It's my understanding that currently nuclear plants aren't insurable now. Seems the insurance companies don't like the odds of a catastrophic accident so government insures them instead. One of the hidden costs which make nuclear much more expensive then they say.
What about British citizens? As the only British subjects left are people born in The Republic of Ireland before 1949 who did not claim any countries citizenship there can't be many left, probably only a few dozen if that.
I agree, but the parent was making extreme claims of only 50 deaths ever attributable to nuclear when the number is at least an order of magnitude higher.
Of course they're capitalist. Capitalism says to increase profits in the most efficient manner possible. Using force is the most efficient and having a proxy to use that force is even better as there is little backlash. So one of the goals of successful capitalism is to have a proxy that can use force to assure your profits as it is simpler and cheaper then producing a better product and marketing it. So our current type of government evolves from pressure of capitalist survival of the fittest. Basically a capitalist system is always going to produce a government that props up the capitalist, this is best shown by the American government which seems to mostly exist to ensure profits for business.
Mining Uranium is more dangerous then mining coal, at least on a per ton basis. Large volumes need to be mined to get any Uranium as it is fairly dilute, the mines are full of radon gas which leads to high cancer rates amongst the miners. Extracting the uranium from the ore involves hazardous chemicals which often leak into the environment. It is hard to believe only fifty people have died, perhaps you're only counting deaths from industrial accidents when building nuclear plants which have to be as hazardous as your other examples. If you want to make a point, please don't exaggerate to such an extreme as it makes whatever you say come across as bullshit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining#Health_risks_of_uranium_mining
I'm thinking of freight, not passengers as Canada is like the States with crappy expensive train travel. For passengers and automobiles there is an extensive car ferry system.
Between Vancouver Island and the mainland trains use ferries ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train_ferry ) which I guess Ireland misses out on with incompatible lines.
The line should probably be drawn with people who advocate murdering other people, especially by throwing them off a cliff. We have no need for "them kind" in this world.
Actually current events in the mid-East agree. Egypt and Tunisia were mostly non-violent uprisings with the local armies refusing to get involved and they won. Libya and Syria have been much more violent and the local armies are winning (in the case of Libya only outside force has allowed the revolt to continue) Now a days you have much more chance of success just by the citizens sitting down and refusing to co-operate with the government then a violent uprising has. I can't think of too many times when a violent uprising has resulted in a new better government though their has been a few times when a territory has successfully seceded.
Actually the more resourceful criminals have been known to borrow a strangers car, do a crime, then put it carefully back. Makes it hard to explain why your vehicle was at the scene of a crime.
Most places you don't need a license to own a car or to drive it on private property. Requiring that you know how to drive (for using public roads) or use a firearm is quite reasonable. I've almost been killed by bad drivers and I've had too many bullets go by my head to think that any person should just be handed a dangerous tool without them having some knowledge about the tool. Guns and automobiles have one thing in common, a bit of stupidity can kill innocent bystanders very easily.
I've never heard that Venus and Mars don't or didn't have the necessary composition to sustain life. As far as I know Mars currently has the correct composition and Venus before the runaway greenhouse affect started may well have been covered in oceans with tectonic plates and the correct composition.
The really, really, really simplified version is that Hollywood sets up a separate corporation for each movie with the intent that this corporation will take on losses. The studio then charges the "film corporation" a huge fee (which creates a large part of the "expense" that leads to the loss).
Now it seems to me like someone - whoever the fee is paid to - will need to pay tax on this income. There's nothing illegal about any of this. If you run a business I think you're obliged to take advantage of any loopholes you can. And they do.
If you run a business you're obliged to keep PR in mind all the time including not taking advantage of loopholes if it gives your customers and clients such a bad view of you that they would sooner rip you off then pay for your product because they see you as worse scum then most crooks. Also I doubt that the shell company in the Bahamas pays any taxes on that income, why else would they sacrifice their good image other then to pocket more money.
Serenity sounds like it might be a good movie but I'm not going to pay for it sight unseen and as I've never seen it and don't bother downloading movies...
Columbus didn't set out to go to America, he erroneously believed the Earth was much smaller and he sailed for India. No one else was interested in the trip because it was common knowledge that the journey was too long to carry supplies and he lucked out in finding inhabitable lands before running out of supplies.
Everyone forgets that a space elevator has to be built in geosynchronous orbit as well. If each meter only weighs a ton (about a meter in circumference and about the same density as water) that's what, 80 million tons that needs to be lifted to geosynchronous orbit at a minimum.
Well, I'd be happy to hear how US helped Mexico and Canada. You helped the richest Canadians get richer by outsourcing most of our industry south to the States. Of course that didn't work out too good for you as the richest Americans learned, added Mexico to the free trade zone and outsourced those American jobs further south therefore making the richest Americans richer.
Slashdot Mirror
It's my understanding that currently nuclear plants aren't insurable now. Seems the insurance companies don't like the odds of a catastrophic accident so government insures them instead.
One of the hidden costs which make nuclear much more expensive then they say.
What about British citizens? As the only British subjects left are people born in The Republic of Ireland before 1949 who did not claim any countries citizenship there can't be many left, probably only a few dozen if that.
I agree, but the parent was making extreme claims of only 50 deaths ever attributable to nuclear when the number is at least an order of magnitude higher.
Of course they're capitalist. Capitalism says to increase profits in the most efficient manner possible. Using force is the most efficient and having a proxy to use that force is even better as there is little backlash. So one of the goals of successful capitalism is to have a proxy that can use force to assure your profits as it is simpler and cheaper then producing a better product and marketing it. So our current type of government evolves from pressure of capitalist survival of the fittest.
Basically a capitalist system is always going to produce a government that props up the capitalist, this is best shown by the American government which seems to mostly exist to ensure profits for business.
Mining Uranium is more dangerous then mining coal, at least on a per ton basis. Large volumes need to be mined to get any Uranium as it is fairly dilute, the mines are full of radon gas which leads to high cancer rates amongst the miners. Extracting the uranium from the ore involves hazardous chemicals which often leak into the environment. It is hard to believe only fifty people have died, perhaps you're only counting deaths from industrial accidents when building nuclear plants which have to be as hazardous as your other examples.
If you want to make a point, please don't exaggerate to such an extreme as it makes whatever you say come across as bullshit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining#Health_risks_of_uranium_mining
I think that it is a regional accent thing. To me loose rhymes with choose but not moose.
I'm thinking of freight, not passengers as Canada is like the States with crappy expensive train travel. For passengers and automobiles there is an extensive car ferry system.
Between Vancouver Island and the mainland trains use ferries ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train_ferry ) which I guess Ireland misses out on with incompatible lines.
Don't you need cell coverage for that to work? I'm 40 miles out from Vancouver, no cell coverage.
The line should probably be drawn with people who advocate murdering other people, especially by throwing them off a cliff.
We have no need for "them kind" in this world.
Actually current events in the mid-East agree. Egypt and Tunisia were mostly non-violent uprisings with the local armies refusing to get involved and they won.
Libya and Syria have been much more violent and the local armies are winning (in the case of Libya only outside force has allowed the revolt to continue)
Now a days you have much more chance of success just by the citizens sitting down and refusing to co-operate with the government then a violent uprising has.
I can't think of too many times when a violent uprising has resulted in a new better government though their has been a few times when a territory has successfully seceded.
Actually the more resourceful criminals have been known to borrow a strangers car, do a crime, then put it carefully back. Makes it hard to explain why your vehicle was at the scene of a crime.
The problems are He3 is much harder to fuse then D and it is spread very thinly on the lunar surface.
Most places you don't need a license to own a car or to drive it on private property. Requiring that you know how to drive (for using public roads) or use a firearm is quite reasonable. I've almost been killed by bad drivers and I've had too many bullets go by my head to think that any person should just be handed a dangerous tool without them having some knowledge about the tool.
Guns and automobiles have one thing in common, a bit of stupidity can kill innocent bystanders very easily.
Some turbines use a simple spark plug to initially fire the fuel, starter motor spins up the turbine, fuel added then one spark and away it goes.
I've never heard that Venus and Mars don't or didn't have the necessary composition to sustain life. As far as I know Mars currently has the correct composition and Venus before the runaway greenhouse affect started may well have been covered in oceans with tectonic plates and the correct composition.
The really, really, really simplified version is that Hollywood sets up a separate corporation for each movie with the intent that this corporation will take on losses. The studio then charges the "film corporation" a huge fee (which creates a large part of the "expense" that leads to the loss).
Now it seems to me like someone - whoever the fee is paid to - will need to pay tax on this income. There's nothing illegal about any of this. If you run a business I think you're obliged to take advantage of any loopholes you can. And they do.
If you run a business you're obliged to keep PR in mind all the time including not taking advantage of loopholes if it gives your customers and clients such a bad view of you that they would sooner rip you off then pay for your product because they see you as worse scum then most crooks.
Also I doubt that the shell company in the Bahamas pays any taxes on that income, why else would they sacrifice their good image other then to pocket more money.
Serenity sounds like it might be a good movie but I'm not going to pay for it sight unseen and as I've never seen it and don't bother downloading movies...
he reason people are willing to invest money in making movies is because they expect to get that money back and more from selling the right to see it
They don't make money and haven't for the longest time yet they still keep making movies so obviously they aren't doing it to make money.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting#Examples
What happens if you pick different dates, perhaps 1980 when gold was $850 an ozt? Also using cotton which is heavily subsidized doesn't seem right.
Columbus didn't set out to go to America, he erroneously believed the Earth was much smaller and he sailed for India.
No one else was interested in the trip because it was common knowledge that the journey was too long to carry supplies and he lucked out in finding inhabitable lands before running out of supplies.
Don't forget Mars is a lot smaller than the Earth.
Not disagreeing but actually Mars has about the same land area as Earth.
Everyone forgets that a space elevator has to be built in geosynchronous orbit as well. If each meter only weighs a ton (about a meter in circumference and about the same density as water) that's what, 80 million tons that needs to be lifted to geosynchronous orbit at a minimum.
Well, I'd be happy to hear how US helped Mexico and Canada.
You helped the richest Canadians get richer by outsourcing most of our industry south to the States. Of course that didn't work out too good for you as the richest Americans learned, added Mexico to the free trade zone and outsourced those American jobs further south therefore making the richest Americans richer.
A very small community.
Gemini XI used the Agena to boost to 739 miles. Not sure how that relates to the van Allen belt.