Nuclear energy rocks

Which means that the government was regulating the banks and could have stopped them by just not requiring them to do anything. This only means that there is no capitalism any more.

The capitalists were just as culpable. Taking these mortgages THEY KNEW WERE BAD and repackaging them as new investment securities was particularly malicious. They knew what they were doing.

Government and big business have fused together in a big "fuck the little guy" fusion.
 
The capitalists were just as culpable. Taking these mortgages THEY KNEW WERE BAD and repackaging them as new investment securities was particularly malicious. They knew what they were doing.

Government and big business have fused together in a big "fuck the little guy" fusion.

If they knew what they were doing then why did so many of them get screwed over only some of them got out in time.
 
Which means that the government was regulating the banks and could have stopped them by just not requiring them to do anything. This only means that there is no capitalism any more.

No, it means that when GOVERNMENT starts meddling in Banking, just as anything else done by the private sector, it fucks it all up worse. Government is NOT the solution, free market, private sector, capitalism IS the answer, always!

People whine and moan about "unbridled" capitalism, but we should strive for our 'economy horse' to be as close to unbridled as humanly possible! When private sector capitalism is unleashed, there is no limit to the potential, from an economic standpoint, or from a security standpoint. We do need some sensible regulation on capitalism, I have never said otherwise, but what we have now, is borderline Communism, with the State taking more and more control of Capitalism. The Government is NOT the answer!
 
No, it means that when GOVERNMENT starts meddling in Banking, just as anything else done by the private sector, it fucks it all up worse. Government is NOT the solution, free market, private sector, capitalism IS the answer, always!

People whine and moan about "unbridled" capitalism, but we should strive for our 'economy horse' to be as close to unbridled as humanly possible! When private sector capitalism is unleashed, there is no limit to the potential, from an economic standpoint, or from a security standpoint. We do need some sensible regulation on capitalism, I have never said otherwise, but what we have now, is borderline Communism, with the State taking more and more control of Capitalism. The Government is NOT the answer!

But what about bankers taking the mortgages they knew were bad and reselling them all around the world, dixie? Please address this, if you dare.
 
France has had problems with Nuclear power. France though, learned from it's mistakes. France's nuclear power plants are also nationalized, as public utilities and under an extraordinary degree of regulations. Blaming the past failures on political mudslinging is about as stupid as it gets. The Chernobyl disaster occurred because the Soviets operating that plant did not have the degree of oversight, regulation and quality assurance required to operate safely. This is the point I am making and this is the lesson the French have learned about nuclear power. Nuclear power must meet three criteria or it is not viable. It must be safe, it must be clean and it must be cost affective. The first two conditions cannot be assured by the free market. The free market does many things well. This is not one of them and considering the huge destructive potential of nuclear power how can you trust those who's position is to elminiate and undermine the institutional controls needed to make nuclear power a viable option.

Let me put it to you like this. Would you want the same people managing nuclear safety policy that were regulating our financial services industry when it collapsed?

Commies didn't have regulation and oversight?

Your argument boils down to this: France has nukes run by the government, so that is good. The USSR had a pant run by the government, but that was bad. :palm:
 
Excellent point, government can not be trusted but neither can the corporations!

Will if neither can be trusted should both be destroyed? Should Corporations be broken down into small businesses? Should the goverment be shrunk back to where it was 100 years ago? Can Unions be trusted either? What large organization can be trusted?
 
France has a lot of nuclear weapons and nulear technology. It also has a large number of muslims. Muslims have high birth rates while the French have a low one. Large numbers of muslims immigrate to france every year. Once the muslims become the majority they will take over France and could establish Sharia law if they wanted to. What will muslims do with France. They will have nukes and the ability to mass produce them on a massive scale. Is France falling to Islam dangerous to World security. Italy also is likely to be taken over by muslims as well as other european countries.
 
Republicans tend to support nuclear power while Democrates support renewable energy and electric cars. Republicans and Democrates fail to work together to provide America energy security. Republicans which don't believe in Global Warming will not support bills about alternative energy. Republicans don't see that ending American dependence on foreign oil is essential to America's national security. Democrates fail to realize that its impossible to convince everyone about the enviormental impacts of fossil fuels. Democrates need to argue energy security, resource scarcity. Liberals need to stop opposing nuclear power. The technology all ready exists to make it completely safe. France has never had a problem. Republicans need to support renewable energy/ electric cars. Renewable energy should be more about national security then the envionment.
Terrorist get their money from oil. Once efficient electric cars are created then oil will be useless and terrorists will lose all their funding. If just a fraction of the money used to fight terrorists had gone into research America would all ready be on the path victory. Islamic extremists will lose only if oil becomes worthless. Electric cars could will replace oil powered ones all we need is to research and design good electric cars. Nuclear power is superior to coal and is much better for the environment.


Actually, France did have a problem with their reactors last summer (2009). During the deadly heat wave gripping Europe, the French had to cut back their nuke-generated electricity just when they needed it most for the spiking demand for a/c. The river water they use to cool the reactors was abnormally warm to begin with, and therefore provided less cooling effect even at normal operating levels. At the generating levels required to match the demand, the warmer river water was unable to cool the reactors, and the water discharged back into the river was so hot, it was killing the fish, so they had to cut back their power generation drastically just when they needed it at maximum output, showing that nuke-generated power is not the answer for climate change.

BTW, if nuclear waste is recyclable, why is there such a problem with finding a place to store it (ie, the Yucca Mountain fight)? In fact, recycling nuclear fuel involves extracting the "neutron poisons," the highly radioactive, neutron-absorbing isotopes that will stop a fission reaction dead in its tracks, even with the control rods removed entirely. Unfortunately, while this extraction recycling results in smaller amounts of unusable waste (unusable for power generation, that is. It is still weapons-grade), the waste is highly concentrated, highly radioactive, highly toxic (as are the chemicals used in the extraction), and can have a half-life of thousands of years. One such isotope, plutonium-239, has a half life of 24,112 years, and is still toxic after 100,000 years: the ideal material for a dirty bomb. Nuke power is unsuited for a warming climate, isn't cheap or clean, and both the fission reaction and its waste are inherently dangerous.

Other than that, it's great.
 
Geothermal energy along with Nuclear Fusion, Natural Gas, Clean Coal and Solar are the future. It will be decades before we can ever think of being Oil free. However, until then you are corret we must push for the advancement of Nuc and Geothermal. Biosfuels will be a good alternative for Machinery.
 
Last edited:
Geothermal energy along with Nuclear Fusion, Natural Gas, Clean Coal and Solar are the future. It will be decades before we can ever think of being Oil free. However, until then you are corret we must push for the advancement of Nuc and Geothermal. Biosfuels will be a good alternative for Machinery.

Couldn't an efficient electric car be designed at any time especially if the government takes up the task? An efficient electric car would make us a lot more oil free.
 
Nuclear energy is clean. There is an abudence of uranium in the world. A small amount of uranium creates a lot of energy. Nuclear waste can be recycled. Uranium generates a lot of energy.

Sorry nuclear waste is not clean and the waste can not be recycled.
 
France has had problems with Nuclear power. France though, learned from it's mistakes. France's nuclear power plants are also nationalized, as public utilities and under an extraordinary degree of regulations. Blaming the past failures on political mudslinging is about as stupid as it gets. The Chernobyl disaster occurred because the Soviets operating that plant did not have the degree of oversight, regulation and quality assurance required to operate safely. This is the point I am making and this is the lesson the French have learned about nuclear power. Nuclear power must meet three criteria or it is not viable. It must be safe, it must be clean and it must be cost affective. The first two conditions cannot be assured by the free market. The free market does many things well. This is not one of them and considering the huge destructive potential of nuclear power how can you trust those who's position is to elminiate and undermine the institutional controls needed to make nuclear power a viable option.

Let me put it to you like this. Would you want the same people managing nuclear safety policy that were regulating our financial services industry when it collapsed?

EDF was partially privatised in 2005, the French government still retains an 85% share in the company. It is now designated as a Société Anonyme or SA.

Électricité de France - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Nuclear_Power_Plant_Cattenom.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Nuclear_Power_Plant_Cattenom.jpg/300px-Nuclear_Power_Plant_Cattenom.jpg"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/4/4e/Nuclear_Power_Plant_Cattenom.jpg/300px-Nuclear_Power_Plant_Cattenom.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sorry nuclear waste is not clean and the waste can not be recycled.

Only retards believe that:
What if lawmakers forced us to bury 95 percent of our energy resources?

That is exactly what Washington does when it comes to safe, affordable and CO2-free nuclear energy. Indeed, 95 percent of the used fuel from America's 104 power reactors, which provide about 20 percent of the nation's electricity, could be recycled for future use.

To create power, reactor fuel must contain 3-5 percent burnable uranium. Once the burnable uranium falls below that level, the fuel must be replaced. But this "spent" fuel generally retains about 95 percent of the uranium it started with, and that uranium can be recycled.

Over the past four decades, America's reactors have produced about 56,000 tons of used fuel. That "waste" contains roughly enough energy to power every U.S. household for 12 years. And it's just sitting there, piling up at power plant storage facilities. Talk about waste!

The sad thing is, the United States developed the technology to recapture that energy decades ago, then barred its commercial use in 1977. We have practiced a virtual moratorium ever since.

Other countries have not taken such a backward approach to nuclear power. France, whose 59 reactors generate 80 percent of its electricity, has safely recycled nuclear fuel for decades. They turned to nuclear power in the 1970s to limit their dependence on foreign energy. And, from the beginning, they made recycling used fuel central to their program.
http://www.heritage.org/research/co...ng-nuclear-fuel-the-french-do-it-why-cant-oui

You can thank your hero Jimmy Carter for that.
 
Nuclear energy can rock in more ways then one. Particularly if it's done wrong. Then it can bring a sober new meaning to the phrase "rock your world".

Done right there are a lot of advantages to nuclear energy. It's cost affective, renewable and done right it can be safe and clean.

Done wrong and it can have catastrophic consequences that can make one shudder in horror.

For me, there lies the problem. Can you actually tell me you'd feel safe with free market, deregulate everything Republican ideologues making decisions about nuclear policy and safety based on their short term profit laissez faire political ideology?

Point being, there is no room, I repeat this for emphasis "THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO ROOM WHAT SO EVER" for this sort of thinking when it comes to Nuclear Energy.

Nuclear Safety is predicated on a high degree of regulation.

You post hits the mark pretty well, except for the bullshit about Republican ideologues making decisions about nuclear policy and safety based on their short term profit laissez faire political ideology?

You've been spoon fed the fuckin' lie for so long I guess its just impossible for you reality from any other perspective....
No one wants to get rich but kill themselves doing it...use you head....

You lefties go so far overboard imposing your rules and regulations on us, that "protect" everyone from everything, including ourselves, you don't know when enough is enough......
 
Back
Top