 32 F. They are not going to work at all when the power goes out.
There already is not enough reliable electricity to go around and with the new demands for it created by A I and data centers. How are we going to have enough for EV's and home appliances ? Let alone a reliable infrastructure.
You can thank Joe when the pipes in your house freeze and essentially destroy it when the inevitable thaw happens and the busted pipes leak everywhere. Just for openers.
Home emergency generators run on nat gas and propane. Portables run on gasoline.
Should have started with heating oil fueled furnaces and wood stoves. They pollute more if he was being serious.
Nice legacy.
Who is doing the tilting at windmills again ?
He's fucking everyone, not just Trump supporters.
These are real actions done by a real dictator.
And all you Biden supporters still wonder why Trump got re elected ?
respectfully, i think you need to go back and review what the proposal means.
It only bans certain nat gas heaters/furnaces.
ps, heat pumps do work below 32, but it is recommended to have backup heat in extreme drops in temps, well below freezing.
Well Joe is doing his best to burn down the house on his way out the door hurting as many people as he can.
Banning nat gas furnaces and hot water heaters hits the poorest the hardest.
Heat pumps begin to fail when the temp gets below 32 F. They are not going to work at all when the power goes out.
There already is not enough reliable electricity to go around and with the new demands for it created by A I and data centers. How are we going to have enough for EV's and home appliances ? Let alone a reliable infrastructure.
You can thank Joe when the pipes in your house freeze and essentially destroy it when the inevitable thaw happens and the busted pipes leak everywhere. Just for openers.
Home emergency generators run on nat gas and propane. Portables run on gasoline.
Should have started with heating oil fueled furnaces and wood stoves. They pollute more if he was being serious.
Nice legacy.
Who is doing the tilting at windmills again ?
He's fucking everyone, not just Trump supporters.
These are real actions done by a real dictator.
And all you Biden supporters still wonder why Trump got re elected ?
Well that ship sank long ago. Torpedoed by the same people that brought you Biden and then Harris. They have been "educating" our kids for two generations now. The indoctrination is complete.
A classic oversimplification of a really complex issue. Education has changed a lot over the years, and it’s influenced by many factors—
. not just one administration.
. Should we discuss "no child left behind"? Not that my earlier point about an ill-informed electorate needed a poster child— but your take shows how easily the politically-driven misinformed can derail a critically important discussion. It's shocking how many of the "under-educated" suggest they can fix a system they struggled in.
I guess that you missed where I said "for two generations".
By standard definitions that would be around 40 years.
And not that your statement that I was responding to was not a classic oversimplification.
rgio wrote:
We don't need a rule... we need an educated electorate and compelling options.
Well that ship sank long ago. Torpedoed by the same people that brought you Biden and then Harris. They have been "educating" our kids for two generations now. The indoctrination is complete.
A classic oversimplification of a really complex issue. Education has changed a lot over the years, and itâs influenced by many factorsânot just one administration. Should we discuss "no child left behind"?
Not that my earlier point about an ill-informed electorate needed a poster childâ but your take shows how easily the politically-driven misinformed can derail a critically important discussion. It's shocking how many of the "under-educated" suggest they can fix a system they struggled in.
Well that ship sank long ago. Torpedoed by the same people that brought you Biden and then Harris. They have been "educating" our kids for two generations now. The indoctrination is complete.
Nope. See "private Christian schools" - i.e., a refuge from "those" people, where kids can learn good Christian values, that abstinence is the only way, and that there's no such thing as evolution. Like those of the Klan, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and the Republican Party: the party that has a President who's said they want to do away with the Department of Education. You can't pin that racist, hypocritical, ignorant stuff on "the same people that brought you Biden" as a distraction. Doesn't work.
We don't need a rule... we need an educated electorate and compelling options.
Well that ship sank long ago. Torpedoed by the same people that brought you Biden and then Harris. They have been "educating" our kids for two generations now. The indoctrination is complete.
We don't need a rule... we need an educated electorate and compelling options.
We also need to return to a time of full transparency in politics. Every dollar in support of every candidate should be visible. We should know who is buying what, and allow voters to consider their options.
Lastly... we need to educate about the process and the system. Too few people understand how government and elections work. What the debt ceiling is, and how tariffs work.
An informed, educated electorate would not have ended up here. We're the problem... and an age limit won't fix that.
We don't need a rule... we need an educated electorate and compelling options.
We also need to return to a time of full transparency in politics. Every dollar in support of every candidate should be visible. We should know who is buying what, and allow voters to consider their options.
Lastly... we need to educate about the process and the system. Too few people understand how government and elections work. What the debt ceiling is, and how tariffs work.
An informed, educated electorate would not have ended up here. We're the problem... and an age limit won't fix that.
A maximum age to run for Prez at 65?
if makes it two terms = 73. Sounds ok to me.
We don't need a rule... we need an educated electorate and compelling options.
We also need to return to a time of full transparency in politics. Every dollar in support of every candidate should be visible. We should know who is buying what, and allow voters to consider their options.
Lastly... we need to educate about the process and the system. Too few people understand how government and elections work. What the debt ceiling is, and how tariffs work.
An informed, educated electorate would not have ended up here. We're the problem... and an age limit won't fix that.
