Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

mugtang

Fresno Grizzlies Played This Memorial Day Tribute Video

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, Orange said:

What was the point of sharing that video?  Did you think there was something in there proving she's a communist?

Again, you clearly don't understand what communism is, and I'm beginning to think you don't understand how economies of scale work in general.

No point, I just sharing a video of what the GND was... that’s all. You know, just in case someone wanted to familiarize themselves a little bit about it. 

Continue on, Einstein! 

"Make a mistake once and it becomes a lesson, make the same mistake twice and it becomes a choice."
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silly to infer she is an enemy to the country.  I don't agree with her, but she has good intentions.  I would label her more an enemy of the economy.  Maybe show her with Marx, Engels, and then Stalin and Chairman Mao so we can remember where it all leads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BYUcougfan said:

Silly to infer she is an enemy to the country.  I don't agree with her, but she has good intentions.  I would label her more an enemy of the economy.  Maybe show her with Marx, Engels, and then Stalin and Chairman Mao so we can remember where it all leads.

Another person who has no clue how the economy works.  The tax rates she vouches for were in place through the Eisenhower and Nixon administrations.  Subsidizing energy sources is something we've done for half a century.  Raising the minimum wage should've happened 10 years ago.  All of these things should please you unless you're a billionaire, in which case government hardly exists to please you (except for protecting all of your assets with an army).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Orange said:

Another person who has no clue how the economy works.  The tax rates she vouches for were in place through the Eisenhower and Nixon administrations.  Subsidizing energy sources is something we've done for half a century.  Raising the minimum wage should've happened 10 years ago.  All of these things should please you unless you're a billionaire, in which case government hardly exists to please you (except for protecting all of your assets with an army).

You do know that we’re collecting the same % of GDP now as we were then in tax revenues, right?  We have a spending problem here, not a revenue problem.  Historically, since the end of WWII we have consistently collected 15-18% of GDP in revenue.  We need to get spending down to that target which means across the board cuts to defense, social security, Medicare, Medicaid and all discretionary accounts.  Here are the historical tables:

 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/hist01z3-fy2020.xlsx

Minimum wage should be handled at the state/local level. All the federal law should be is “minimum wage should be a factor of the poverty level”.  $15/hr in Seattle or San Francisco may be what’s needed.  But it may not work in Laramie, Wyoming. 

We should end all energy subsidies, none for Tesla, none for Chevron.  Let the free market decide what’s best. 

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have to subsidize green energy sources because of what our carbon output is doing to the planet.  It's really that simple, unless you doubt the clear scientific consensus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Orange said:

We have to subsidize green energy sources because of what our carbon output is doing to the planet.  It's really that simple, unless you doubt the clear scientific consensus.

Any green plan that doesn’t include Nuclear is a joke.  If Climate Change was as serious of a problem as people are saying we would be building nuclear power plants everywhere.  They’re the best option available to combat carbon emissions and protect the environment.  Solar and wind cause significant environmental damage. The minerals for solar panels have to be mined.  Animals are displaced to build solar fields.  What happens when solar panels are no longer useable?  We will just export that pollution to Africa or some 3rd world country is Southeast Asia.  Wind turbines kill a significant amount of birds.  And I’m talking rare, endangered birds.  The best option available is nuclear.  This is why I don’t take AOC’s GND seriously, despite the stupidity of cow farts and banning air travel, it doesn’t include nuclear. 

Plus, you know who funds the green energy industry?  Oil and gas.  They want to suppress nuclear power as they know it will solve our energy problems. 

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mugtang said:

Any green plan that doesn’t include Nuclear is a joke.  If Climate Change was as serious of a problem as people are saying we would be building nuclear power plants everywhere.  They’re the best option available to combat carbon emissions and protect the environment.  Solar and wind cause significant environmental damage. The minerals for solar panels have to be mined.  Animals are displaced to build solar fields.  What happens when solar panels are no longer useable?  We will just export that pollution to Africa or some 3rd world country is Southeast Asia.  Wind turbines kill a significant amount of birds.  And I’m talking rare, endangered birds.  The best option available is nuclear.  This is why I don’t take AOC’s GND seriously, despite the stupidity of cow farts and banning air travel, it doesn’t include nuclear. 

Plus, you know who funds the green energy industry?  Oil and gas.  They want to suppress nuclear power as they know it will solve our energy problems. 

Please don't act like you're concerned for the rare, endangered birds killed by wind turbines.  Nuclear power and natural gas are certainly options that are viable for a transition until we can make something else work permanently (like fusion), but stop pretending nuclear is flawless.  There are hundreds of square miles of uninhabitable territory in the Ukraine and Japan that would differ with you.

And no one said ANYTHING about "banning air travel" in the GND.   You just proved to me that you didn't read it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Orange said:

Another person who has no clue how the economy works.  The tax rates she vouches for were in place through the Eisenhower and Nixon administrations.  Subsidizing energy sources is something we've done for half a century.  Raising the minimum wage should've happened 10 years ago.  All of these things should please you unless you're a billionaire, in which case government hardly exists to please you (except for protecting all of your assets with an army).

Amazing!  You want top tax rates at over 90%?  Pretty sure no one actually paid those rates, but let's see if we can make it happen.  Let's spend the trillions and trillions AOC is advocating for and see just how much we can get everyone to chip in.  That ought to be just swell.  Let's just have the Federal government take over more and more of the economy.  It will be great for efficient allocation of capital and should really spur private sector innovation and risk taking.  What could go wrong?  It is not like politics will cause us to waste enormous amounts of money on things that don't work.  We can re-build buildings, get rid of airplanes and plug up cows.  What an exciting future!  Exactly what energy sources are we going to subsidize?  Wind and solar?  Let's blanket our open spaces and coasts with solar cells, windmills and whatever you call those things that generate power from waves.  But can we not use nuclear?  We don't want to despoil any of our scenic vistas with a storage facility when we can cover them with windmills.  And if for some surprising reason it doesn't work and the economy is wrecked?  Well, we can use the age old excuse of every central planner.  We did not have enough control.  We needed even more money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Orange said:

Please don't act like you're concerned for the rare, endangered birds killed by wind turbines.  Nuclear power and natural gas are certainly options that are viable for a transition until we can make something else work permanently (like fusion), but stop pretending nuclear is flawless.  There are hundreds of square miles of uninhabitable territory in the Ukraine and Japan that would differ with you.

Despite what you might believe based on your 5 minutes of interactions with me and you joining the board only last week, I do care about endangered animals and our environment.  We only have 1 planet and we should do everything we can to protect it.  

Chernobyl was a completely avoidable disaster and Fukushima was an unforeseen event. Maybe the plant shouldn’t have been built on the ocean in a seismically active area where the risk of a tsunami was high.  Considering the minimal risk involved with Nuclear, I think that’s our best chance. 

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're making modular nuclear plants that have next to zero risk of melting down, even in the absence of additional water.

Quote

In January, NuScale announced that the NRC agreed that NuScale’s SMR design approach requires no safety-related power to safely shut down. No operating nuclear plant in the United States can make that claim – walk-away safe, can’t melt down – it’s what America’s been waiting for in nuclear since 1979.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2018/06/22/nuscales-small-modular-nuclear-reactor-reliable-resilient-and-flexible/#127821f01139

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Orange said:

And no one said ANYTHING about "banning air travel" in the GND.   You just proved to me that you didn't read it.

I should’ve said she wants to phase it out not ban it.  Still a completely stupid proposal that has zero basis in reality. 

0742BFFF-7D7E-4CF6-8A0D-0CBF25D88B33.png

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mugtang said:

I should’ve said she wants to phase it out not ban it.  Still a completely stupid proposal that has zero basis in reality. 

0742BFFF-7D7E-4CF6-8A0D-0CBF25D88B33.png

At a level where air travel stops becoming necessary.

I think that's your key right there... they wanted to increase renewable travel to locations to the point where air travel would become minimally necessary. We should also note that the GND draft that was inadvertently released wasn't intended to be a finalized policy proposal either. Further, if their goal was to replace every combustion-engine vehicle, wouldn't it stand to reason that jet engines would be included in that goal? :shrug:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, CV147 said:

They're making modular nuclear plants that have next to zero risk of melting down, even in the absence of additional water.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2018/06/22/nuscales-small-modular-nuclear-reactor-reliable-resilient-and-flexible/#127821f01139

 

24 minutes ago, mugtang said:

Despite what you might believe based on your 5 minutes of interactions with me and you joining the board only last week, I do care about endangered animals and our environment.  We only have 1 planet and we should do everything we can to protect it.  

Chernobyl was a completely avoidable disaster and Fukushima was an unforeseen event. Maybe the plant shouldn’t have been built on the ocean in a seismically active area where the risk of a tsunami was high.  Considering the minimal risk involved with Nuclear, I think that’s our best chance. 

You guys act like you've never seen any of the Jurassic Park movies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, toonkee said:

 

You guys act like you've never seen any of the Jurassic Park movies.

I work in the utility industry, and with the plants that are operational and properly taken care of, we stand a better chance of dinosaurs coming back to life than we do a true nuclear meltdown at a power plant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, retrofade said:

I work in the utility industry, and with the plants that are operational and properly taken care of, we stand a better chance of dinosaurs coming back to life than we do a true nuclear meltdown at a power plant. 

I'm sure that's what guys with your job said that worked at Fukushima, 3 mile island and Chernobyl. Shit always finds a way to happen.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, toonkee said:

I'm sure that's what guys with your job said that worked at Fukushima, 3 mile island and Chernobyl. Shit always finds a way to happen.    

I doubt that anyone with my specific job said any of those things. Nuclear power shouldn't be this weird crazy boogeyman... when handled properly, it can provide clean* energy for generations while better technologies are perfected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, retrofade said:

I doubt that anyone with my specific job said any of those things. Nuclear power shouldn't be this weird crazy boogeyman... when handled properly, it can provide clean* energy for generations while better technologies are perfected.

I'm not arguing against it being our best alternative.

I just find it odd that some have the hubris to say "it won't happen again".  Everything happens again.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, toonkee said:

I'm not arguing against it being our best alternative.

I just find it odd that some have the hubris to say "it won't happen again".  Everything happens again.   

Sure, things could happen again, but I'm putting their odds at us recreating dinosaurs multiple times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...