Government, like the law, works on the reality of approximation, not perfection, but with all respect, this has nothing to do with the point.
The fact is that it is necessary for responsible Government to 'intrude' into peoples personal choices over numerous matters. That it might get some of its mandates wrong some of the time is a given, but this does not undermine the principle of the necessity of government intervention in any way. If CFL bulbs better serve the community, as they do, then it would be irresponsible for them not to mandate their use.
It seems to me that the US is terrified of anything that might even remotely be interpreted as 'socialism' with the same rationality that they might view witches in Salem.
Once again, I agree. But, your statement dosen't address the subject of the discussion here.
We're not talking about the "right" of government to pass legislation. We're discussing if this piece of legislation will ultimately be beneficial or eventually be viewed as a fatally flawed piece of legislation.
I understand your overview. I'm probably closer to a socialist than a capitalist if I were to take the time to sort out my personal views. I'm more a realist than either though. I find that I go for the grey, when I can. Compromise is what makes representation work. Well, in my bloated country anyways.
The "duty of governments to pass beneficial laws" discussion is for another thread though. This thread is about CFL's.
I haven't changed my stance on that topic. Sell me, I'll listen.