Amusing response to Rand Paul's "toilet rant" from a statist....

Lol...government regulations made it possible? Hardly; the marketplace made it possible....but here's the catch...at what cost? I'd be willing to bet quite a bit that that design is patented...meaning we'll have to wait years before we can get a toilet like that at a more reasonable price--it also makes it difficult to innovate, as well--as you could easily run into patent infringement issues.

In any event, the author misses the point; it's not that low flow toilets are necessarily bad; it's that we're forced into buying them. If people want to buy the 3 or 5 gallon toilets...so be it--they'll bear the cost in the form of a higher water bill....if they think they can save money (or do) by using a low water flush toilet...more power to them.

He...clearly didn't get that point though.
 
Fox McCloud said:
Lol...government regulations made it possible? Hardly; the marketplace made it possible....but here's the catch...at what cost? I'd be willing to bet quite a bit that that design is patented...meaning we'll have to wait years before we can get a toilet like that at a more reasonable price--it also makes it difficult to innovate, as well--as you could easily run into patent infringement issues.

In any event, the author misses the point; it's not that low flow toilets are necessarily bad; it's that we're forced into buying them. If people want to buy the 3 or 5 gallon toilets...so be it--they'll bear the cost in the form of a higher water bill....if they think they can save money (or do) by using a low water flush toilet...more power to them.

He...clearly didn't get that point though.
Click to expand...

Agreed, he definitely missed the point Rand was making.

Once a person becomes attuned to using the key element of "force" as a deciding factor when analyzing a particular proposition for dealing with an issue, it's a lot easier to decide what should and should not be proposed.
 
Reason said:
Agreed, he definitely missed the point Rand was making.

Once a person becomes attuned to using the key element of "force" as a deciding factor when analyzing a particular proposition for dealing with an issue, it's a lot easier to decide what should and should not be proposed.
Click to expand...

Tragically, yes.

If you want to go to the absurd end of things....then they should suggest no-water toilets...after all, it's something for the "public good". *eye-rolls*
 
lol...

Pretty entertaining, but, "..we had to have a toilet shipped all the fucking way from Australia" isn't the best argument for "gubmint" regulation.
 
Anyway, toilets like these were made possible by federal regulations.
Click to expand...

This makes no sense. Like, what, before there were regulations that toilet couldn't be on the market, but now it can?
 
what a MORON. this guy is trying to argue that somehow this stupid gov't regulation that a toilet here can only us 1.6L per flush somehow made our world a better place, because it forced the 'free market' to innovate in a place totally unaffected by the retarded legislation, that actually had to innovate because of physical restrictions based on locality?

that makes NO SENSE AT ALL. the Australians would've made that toilet anyways, because WATER THERE IS SCARCE. he would've still bought that toilet with/without the stupid 1.6L per flush regulation here because it uses less water and is an awesome toilet. goddamn i can't understand liberals sometimes.
 
The trick is in the trapway -- it's 4 inches wide rather than the 2 1/8 inches standard in U.S. toilets.
Click to expand...
Hoping an engineer can step in here and explain this to me. I'm thinking (and I'm probably wrong) that if the trap is bigger, the flush pressure is reduced, which would require MORE (and not less) water to force the solids past the bend.

I also wonder if the government has rules about trap size. It would truly be a thing of beauty if his expensive imported toilet was in violation of some government building code. As much as I would love to serve him a piece of his own waste on RedStateEclectic, I have not had any luck finding out what the regulations on toilets actually specify. Anybody got links?
 
Last edited:
BarryDonegan said:
US government regulations are working so great this statist imported a toilet from Australia.
Click to expand...

Right! Also, without government regulations...there wouldn't be so many Plumber companies to help you unclog your toilet. It's about jobs, jobs, jobs!
 
By his logic the only reason a toilet would be designed to use less water is if the government regulates it has to use less water. Then why did the toilet designer of this toilet build it to use substantially less than what regulations specify as a max? What was their motivation?
 
Well Fox, that has happened to some degree in terms of urinals in my college campus. I go to Texas A&M University-Commerce, and taxpaper dollars have been used to bring state of the art infrastructure, never mind the persistant tech problems and the addition of new administrators against good teachers.

Well, we just happen to have water-less urinals in the student center, and they STINK. They leave an order and it attracts some flies, and sometimes it overflows. All in the name of saving a couple of droplets.
 
I just converted my 1.6 gallon toilet to a 4 gallon toilet. Just replace the guts. $25 kit at Ace Hardware. If the tank will hold 4-5 gallons, than the toilet can be made into a good flusher. You need to get an adjustable height drain tower, and an adjustable height fill float.

My toilet works great now.

The bowl still has a pretty low amount of standing water, but enough water coming down during the flush scrubs away clingers pretty well.
 
brandon said:
By his logic the only reason a toilet would be designed to use less water is if the government regulates it has to use less water. Then why did the toilet designer of this toilet build it to use substantially less than what regulations specify as a max? What was their motivation?
Click to expand...

They are going for the smug demographic. I hear that is a big demographic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
The WHO: Building a Permanent Pandemic Market
Replies
6
Views
1K
Invisible Man
I
jmdrake
Rand Paul introduces "REINS" act to rein in the administrative state
Replies
13
Views
2K
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
jct74
Sen. Rand Paul Challenges Sen. McConnell to a Debate Regarding His ‘Ukraine First Policy’
Replies
8
Views
3K
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Rand Paul's airing of grievances #Festivus2023
Replies
3
Views
3K
acptulsa
acptulsa
Brian4Liberty
Three Cheers For Rep. Thomas Massie!
Replies
5
Views
301
TheTexan
TheTexan
Back
Top