Communist California to require Solar Panels on all new homes

[Hutch Starskey]

This regulation is there for a purpose whether you acknowledge that or not.

This means that going foreward, new housing will not require any large upscaling of centralized power production. Fewer production facilities running for fewer hours a day. Simpler, more localized and efficient transmission infrasructure. Excess will be put back into the grid and used locally in real time. If you can't see the benefit of that going foreward, then you aren't trying to.
Lastly, less dependency on a huge, outdated and inefficient power grid and transmission system is far better for national security.

Why do you care where the power comes from as long as it works when you flip the switch?

I don't care where it comes from as long as it doesn't cost me or I'm forced where to get it from. It's one thing when Democrats control things and spend our tax money the way they want, but it's quite another to burden individuals with mandated excessive costs for Democrat obsessions.

I think government is too big as it is, and that goes for federal, state, county and even city. The less government in my life, the better. I don't want government telling me what kind of power I must have for my utilities, how good of windows I must buy, how good of insulation I must have in my home, or how much power I'm allowed to use. It's none of their damn business.

Progress costs.
Cars cost more than buggys.
Smartphones cost more than the kitchen rotary dial.
MRIs cost more than leeches, etc.

The truth is, the more companies that manufacture and install solar, the lower the pricepoint.
It becomes cheaper every year.

In the future, the roofing material itself will be the photo voltaics.

And that's fine with me if people buy it on their own without taxpayers footing much of the bill. Also so they aren't forced to buy them.

Government didn't force people to buy cars, citiznes bought them because of it's advantages.
Government didn't force people to buy smart phones, people bought them freely because of their advantages.
Government didn't force anybody to get an MRI. People freely chose to get those for themselves.

The govt built the interstate highway system that made the market for cars boom.
The govt built or subsidized every bit of large infrastructure in this country, including the internet, which allowed for massive business expansion around them. The govt has always been the driver of progress.

I have not problem with government doing things that benefit most if not ALL people. But forcing somebody to pay and use solar panels is not benefiting anybody but the saps that believe in global warming.

Progress is always resisted by some. They fade away fairly quickly.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't care where it comes from as long as it doesn't cost me or I'm forced where to get it from. It's one thing when Democrats control things and spend our tax money the way they want, but it's quite another to burden individuals with mandated excessive costs for Democrat obsessions.

I think government is too big as it is, and that goes for federal, state, county and even city. The less government in my life, the better. I don't want government telling me what kind of power I must have for my utilities, how good of windows I must buy, how good of insulation I must have in my home, or how much power I'm allowed to use. It's none of their damn business.

Progress costs.
Cars cost more than buggys.
Smartphones cost more than the kitchen rotary dial.
MRIs cost more than leeches, etc.

The truth is, the more companies that manufacture and install solar, the lower the pricepoint.
It becomes cheaper every year.

In the future, the roofing material itself will be the photo voltaics.

And that's fine with me if people buy it on their own without taxpayers footing much of the bill. Also so they aren't forced to buy them.

Government didn't force people to buy cars, citiznes bought them because of it's advantages.
Government didn't force people to buy smart phones, people bought them freely because of their advantages.
Government didn't force anybody to get an MRI. People freely chose to get those for themselves.

The govt built the interstate highway system that made the market for cars boom.
The govt built or subsidized every bit of large infrastructure in this country, including the internet, which allowed for massive business expansion around them. The govt has always been the driver of progress.

I have not problem with government doing things that benefit most if not ALL people. But forcing somebody to pay and use solar panels is not benefiting anybody but the saps that believe in global warming.

Progress is always resisted by some. They fade away fairly quickly.

Mandating that people cough up an extra 20K or so is progress? If that's progress, you bet I'm resisting it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Where are you getting your numbers from? I'll be the first to admit I'm no calculator wiz, so I went to Lending Tree mortgage calculator to compare your numbers.

According to the mortgage calculator, at the current rate of interest, your extra bill would be about $100.00 a month based on a 30 year mortgage. With a 15 year mortgage, about $150.00 a month. I used the capital of 20K for the calculations since that seems to be the general consensus of what a solar panel system would cost.

LendingTree.com - Compare Lenders

You forgot to factor the tax credit and the energy credit.

Yeah, well like I said, if you took that same amount of money, invested it in a secure growth fund, there is no way anybody is making out unless they get a subsidy from the government which means indirectly, it's government paying for it. Without government, a really bad investment.

Your "secure growth fund" doesn't receive government subsidies?

Nope, they don't. And don't take off with saying companies getting a lower tax rate is a subsidy.

Why don't you list the name of your growth fund and we'll do some dissecting.

Why mine? Just contact any reputable investment company and ask what 20K or so would be in 20 years from today. I know how my IRA is performing, and there is no way you can tell me that electricity savings would outdo secure investments in that amount of time.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I think it's smart governing.

Solar panels pay for themselfs in cheaper electrical bills and if you roll up-front cost into mortgage you'll probably not be paying more than for the same house without solar.

I guess that depends on where you live and what you use. My monthly electric bill is around 50 bucks a month. That's 600 bucks a year. Do you know how long it would take me just to break even on solar panels? And once you break even, how much more would you need to invest for replacement panels when those break down?

WOW! Your electric bill is more than 50% less than the State average?

Yep, that's what I pay.

Liar.
One brand new fridge alone is at least $150 a year.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

This regulation is there for a purpose whether you acknowledge that or not.

This means that going foreward, new housing will not require any large upscaling of centralized power production. Fewer production facilities running for fewer hours a day. Simpler, more localized and efficient transmission infrasructure. Excess will be put back into the grid and used locally in real time. If you can't see the benefit of that going foreward, then you aren't trying to.
Lastly, less dependency on a huge, outdated and inefficient power grid and transmission system is far better for national security.

Why do you care where the power comes from as long as it works when you flip the switch?

I don't care where it comes from as long as it doesn't cost me or I'm forced where to get it from. It's one thing when Democrats control things and spend our tax money the way they want, but it's quite another to burden individuals with mandated excessive costs for Democrat obsessions.

I think government is too big as it is, and that goes for federal, state, county and even city. The less government in my life, the better. I don't want government telling me what kind of power I must have for my utilities, how good of windows I must buy, how good of insulation I must have in my home, or how much power I'm allowed to use. It's none of their damn business.

Progress costs.
Cars cost more than buggys.
Smartphones cost more than the kitchen rotary dial.
MRIs cost more than leeches, etc.

The truth is, the more companies that manufacture and install solar, the lower the pricepoint.
It becomes cheaper every year.

In the future, the roofing material itself will be the photo voltaics.

And that's fine with me if people buy it on their own without taxpayers footing much of the bill. Also so they aren't forced to buy them.

Government didn't force people to buy cars, citiznes bought them because of it's advantages.
Government didn't force people to buy smart phones, people bought them freely because of their advantages.
Government didn't force anybody to get an MRI. People freely chose to get those for themselves.

The govt built the interstate highway system that made the market for cars boom.
The govt built or subsidized every bit of large infrastructure in this country, including the internet, which allowed for massive business expansion around them. The govt has always been the driver of progress.

All the interstate highway system did is bankrupt the railroads. That was a private system that didn't require any tax money to be spent, and it was perfectly adequate for interstate travel. So the interstate highway system actually retarded the economic development of this country by diverting huge amounts of capital into a system that wasn't needed.

The governent had very little to do with with the development of the internet. I was responsible for perhaps one of the pieces out of the 20 that were needed to make it viable.

Sure, dope. All of those trucks on the interstate are retarding economic development.

 

[bripat9643]

I don't care where it comes from as long as it doesn't cost me or I'm forced where to get it from. It's one thing when Democrats control things and spend our tax money the way they want, but it's quite another to burden individuals with mandated excessive costs for Democrat obsessions.

I think government is too big as it is, and that goes for federal, state, county and even city. The less government in my life, the better. I don't want government telling me what kind of power I must have for my utilities, how good of windows I must buy, how good of insulation I must have in my home, or how much power I'm allowed to use. It's none of their damn business.

Progress costs.
Cars cost more than buggys.
Smartphones cost more than the kitchen rotary dial.
MRIs cost more than leeches, etc.

The truth is, the more companies that manufacture and install solar, the lower the pricepoint.
It becomes cheaper every year.

In the future, the roofing material itself will be the photo voltaics.

And that's fine with me if people buy it on their own without taxpayers footing much of the bill. Also so they aren't forced to buy them.

Government didn't force people to buy cars, citiznes bought them because of it's advantages.
Government didn't force people to buy smart phones, people bought them freely because of their advantages.
Government didn't force anybody to get an MRI. People freely chose to get those for themselves.

The govt built the interstate highway system that made the market for cars boom.
The govt built or subsidized every bit of large infrastructure in this country, including the internet, which allowed for massive business expansion around them. The govt has always been the driver of progress.

All the interstate highway system did is bankrupt the railroads. That was a private system that didn't require any tax money to be spent, and it was perfectly adequate for interstate travel. So the interstate highway system actually retarded the economic development of this country by diverting huge amounts of capital into a system that wasn't needed.

The governent had very little to do with with the development of the internet. I was responsible for perhaps one of the pieces out of the 20 that were needed to make it viable.

Sure, dope. All of those trucks on the interstate are retarding economic development.

Sure they are. Trains are much more efficient. Interstate trucking is viable only because the taxpayers are footing a big part of the cost.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The govt built the interstate highway system that made the market for cars boom.
The govt built or subsidized every bit of large infrastructure in this country, including the internet, which allowed for massive business expansion around them. The govt has always been the driver of progress.

The Federal Government built the interstate system as part of our military defense. President Eisenhower and the generals at the time saw how much Autobahns helped the Nazi's move military equipment and supplies quickly to supply their Blitzkrieg and how crippling it was when they ran out of their roads and railroads.

The vast majority of infrastructure is built by taxpayers, locally, agreeing to pay for THEIR roads, sewer, water, police, and fire. I don't recall the government paying for my first laptop, nor the software. Although, as a business expense I did deduct it from my gross income. I also don't recall government paying for a large part of my radio-telephone. The brand new Buick Century cost $12,000. and the radio-telephone $3,000. long before cell phones.

PROFIT has always been and always will be the driver of progress.

Profit needs a playing field, fool.

Did you ever notice the commerce that takes place around interstates? Is there a big box store in America that isn't within 5 min of an interstate?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I think it's smart governing.

Solar panels pay for themselfs in cheaper electrical bills and if you roll up-front cost into mortgage you'll probably not be paying more than for the same house without solar.

I guess that depends on where you live and what you use. My monthly electric bill is around 50 bucks a month. That's 600 bucks a year. Do you know how long it would take me just to break even on solar panels? And once you break even, how much more would you need to invest for replacement panels when those break down?

WOW! Your electric bill is more than 50% less than the State average?

Yep, that's what I pay.

Liar.
One brand new fridge alone is at least $150 a year.

Why would I lie about something like that? I'm telling you (and others have chimed in with the same claim) that my electric bill has been as low as $35.00 a month. Again, that's provided I'm not using a furnace or AC like I'm currently doing.

It would depend on what you are paying for electricity in the first place. Your claim is that your fridge is using $12.5 a month. Usually the fridge uses the most electricity in your home year round.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I think it's smart governing.

Solar panels pay for themselfs in cheaper electrical bills and if you roll up-front cost into mortgage you'll probably not be paying more than for the same house without solar.

I guess that depends on where you live and what you use. My monthly electric bill is around 50 bucks a month. That's 600 bucks a year. Do you know how long it would take me just to break even on solar panels? And once you break even, how much more would you need to invest for replacement panels when those break down?

WOW! Your electric bill is more than 50% less than the State average?

Hell, mine is less that even that in the winter. (I think it was 38 bucks for March.)

Because you live in a trailer and can't afford anything to plug in no doubt.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Yeah if it's such a 'great idea', why do Communists/Democrats have to force it on Citizens. If it was so great, they wouldn't need to use Government force. The People would be allowed to decide whether or not they want them.

Solar can't compete with fossil fuels.

These stupid Moon Bats don't seem to understand the significance of that.

I hear ya. Communists/Democrats can't tolerate freedom. They have to use force to get their agendas through. I don't have a problem with folks wanting solar panels. But i do have a problem with folks being forced to have them.

Sadly, the Communists are killing the California Golden Goose. They've seized complete control of the state. There's no checks & balances on them. They're rapidly leading the state to Third World disaster. Hopefully Californians will begin realizing that, and start booting them from power. It's not too late. They can still save their state.

California is the most capitalist place ever. Look at the cost of living and number of homeless.

Capitalism doesn't do that--liberalism does that.

.

Capitalism creates wealth. Socialism robs wealth.

If these Moon Bats would ever take a course in Economics they would understand simple things like that.

Capitalism creates wealth

.......for a very small percentage of users.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Solar can't compete with fossil fuels.

These stupid Moon Bats don't seem to understand the significance of that.

I hear ya. Communists/Democrats can't tolerate freedom. They have to use force to get their agendas through. I don't have a problem with folks wanting solar panels. But i do have a problem with folks being forced to have them.

Sadly, the Communists are killing the California Golden Goose. They've seized complete control of the state. There's no checks & balances on them. They're rapidly leading the state to Third World disaster. Hopefully Californians will begin realizing that, and start booting them from power. It's not too late. They can still save their state.

California is the most capitalist place ever. Look at the cost of living and number of homeless.

Capitalism doesn't do that--liberalism does that.

.

Capitalism creates wealth. Socialism robs wealth.

If these Moon Bats would ever take a course in Economics they would understand simple things like that.

If they bothered to look at the Northeast liberal states, they would see those states are not far behind Commiefornia. Over 800K for a moderate house, 12 bucks for a pack of cigarettes, high taxation, government taking care of them from cradle to grave...........

You're such a liar. Or just a loser who hasn't been engaged in the housing market lately.


Post it up.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

If you don't need it and don't want it , don't buy it.

Kalifornia is mandating them on new homes if the bill is passed. You wouldn't have a choice. Pretty oppressive, isn't it?

That will really run up the cost of existing homes because it adds $40K to the cost of a new home. That is bad in a state that already has high housing cost.

Trust the Liberal idiots to screw up everything they touch.

You do have a choice. Exactly every bit of existing housing stock is free from that regulation.

I said that. Buy an existing home but with the additional cost of new homes being $40K more that will drive up the cost of existing homes. Everybody gets screwed. Another dumbass Liberal deal with unintended consequences.

No.
Ny neighbor's house doesn't increase in value when I update my kitchen and bathrooms.

Are you lying or are you really THIS dense?

What are you trying to say? Explain your point.

 

[Flopper]

Until you get them and have an energy credit every month.

Then realize that they will pay for themselves a year after you had the system removed for a roof replacement.

Removing and replacing solar panels is a $500 to $1500 job when replacing most roofs. Better yet, upgrade the old system to an integrated solution where the shingles are replaced by solar panels. You get a 25 year warranty, 5 years longer than most roof. The warranty also guarantees the efficiency of the solar panels will not fall more than 10% or 20% during the warranty period.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I hear ya. Communists/Democrats can't tolerate freedom. They have to use force to get their agendas through. I don't have a problem with folks wanting solar panels. But i do have a problem with folks being forced to have them.

Sadly, the Communists are killing the California Golden Goose. They've seized complete control of the state. There's no checks & balances on them. They're rapidly leading the state to Third World disaster. Hopefully Californians will begin realizing that, and start booting them from power. It's not too late. They can still save their state.

California is the most capitalist place ever. Look at the cost of living and number of homeless.

Capitalism doesn't do that--liberalism does that.

.

Capitalism creates wealth. Socialism robs wealth.

If these Moon Bats would ever take a course in Economics they would understand simple things like that.

If they bothered to look at the Northeast liberal states, they would see those states are not far behind Commiefornia. Over 800K for a moderate house, 12 bucks for a pack of cigarettes, high taxation, government taking care of them from cradle to grave...........

You're such a liar. Or just a loser who hasn't been engaged in the housing market lately.


Post it up.

All you have to do is what I do, and that is watch the HGTV channel. Property Brothers is the best show, but they have other House Hunter programs that clearly show how little you get for your money in many liberal states.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I think it's smart governing.

Solar panels pay for themselfs in cheaper electrical bills and if you roll up-front cost into mortgage you'll probably not be paying more than for the same house without solar.

I guess that depends on where you live and what you use. My monthly electric bill is around 50 bucks a month. That's 600 bucks a year. Do you know how long it would take me just to break even on solar panels? And once you break even, how much more would you need to invest for replacement panels when those break down?

WOW! Your electric bill is more than 50% less than the State average?

Hell, mine is less that even that in the winter. (I think it was 38 bucks for March.)

Because you live in a trailer and can't afford anything to plug in no doubt.

Having no facts, you fling poo.

In other words: you concede.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Kalifornia is mandating them on new homes if the bill is passed. You wouldn't have a choice. Pretty oppressive, isn't it?

That will really run up the cost of existing homes because it adds $40K to the cost of a new home. That is bad in a state that already has high housing cost.

Trust the Liberal idiots to screw up everything they touch.

You do have a choice. Exactly every bit of existing housing stock is free from that regulation.

I said that. Buy an existing home but with the additional cost of new homes being $40K more that will drive up the cost of existing homes. Everybody gets screwed. Another dumbass Liberal deal with unintended consequences.

No.
Ny neighbor's house doesn't increase in value when I update my kitchen and bathrooms.

Are you lying or are you really THIS dense?

What are you trying to say? Explain your point.

Think hard. I promise it will not hurt!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Are you lying or are you really THIS dense?

There are some improvements that add value to a home. Solar panels is not one of them. In fact it detracts from the value.

Absolutely. One of the things most buyers look for in a home is future expenses. How good are the windows? How old is the furnace or AC? How old is the roof and things like that.

So in the future, a couple looks at a house with 30 year old solar panels. The first thing that would cross my mind is how many of those I'm going to have to replace in the next ten years. Or if allowed by law, how much is it going to cost me to have those things removed and have a regular roof installed?

If a house has a 30-year-old solar system on the roof, it is almost certain to need a new ROOF soon.

In the late 70's, my Father had solar water heating installed for the pool and the house. That part of the roof that was under the panels looked brand new. Kinda like your farmers tan.

You’re missing the point, No one’s against alternative energy. But everyone’s against being forced into alternative energy. People that want to force people into alternative energy are fucking cowards and should be treated as such...

People resented being forced to install flushing toilets as well. We survived.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Until you get them and have an energy credit every month.

Then realize that they will pay for themselves a year after you had the system removed for a roof replacement.

Removing and replacing solar panels is a $500 to $1500 job when replacing most roofs. Better yet, upgrade the old system to an integrated solution where the shingles are replaced by solar panels. You get a 25 year warranty, 5 years longer than most roof. The warranty also guarantees the efficiency of the solar panels will not fall more than 10% or 20% during the warranty period.

Actually what they claim is that many companies won't install panels on a roof more than 5 years old. So in most cases, you would need a complete tear off and replacement of your roof before installing the panels. That could be anywhere from 2 to 4 K or more depending on the size. Solar panels are not exactly light, so that adds weight to your roof which is why it would need a complete tear off instead of just going over the first layer or two.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You do have a choice. Exactly every bit of existing housing stock is free from that regulation.

I said that. Buy an existing home but with the additional cost of new homes being $40K more that will drive up the cost of existing homes. Everybody gets screwed. Another dumbass Liberal deal with unintended consequences.

No.
Ny neighbor's house doesn't increase in value when I update my kitchen and bathrooms.

Are you lying or are you really THIS dense?

What are you trying to say? Explain your point.

Think hard. I promise it will not hurt!

Or just simply state yor point, dope.

 

[bripat9643]

There are some improvements that add value to a home. Solar panels is not one of them. In fact it detracts from the value.

Absolutely. One of the things most buyers look for in a home is future expenses. How good are the windows? How old is the furnace or AC? How old is the roof and things like that.

So in the future, a couple looks at a house with 30 year old solar panels. The first thing that would cross my mind is how many of those I'm going to have to replace in the next ten years. Or if allowed by law, how much is it going to cost me to have those things removed and have a regular roof installed?

If a house has a 30-year-old solar system on the roof, it is almost certain to need a new ROOF soon.

In the late 70's, my Father had solar water heating installed for the pool and the house. That part of the roof that was under the panels looked brand new. Kinda like your farmers tan.

You’re missing the point, No one’s against alternative energy. But everyone’s against being forced into alternative energy. People that want to force people into alternative energy are fucking cowards and should be treated as such...

People resented being forced to install flushing toilets as well. We survived.

No one was forced to install flush toilets, moron.