Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus
- Jaymann
- Posts: 19712
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
- Location: California
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Apparently they are contemplating a name change to the Do Nothing Party.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
- Pyperkub
- Posts: 23791
- Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
- Location: NC- that's Northern California
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
The commitment to anyone BUT their constituents is rather jawdropping:
Former Rep. Madison Cawthorn reportedly didn't hand over any of his office's constituent casework to his successor, Rep. Chuck Edwards, creating a mess for the freshman representative.
Members of Congress, outside of legislating, provide a series of services for members of their districts. This includes help obtaining government resources, casework, US Service Academy nominations, and more.
And when a legislator departs Congress, they're expected to pass along any casework and ongoing constituent services information to their successor in order to maintain guidance and leadership for their constituents. The deadline for signing over the database of information was December 23, 2022.
Cawthorn, his successor said, failed to do that.
Edwards is a fellow Republican who dispatched Cawthorn in a primary.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
- gilraen
- Posts: 4363
- Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:45 pm
- Location: Broomfield, CO
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Edwards assumed that Cawthorn was doing anything resembling actual work and had any casework to hand over...
- Unagi
- Posts: 26705
- Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
- Location: Chicago
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
I bet it’s more like they haven’t made copies of everything they want to use for leverage, so haven’t handed it over (nor care about constituents or the new guys success with helping them).
- LawBeefaroni
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 55449
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
- Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
"Transition of Power" is now "Sour Grapes".
Decency and generosity are now nearly dead.
Decency and generosity are now nearly dead.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton
MYT
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton
MYT
- Pyperkub
- Posts: 23791
- Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
- Location: NC- that's Northern California
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Ditto actually doing the Job applied for in the Job Description which one swore an Oath to do faithfully.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Jan 10, 2023 5:15 pm "Transition of Power" is now "Sour Grapes".
Decency and generosity are now nearly dead.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
- Kurth
- Posts: 6042
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
- Location: Portland
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
This. 100% this.
Anyone who thinks Madison Cawthorn was doing any constituent casework has not been paying attention.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
- LawBeefaroni
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 55449
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
- Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Undoubtedly there was intake and Edwards' office is dealing with people calling asking what the status is of their previous request. Cawthorn may not have done any work but there was definitely work handed to his office that Edwards now has to deal with, with zero case background.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton
MYT
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton
MYT
- El Guapo
- Posts: 41522
- Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
- Location: Boston
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
The thing is that the amount of records related to constituent work is probably not zero. But you figure that a decent % of his 'constituent work' was corrupt and/or potentially illegal in nature. Like, helping the richest guy in your district advance his business in exchange for current or future favors is probably constituent work. On top of that, you figure that there's a good chance that Cawthorn and his people don't know where a lot of records are or what's in them. Plus, what does Cawthorne get out of providing records to his successor?LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:08 pmUndoubtedly there was intake and Edwards' office is dealing with people calling asking what the status is of their previous request. Cawthorn may not have done any work but there was definitely work handed to his office that Edwards now has to deal with, with zero case background.
All of which adds up to Cawthorne providing nothing.
Black Lives Matter.
- LawBeefaroni
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 55449
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
- Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Right. I'm saying that he's providing nothing rather than having nothing to provide.El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:22 pmThe thing is that the amount of records related to constituent work is probably not zero. But you figure that a decent % of his 'constituent work' was corrupt and/or potentially illegal in nature. Like, helping the richest guy in your district advance his business in exchange for current or future favors is probably constituent work. On top of that, you figure that there's a good chance that Cawthorn and his people don't know where a lot of records are or what's in them. Plus, what does Cawthorne get out of providing records to his successor?LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:08 pmUndoubtedly there was intake and Edwards' office is dealing with people calling asking what the status is of their previous request. Cawthorn may not have done any work but there was definitely work handed to his office that Edwards now has to deal with, with zero case background.
All of which adds up to Cawthorne providing nothing.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton
MYT
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton
MYT
- El Guapo
- Posts: 41522
- Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
- Location: Boston
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Yes, I agree. I was more providing additional commentary to the thread than disagreeing with you.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:26 pmRight. I'm saying that he's providing nothing rather than having nothing to provide.El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:22 pmThe thing is that the amount of records related to constituent work is probably not zero. But you figure that a decent % of his 'constituent work' was corrupt and/or potentially illegal in nature. Like, helping the richest guy in your district advance his business in exchange for current or future favors is probably constituent work. On top of that, you figure that there's a good chance that Cawthorn and his people don't know where a lot of records are or what's in them. Plus, what does Cawthorne get out of providing records to his successor?LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:08 pmUndoubtedly there was intake and Edwards' office is dealing with people calling asking what the status is of their previous request. Cawthorn may not have done any work but there was definitely work handed to his office that Edwards now has to deal with, with zero case background.
All of which adds up to Cawthorne providing nothing.
Black Lives Matter.
- LawBeefaroni
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 55449
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
- Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
No you weren't!El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:35 pmYes, I agree. I was more providing additional commentary to the thread than disagreeing with you.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:26 pmRight. I'm saying that he's providing nothing rather than having nothing to provide.El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:22 pmThe thing is that the amount of records related to constituent work is probably not zero. But you figure that a decent % of his 'constituent work' was corrupt and/or potentially illegal in nature. Like, helping the richest guy in your district advance his business in exchange for current or future favors is probably constituent work. On top of that, you figure that there's a good chance that Cawthorn and his people don't know where a lot of records are or what's in them. Plus, what does Cawthorne get out of providing records to his successor?LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:08 pmUndoubtedly there was intake and Edwards' office is dealing with people calling asking what the status is of their previous request. Cawthorn may not have done any work but there was definitely work handed to his office that Edwards now has to deal with, with zero case background.
All of which adds up to Cawthorne providing nothing.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton
MYT
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton
MYT
- Kurth
- Posts: 6042
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
- Location: Portland
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
I did an internship over two summers for my Representative when I was in college. I spent a bunch of that time in the District Office, and most of that time was dedicated to doing constituent work. That largely comprised fielding phone calls from constituents complaining about this or that policy and then drafting a letter responding to their complaints. When we weren't responding to complaints, we were dealing with constituents that had actual problems related to the federal government that we could help with (usually dealing with administrative issues with various agencies), arranging D.C. tours, assisting with nominations to the service academies, and scheduling the Rep. for appearances in the district at various schools and clubs and businesses.El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:22 pmThe thing is that the amount of records related to constituent work is probably not zero. But you figure that a decent % of his 'constituent work' was corrupt and/or potentially illegal in nature. Like, helping the richest guy in your district advance his business in exchange for current or future favors is probably constituent work. On top of that, you figure that there's a good chance that Cawthorn and his people don't know where a lot of records are or what's in them. Plus, what does Cawthorne get out of providing records to his successor?LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:08 pmUndoubtedly there was intake and Edwards' office is dealing with people calling asking what the status is of their previous request. Cawthorn may not have done any work but there was definitely work handed to his office that Edwards now has to deal with, with zero case background.
All of which adds up to Cawthorne providing nothing.
All of that is what typically goes on in a normal, functioning District Office for a member of the House of Representatives.
I doubt much of that went on at Madison Cawthorn's office.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
- El Guapo
- Posts: 41522
- Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
- Location: Boston
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Yes I was!LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:39 pmNo you weren't!El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:35 pmYes, I agree. I was more providing additional commentary to the thread than disagreeing with you.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:26 pmRight. I'm saying that he's providing nothing rather than having nothing to provide.El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:22 pmThe thing is that the amount of records related to constituent work is probably not zero. But you figure that a decent % of his 'constituent work' was corrupt and/or potentially illegal in nature. Like, helping the richest guy in your district advance his business in exchange for current or future favors is probably constituent work. On top of that, you figure that there's a good chance that Cawthorn and his people don't know where a lot of records are or what's in them. Plus, what does Cawthorne get out of providing records to his successor?LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:08 pmUndoubtedly there was intake and Edwards' office is dealing with people calling asking what the status is of their previous request. Cawthorn may not have done any work but there was definitely work handed to his office that Edwards now has to deal with, with zero case background.
All of which adds up to Cawthorne providing nothing.
Black Lives Matter.
- El Guapo
- Posts: 41522
- Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
- Location: Boston
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Yeah, but there may have been stuff like "Memo to Rep. Cawthorne: CEO Smith called. Wants to know the status of [amendment flagrantly favoring their business], Told him we are doing all we can. He wants a callback from you."Kurth wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 2:11 pmI did an internship over two summers for my Representative when I was in college. I spent a bunch of that time in the District Office, and most of that time was dedicated to doing constituent work. That largely comprised fielding phone calls from constituents complaining about this or that policy and then drafting a letter responding to their complaints. When we weren't responding to complaints, we were dealing with constituents that had actual problems related to the federal government that we could help with (usually dealing with administrative issues with various agencies), arranging D.C. tours, assisting with nominations to the service academies, and scheduling the Rep. for appearances in the district at various schools and clubs and businesses.El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:22 pmThe thing is that the amount of records related to constituent work is probably not zero. But you figure that a decent % of his 'constituent work' was corrupt and/or potentially illegal in nature. Like, helping the richest guy in your district advance his business in exchange for current or future favors is probably constituent work. On top of that, you figure that there's a good chance that Cawthorn and his people don't know where a lot of records are or what's in them. Plus, what does Cawthorne get out of providing records to his successor?LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:08 pmUndoubtedly there was intake and Edwards' office is dealing with people calling asking what the status is of their previous request. Cawthorn may not have done any work but there was definitely work handed to his office that Edwards now has to deal with, with zero case background.
All of which adds up to Cawthorne providing nothing.
All of that is what typically goes on in a normal, functioning District Office for a member of the House of Representatives.
I doubt much of that went on at Madison Cawthorn's office.
Black Lives Matter.
- Kurth
- Posts: 6042
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
- Location: Portland
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Yeah, maybe. I just never got the feeling that was Cawthorn's thing. Even flagrantly illegal practices like greasing the wheels for CEO constituents actually involves some level of work. Never seemed like something that idiot was the least bit interested in.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
- Pyperkub
- Posts: 23791
- Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
- Location: NC- that's Northern California
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
While I do think he is a card-carrying member of the in-it-for-myself-only wave of performative assholes via legal or illegal/unethical means gravitating to the GOP grifter machines, sometimes Constituent work is a nothingburger/administrivia such as setting up Constituent passes for tours of the White House.El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:22 pmThe thing is that the amount of records related to constituent work is probably not zero. But you figure that a decent % of his 'constituent work' was corrupt and/or potentially illegal in nature. Like, helping the richest guy in your district advance his business in exchange for current or future favors is probably constituent work. On top of that, you figure that there's a good chance that Cawthorn and his people don't know where a lot of records are or what's in them. Plus, what does Cawthorne get out of providing records to his successor?LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 1:08 pmUndoubtedly there was intake and Edwards' office is dealing with people calling asking what the status is of their previous request. Cawthorn may not have done any work but there was definitely work handed to his office that Edwards now has to deal with, with zero case background.
All of which adds up to Cawthorne providing nothing.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
- Smoove_B
- Posts: 54926
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
- Location: Kaer Morhen
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
I did not realize the GOP was going to come out swinging demanding the full exoneration of gas stoves. I guess I should have known given everything else that's been going on the last 5+ years. I feel for sure now that parody is dead.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
- coopasonic
- Posts: 21014
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:43 pm
- Location: Dallas-ish
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Will you really need a gas stove once we eliminate beef?
-Coop
Black Lives Matter
Black Lives Matter
- Skinypupy
- Posts: 20473
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
- Location: Utah
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
-
- Posts: 24795
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
It's true but this gas stove thing is SO DUMB as well. It's the specter of government overreach that makes for easy targets.
- YellowKing
- Posts: 30338
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
The gas stove kerfluffle is ridiculous, but at the same time I'm pretty sure my wife would kill the first person who tried to take away her gas range. You don't fuck with the woman's cooking tools.
- stessier
- Posts: 29897
- Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:30 pm
- Location: SC
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
She needs to be exposed to induction.YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:21 pm The gas stove kerfluffle is ridiculous, but at the same time I'm pretty sure my wife would kill the first person who tried to take away her gas range. You don't fuck with the woman's cooking tools.
I require a reminder as to why raining arcane destruction is not an appropriate response to all of life's indignities. - Vaarsuvius
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Running__ | __2014: 1300.55 miles__ | __2015: 2036.13 miles__ | __2016: 1012.75 miles__ | __2017: 1105.82 miles__ | __2018: 1318.91 miles | __2019: 2000.00 miles |
- Smoove_B
- Posts: 54926
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
- Location: Kaer Morhen
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Whoa, whoa - this is a family forum!
But seriously, our new policies seem to follow what people want irrespective of the impacts. Household paint that's been infused with lead and DDT will be making a big comeback in 2024 - you heard it here first!
But seriously, our new policies seem to follow what people want irrespective of the impacts. Household paint that's been infused with lead and DDT will be making a big comeback in 2024 - you heard it here first!
Maybe next year, maybe no go
- Unagi
- Posts: 26705
- Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
- Location: Chicago
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Poor analogy, IMO.
Consumers didn’t actually ‘want’ those things in paint.
Consumers didn’t actually ‘want’ those things in paint.
- Smoove_B
- Posts: 54926
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
- Location: Kaer Morhen
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
The hell they didn't! People paid extra to get leaded paint - its such a superior product. Brighter colors, resistant to mildew, lasts longer in high-traffic areas. It was better than anything else available. It's also why they still use it on boats, bridges and to paint medians and shoulder strips on roads. It's awesome. And deadly. But still awesome!
Maybe next year, maybe no go
-
- Posts: 24795
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
I get that there are health risks but everything I've seen indicates it's mostly tied to poor ventilation. Sounds like a good case for pushing for product improvements/updates to code. A wholesale ban which I suspect will be deeply unpopular is politically unwise. I'm all for appropriate regulation but they need to make a damn good case and this is the sort of the wrong thing to focus on when we have much bigger problems.
Induction is really good but telling people they need to potentially spend thousands of dollars to upgrade their electrical system the next time they have to replace a stove isn't going to work for many people.stessier wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:24 pmShe needs to be exposed to induction.YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:21 pm The gas stove kerfluffle is ridiculous, but at the same time I'm pretty sure my wife would kill the first person who tried to take away her gas range. You don't fuck with the woman's cooking tools.
Last edited by malchior on Wed Jan 11, 2023 8:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Smoove_B
- Posts: 54926
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
- Location: Kaer Morhen
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
We do have bigger problems - a lack of indoor air quality standards for both residential and occupational settings. I wonder if improving indoor air quality across the boards would have an impact on anything else? It doesn't matter though because it's just another way big government is trying to regulate and restrict your RIGHTS as an AMERICAN.
Guarantee it's coming via the GOP.
Guarantee it's coming via the GOP.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
-
- Posts: 24795
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
FWIW I get where this is coming from but this is still the worst sort of policy. Government swinging in with a huge hammer out of nowhere. The reaction won't only revolve around these sort of rights of Americans discussions. People are having the same reaction to similar discussions in Europe right now even where it has added significance due to the energy/Russia national security overlaps there. This is the sort of thing you need to bend people towards.Smoove_B wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 8:38 pm We do have bigger problems - a lack of indoor air quality standards for both residential and occupational settings. I wonder if improving indoor air quality across the boards would have an impact on anything else? It doesn't matter though because it's just another way big government is trying to regulate and restrict your RIGHTS as an AMERICAN.
- Holman
- Posts: 29152
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
- Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Have we even heard any details of the "ban" that's coming?
To hear the GOP tell it, Joe Biden is sending the Gestapo to rip apart Grandma's kitchen right in the middle of this weekend's Sunday cooking.
What's far more likely is something like a ban on gas stoves in new construction that takes effect like three years from now, and then a voluntary program of subsidized gas-stove removal and replacement over the next fifteen years. The horror!!
To hear the GOP tell it, Joe Biden is sending the Gestapo to rip apart Grandma's kitchen right in the middle of this weekend's Sunday cooking.
What's far more likely is something like a ban on gas stoves in new construction that takes effect like three years from now, and then a voluntary program of subsidized gas-stove removal and replacement over the next fifteen years. The horror!!
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
-
- Posts: 24795
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
That's the unknown but NY has proposed a gas stove ban already which was more predicated on 'green' concerns. It is along the lines you mention and even then that has led to a fairly big outcry.Holman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 8:49 pm Have we even heard any details of the "ban" that's coming?
To hear the GOP tell it, Joe Biden is sending the Gestapo to rip apart Grandma's kitchen right in the middle of this weekend's Sunday cooking.
What's far more likely is something like a ban on gas stoves in new construction that takes effect like three years from now, and then a voluntary program of subsidized gas-stove removal and replacement over the next fifteen years. The horror!!
- Kurth
- Posts: 6042
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
- Location: Portland
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Isn't this already policy in California?Holman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 8:49 pm Have we even heard any details of the "ban" that's coming?
To hear the GOP tell it, Joe Biden is sending the Gestapo to rip apart Grandma's kitchen right in the middle of this weekend's Sunday cooking.
What's far more likely is something like a ban on gas stoves in new construction that takes effect like three years from now, and then a voluntary program of subsidized gas-stove removal and replacement over the next fifteen years. The horror!!
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
- Carpet_pissr
- Posts: 20180
- Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
- Location: Columbia, SC
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Anecdotally, I’ve cooked a lot of meals on both gas and induction (10+ years each, and hundreds of dinners for 5+) and much prefer COOKING with gas, but much prefer the non-cooking benes of induction like not heating my kitchen in the middle of summer, and the almost absurd speed.stessier wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:24 pmShe needs to be exposed to induction.YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:21 pm The gas stove kerfluffle is ridiculous, but at the same time I'm pretty sure my wife would kill the first person who tried to take away her gas range. You don't fuck with the woman's cooking tools.
I don’t remember what the energy cost differences are, but I suspect induction is probably much cheaper (like LED vs incandescent). Also probably offset by the likelihood of having to install/run heavier duty electrical to be able to run all your induction burners at full power.
When I was trying to decide which to go with (range area had both gas and electric hookups when we moved into current house), I decided to go induction but didn’t know about or even consider indoor air quality impacts of gas.
Pretty sure we discussed this at length here somewhere, maybe in my ‘cool shit/house stuff’ thread (the tech, not the ‘political/health’ implications).
- stessier
- Posts: 29897
- Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:30 pm
- Location: SC
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Good thing I didn't say that.malchior wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 8:34 pmInduction is really good but telling people they need to potentially spend thousands of dollars to upgrade their electrical system the next time they have to replace a stove isn't going to work for many people.stessier wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:24 pmShe needs to be exposed to induction.YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:21 pm The gas stove kerfluffle is ridiculous, but at the same time I'm pretty sure my wife would kill the first person who tried to take away her gas range. You don't fuck with the woman's cooking tools.
The hook-ups are a normal 240V/50amp circuit. It's not like it takes some space age level of power.Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Thu Jan 12, 2023 8:59 amAnecdotally, I’ve cooked a lot of meals on both gas and induction (10+ years each, and hundreds of dinners for 5+) and much prefer COOKING with gas, but much prefer the non-cooking benes of induction like not heating my kitchen in the middle of summer, and the almost absurd speed.stessier wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:24 pmShe needs to be exposed to induction.YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:21 pm The gas stove kerfluffle is ridiculous, but at the same time I'm pretty sure my wife would kill the first person who tried to take away her gas range. You don't fuck with the woman's cooking tools.
I don’t remember what the energy cost differences are, but I suspect induction is probably much cheaper (like LED vs incandescent). Also probably offset by the likelihood of having to install/run heavier duty electrical to be able to run all your induction burners at full power.
When I was trying to decide which to go with (range area had both gas and electric hookups when we moved into current house), I decided to go induction but didn’t know about or even consider indoor air quality impacts of gas.
Pretty sure we discussed this at length here somewhere, maybe in my ‘cool shit/house stuff’ thread (the tech, not the ‘political/health’ implications).
As for policy, we should definitely be discouraging if not out right banning any new residential natural gas pipelines. They are the leading source of gas leaks that are significantly contributing to global warming. Improving indoor air quality is just a side benefit.
I require a reminder as to why raining arcane destruction is not an appropriate response to all of life's indignities. - Vaarsuvius
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Running__ | __2014: 1300.55 miles__ | __2015: 2036.13 miles__ | __2016: 1012.75 miles__ | __2017: 1105.82 miles__ | __2018: 1318.91 miles | __2019: 2000.00 miles |
-
- Posts: 24795
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Fair enough but it is just implicit in my mind.stessier wrote: ↑Thu Jan 12, 2023 10:36 ammalchior wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 8:34 pmInduction is really good but telling people they need to potentially spend thousands of dollars to upgrade their electrical system the next time they have to replace a stove isn't going to work for many people.stessier wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:24 pmShe needs to be exposed to induction.YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:21 pm The gas stove kerfluffle is ridiculous, but at the same time I'm pretty sure my wife would kill the first person who tried to take away her gas range. You don't fuck with the woman's cooking tools.
Good thing I didn't say that.
This steps over a lot. It's not the tech - it's the volume of infrastructure involved. If gas stoves are banned then you have to over time add the circuits which some houses won't be able to do cheaply. You also just don't remove the stove, you'll have to cap or remove the existing gas plumbing - which may still leak and not solve the problem. We're also butting up against necessary improvements to the grid for electrification of vehicles. We may have to pick one over the other in the near-term. This type of stuff sounds great on a post card but it's not often so simple.The hook-ups are a normal 240V/50amp circuit. It's not like it takes some space age level of power.
FWIW the science behinds this claim comes from a single study of 53 homes in California - many in rentals the researchers were able to secure. It may be representative but results from a single state require a bit of skepticism about the results. Even if accurate then the total pollution produced by all gas stoves in the US aggregated for the year is on the order of what the US produces every 3.5 hours in the United States. Not the biggest rock that needs to be moved by any means.As for policy, we should definitely be discouraging if not out right banning any new residential natural gas pipelines. They are the leading source of gas leaks that are significantly contributing to global warming. Improving indoor air quality is just a side benefit.
I'm not saying a policy shift may not be needed but this is big enough bite that you have to do it at the right pace with the right information or you'll see what we saw here. A sharp snapback against it.
- stessier
- Posts: 29897
- Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:30 pm
- Location: SC
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Yeah, but I specifically didn't there. I was commenting on YK's wife fighting to the death for gas and postulating that her exposure to induction cooking would change her mind. That's it. I even snipped it so that's all that I was commenting on.malchior wrote: ↑Thu Jan 12, 2023 11:01 amFair enough but it is just implicit in my mind. Especially since below you advocate for policy that has real costs that have to weighed against the benefit.stessier wrote: ↑Thu Jan 12, 2023 10:36 ammalchior wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 8:34 pmInduction is really good but telling people they need to potentially spend thousands of dollars to upgrade their electrical system the next time they have to replace a stove isn't going to work for many people.stessier wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:24 pmShe needs to be exposed to induction.YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 7:21 pm The gas stove kerfluffle is ridiculous, but at the same time I'm pretty sure my wife would kill the first person who tried to take away her gas range. You don't fuck with the woman's cooking tools.
Good thing I didn't say that.
I really don't know what you are arguing here. I never said we should retrofit anything.This steps over a lot. It's not the tech - it's the volume of infrastructure involved. If gas stoves are banned then you have to over time add the circuits which some houses won't be able to do cheaply. You also just don't remove the stove, you'll have to cap or remove the existing gas plumbing - which may still leak and not solve the problem. We're also butting up against necessary improvements to the grid for electrification of vehicles. We may have to pick one over the other in the near-term. This type of stuff sounds great on a post card but it's not often so simple.The hook-ups are a normal 240V/50amp circuit. It's not like it takes some space age level of power.
I'm not sure which part of my comment you are debating against, but Natural Gas pipeline leaks are not based on one study. They are endemic and maps of high levels of natural gas where there shouldn't be any are pretty easy to find. For that reason, NEW residential gas pipelines should be discouraged if not outright banned. The new houses would then be built with the necessary electrical wiring up front. And the grid will adapt. And improving indoor air quality would be a side benefit.FWIW the science behinds this claim comes from a single study of 53 homes in California - many in rentals the researchers were able to secure. It may be representative but results from a single state require a bit of skepticism about the results. Even if accurate then the total pollution produced by all gas stoves in the US aggregated for the year is on the order of what the US produces every 3.5 hours in the United States. Not the biggest rock that needs to be moved by any means.As for policy, we should definitely be discouraging if not out right banning any new residential natural gas pipelines. They are the leading source of gas leaks that are significantly contributing to global warming. Improving indoor air quality is just a side benefit.
I'm not saying a policy shift may not be needed but this is big enough bite that you have to do it at the right pace with the right information or you'll see what we saw here. A sharp snapback against it.
I require a reminder as to why raining arcane destruction is not an appropriate response to all of life's indignities. - Vaarsuvius
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Running__ | __2014: 1300.55 miles__ | __2015: 2036.13 miles__ | __2016: 1012.75 miles__ | __2017: 1105.82 miles__ | __2018: 1318.91 miles | __2019: 2000.00 miles |
-
- Posts: 24795
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
I thought you were defending the bigger policy by saying it's just a circuit. You seem to be specifically saying just limit residential natural gas expansion. Got it.
Sure. There is a big gap here though. It is one thing to talk about natural gas pipelines and another to specify residential natural gas pipelines. Which I now get is what you're driving at here.I'm not sure which part of my comment you are debating against, but Natural Gas pipeline leaks are not based on one study.
When you said residential level pipelines are a leading source of gas leaks...that's almost certainly not true unless glommed into "pipeline" where it'd be a fairly small percentage of all pipeline leaks. Still the biggest portion of leaks are at the source with the pipeline leaks probably probably a close second subject to measurement error/definitions where the source ends and pipeline begins and all that jazz. Residential pipelines and in-home stoves haven't really been measured until recently because there has been no regulatory or profit reason to do so.
To be clear where I'm referring to a single study, that was specifically around residential natural gas pipelines and stoves published back in April and lead to a lot of kvetching in the energy community. The impact was on the order of maybe 2-4% of all gas leaks. Also, I wouldn't just assume the grid will adapt. At scale we might need to make choices on policy.They are endemic and maps of high levels of natural gas where there should be any are pretty easy to find. For that reason, NEW residential gas pipelines should be discouraged if not outright banned. The new houses would then be built with the necessary electrical wiring up front. And the grid will adapt. And improving indoor air quality would be a side benefit.
- Kurth
- Posts: 6042
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
- Location: Portland
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Have I not been paying attention, or is this issue regarding regulating residential natural gas exploding out of nowhere? I knew CA was moving to limit natural gas appliances over time, but since when is this leading national news? Did something happen that caused this issue to jump to the forefront? It seems like such small ball to me, and with so many other important issues needing to be addressed, why is everyone all of a sudden debating the pros and cons of residential natural gas?
Did someone try to introduce a federal bill or something? Did some new report come out that’s capturing everyone’s attention?
Did someone try to introduce a federal bill or something? Did some new report come out that’s capturing everyone’s attention?
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
- Grifman
- Posts: 21375
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
- Smoove_B
- Posts: 54926
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
- Location: Kaer Morhen
Re: Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?
Gas stoves are the new light bulb. They're providing a relatable (SEE: YK's wife) argument for the average American at how the Democrats are going to change the fundamental existence of life as we know it - unless the GOP stops them. Not only are they coming for your gas stove but they want to limit access to GREEN (SEE: Ohio) energy, making it harder to build homes.Did someone try to introduce a federal bill or something? Did some new report come out that’s capturing everyone’s attention?
Again, this goes back to how the GOP needs a boogeyman. Last week (or was it this week?) they were going after the IRS because so many Americans are being raided by over-zealous IRS agents, looking to squeeze them for every last penny. Next it'll be those crazy environmentalists that are trying to limit your access to natural gas.
There were a few politicians that were Tweeting out things (like Ted Cruz), whipping up the general public (or at least Twitter followers) and I'm guessing Tucker Carlson did a piece on it as well.
The party of outrage politics.
Maybe next year, maybe no go