In response to your comments: a single payer system could actually work better to increase tech. This is how. Open source all research.
What? You might be pondering while your scratch your head. "There is no profit motive to drive people to innovate." you may be thinking... typically breakthroughs are reached by poor lifetime researchers that are indentured servants to their universities already... what we ought to do is publicly fund research in addition to health care. Ensure plenty of funding available to research, at even greater levels than exist today under the private system, and award out grants on the basis of the intention to making leaps in technology and treatment systems.
Example: Provide grants to apply gold nanoparticles to HIV vaccines to followup on work done last year at UCLA. Of course all research would be open source and manufacturers would compete to deliver the best product at the best price. All medication, even cutting edge technology, would be at market price rather than massively inflated to recover investment and profits over the lifetime of the patent. This would stimulate the economy and improve the standard of living, drastically.
The IMAB, IMAC, IMPB, or any other variant they choose to call it, is effectively a death panel. Why ration? Implement an improved Medicare for all and save enough from taking the insurance companies out of the picture... rationing won't even be an issue. We can do it the Obama way and kill a bunch of women by denying mammograms, etc. and make a lot of $$$$$ for the insurance "industry" or we cut the middleman and not be fascist... I vote for the latter.
sorry, there's PLENTY he could be doing but isn't. he's CHOOSING to maintain this monetary system dominated political world. we were in an awesome position last year to wipe out wall street and rebuild the physical economy with government credit. instead, we choose to give wall street $23.5 trillion (near 0% interest loans for derivatives, federal guarantees, and various bailout programs like TARP, AIG, etc.). imagine what $23.5 trillion could do for the world. can you imagine a global maglev network powered by 4th generation nuclear power? i can... how about a fantastic space program, an industrialized moon, and a real fusion research program? i can imagine that too. there's a wealth of he3 on the moon and if obama was serious about "going green" and being "energy independent" he wouldn't kill constellation, he'd expand it!
we could have expanded the social safety nets, greatly increased benefits to social security recipients, passed an expanded medicare for all, greatly improved the quality of life of everyone here, and approached 0% unemployment with wiser use of money creation and loans. they instead choose to prop up the bubble. if the boomer's stock portfolios got wiped out, well that sucks, but that's why we would have improved the safety nets so everyone would have a guaranteed OK life, as galbraith had suggested. white middle class suburbia would be angry, but the real losers would just be high finance, the bankers, and the oligarchy. to hell with them, i want to live in a modern world... and the way we'll get there is thru a massive credit outpouring into physical infrastructure, not financing vampire traders on wall street.
that's where He3 comes in... directly converts to energy and we'll experience a leap in efficiency as a consequence. somebody please explain to our idiot-in-chief not to cancel constellation.
There is a high-tech way to have clean, cheap energy. Everything was going great until hysteria set in in the 70s. Explain to me why a 1GW plant (with a 92% uptime unlike solar or wind) running on 7 lbs of thorium per day is not a universally accepted bipartisan plan? Why aren't we mass producing LFTRs globally?? The LFTR, breeders, and other types of 4th generation reactors ARE the solution. Mass producing them and getting the technology ready is a lot more likely to happen than a "renewable" future or orbit solar energy. If the billions wasted in "alternative energy" research and subsidies were wisely invested into 4th gen nuclear technology things would look a lot better today.
unless your plant decides to step in take the profit for themselves is really the only other thing i could think of. or do you know of other cheap sources?
i'm interested, i was actually thinking of starting a slightly related venture myself...
"While increased development isn’t quite our taste, we certainly support low carbon transportation like rail service, "
so they support increased poverty, starvation, and death rates?
cancel the bailout, screw the financial speculators, and invest in the REAL economy!
wallstreet != "growth engine"... whoever invented that needs to be shot. the real growth engine is when we have millions of high paying, blue collar, industrial jobs... we CAN have this, but we need to have a very well funded space program... we basically need to make a declaration that we are going to industrialize the moon, develop fusion power, and colonize mars... make a 50 year plan and fully fund it.... for every $1 invested in apollo we made $15 back as of 25 years ago, who knows how much we've made back as of today. but to put it in raw dollar terms like that, even tho it was "profitable" (for those simple minded people who only see dollars) is a disgrace because we have much more value that you cannot put dollar values on... it inspired an entire generation to want to go into science and engineering... it really lifted the human spirit to be able to think in terms of being able to accomplish the impossible.
so in short, f*ck london and wallstreet, the bankers can go to hell, and we want advanced technology to be properly funded!!!
well i'd consider the markets themselves to be ponzi schemes as well, because growth requires new money in. we should shut it all down and audit EVERYTHING just like roosevelt. for a president that just loves to compare himself to FDR anyway... they're complete opposites.
we CAN however have a credit dollar whose value is the physical investments it is invested into. we shouldn't write off fiat money but we should write off hyperinflationary fiat money, especially privitized hyperinflationary fiat money like the fed.
Step 1) audit the fed
Step 2) shine light into the darkest corner of the universe
Step 3) rally public outcry to shut it down and replace it with a nationalized institution that makes specifically deliberate long term investments in physical infrastructure
Step 4) profit (everyone has a job and we get all new gear like maglev rail and a real space program)
social darwinism does indeed back the ideologies of the nazi party and its offshoots the conservation movement, eugenics movement, and ultimately the environmentalists as well... this is because fascism began in the british empire, where it was birthed, endorsed, and bailed out (twice) by london and wall street. the print media lavishly heaped praise upon fascist regimes, calling them model governments. fascist (british monarchy friendly) forces even tried to unseat FDR in a failed revolutionary attempt in the USA, the so-called business plot. british royals even sent their children to the hitler youth for summer camp, as well as other nazi related organizations.
british royals have been known to deplore modern medicine and infrastructure because it works against "natural selection." people who are less "economically fit," they argue, shouldn't reproduce and spread their genes, so they claim we should not have public health care, we should "reduce our population" (genocide thru starvation, etc.), food and fuels should be price rationed, and "resources" should be preserved (for the anglo-americans). nothing about this statement by the legislature is surprising, and if it indeed is based upon this line of thinking with this history in mind, i applaud it.
Humans are not bacteria. We do not reproduce like bacteria. We do not consume resources and die off. Humans, unlike any other animals, possess the unique ability to alter their environment. This results in improvements to efficiency and productivity so it is possible to support greater and greater populations. Don't fall victim to such sophistry.
I disagree, and I think you're promoting a dangerous line of thinking. Fission will take care of our energy needs for the next 30 years. I'm confident with appropriate funding we'll have fusion power by then, at least D-T fusion.
Consider that there is enough He3 on the moon to start up a D-He3 fusion economy. Once we get reliable He3 fusion going we'll be able to travel easily to the outer solar system. NTR propulsion technology can only take one so far... By then, if the political body is doing it's job, looking after the general welfare, and not selling us into a banker's dictatorship, we'll have a base on mars as well, which will be a sort of central hub of the solar system.
Together with our colonies on Mars and Titan, we'll be tapping into the new middle east-- Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune harbor massive reserves of He3, enough to power all of our needs way into the future. We'll be expanding across the galaxy before the Sol system appears to be running low on reserves.
Your line of thinking IS Malthusian, and it is very dangerous. There is no energy shortage, there is no problem with overpopulation, there is only a disease of thought. A certain line of thinking, the sort of corruption that brings empire into politics is the problem. These sort of ideas about 0% growth are what kills civilizations.
It's not free when you consider how inefficient the power sources are, how inefficiently electricity alone creates H2, and how expensive these systems are to construct. Think of it terms of steel needed for construction, land area needed, and CONTINUOUS power generation. "Renewables" are terrible. Nuclear plants can create distilled water, H2, AND electricity. It's all about making best use of the massive amount of heat energy available.
Thank you. If I had mod points I'd mod you up. People believe lies and myths about nuclear power. The fuel can be reprocessed and recycled. About 97% can be reclaimed. The remainder has valuable medical isotopes that can be extracted. The residual amount can be bombarded with neutrons to reduce it's halflife down to the point where it's easily manageable.
We should immediately begin constructing new reactors globally. We need to build something like 3TW of new power generation to get the rest of the world to a standard of living approximating that of the USA... Think about 3TW of continuous power. It's impossible without nuclear or coal... Why do you want to go backwards in technology? By far the highest energy per unit is found in nuclear... we must rapidly roll out nuclear plants, for those are the only kind that suit our needs.
Fusion is seriously around the corner... we only need to get about 3 times more efficient to reach ignition. It's a walk in the park with the proper funding...
Slashdot Mirror
In response to your comments: a single payer system could actually work better to increase tech. This is how. Open source all research.
What? You might be pondering while your scratch your head. "There is no profit motive to drive people to innovate." you may be thinking... typically breakthroughs are reached by poor lifetime researchers that are indentured servants to their universities already... what we ought to do is publicly fund research in addition to health care. Ensure plenty of funding available to research, at even greater levels than exist today under the private system, and award out grants on the basis of the intention to making leaps in technology and treatment systems.
Example: Provide grants to apply gold nanoparticles to HIV vaccines to followup on work done last year at UCLA. Of course all research would be open source and manufacturers would compete to deliver the best product at the best price. All medication, even cutting edge technology, would be at market price rather than massively inflated to recover investment and profits over the lifetime of the patent. This would stimulate the economy and improve the standard of living, drastically.
The IMAB, IMAC, IMPB, or any other variant they choose to call it, is effectively a death panel. Why ration? Implement an improved Medicare for all and save enough from taking the insurance companies out of the picture... rationing won't even be an issue. We can do it the Obama way and kill a bunch of women by denying mammograms, etc. and make a lot of $$$$$ for the insurance "industry" or we cut the middleman and not be fascist... I vote for the latter.
so true. too bad some guy with his head rammed deep into the sand downmodded you. i would mod u up if i had points.
sorry, there's PLENTY he could be doing but isn't. he's CHOOSING to maintain this monetary system dominated political world. we were in an awesome position last year to wipe out wall street and rebuild the physical economy with government credit. instead, we choose to give wall street $23.5 trillion (near 0% interest loans for derivatives, federal guarantees, and various bailout programs like TARP, AIG, etc.). imagine what $23.5 trillion could do for the world. can you imagine a global maglev network powered by 4th generation nuclear power? i can... how about a fantastic space program, an industrialized moon, and a real fusion research program? i can imagine that too. there's a wealth of he3 on the moon and if obama was serious about "going green" and being "energy independent" he wouldn't kill constellation, he'd expand it!
we could have expanded the social safety nets, greatly increased benefits to social security recipients, passed an expanded medicare for all, greatly improved the quality of life of everyone here, and approached 0% unemployment with wiser use of money creation and loans. they instead choose to prop up the bubble. if the boomer's stock portfolios got wiped out, well that sucks, but that's why we would have improved the safety nets so everyone would have a guaranteed OK life, as galbraith had suggested. white middle class suburbia would be angry, but the real losers would just be high finance, the bankers, and the oligarchy. to hell with them, i want to live in a modern world... and the way we'll get there is thru a massive credit outpouring into physical infrastructure, not financing vampire traders on wall street.
that's where He3 comes in... directly converts to energy and we'll experience a leap in efficiency as a consequence. somebody please explain to our idiot-in-chief not to cancel constellation.
the "debt" to the fed is one debt i wouldn't mind reorganizing in bankruptcy reorganization.
There is a high-tech way to have clean, cheap energy. Everything was going great until hysteria set in in the 70s. Explain to me why a 1GW plant (with a 92% uptime unlike solar or wind) running on 7 lbs of thorium per day is not a universally accepted bipartisan plan? Why aren't we mass producing LFTRs globally?? The LFTR, breeders, and other types of 4th generation reactors ARE the solution. Mass producing them and getting the technology ready is a lot more likely to happen than a "renewable" future or orbit solar energy. If the billions wasted in "alternative energy" research and subsidies were wisely invested into 4th gen nuclear technology things would look a lot better today.
movies in LA are like 12 bucks, 15 for 3D >
unless your plant decides to step in take the profit for themselves is really the only other thing i could think of. or do you know of other cheap sources? i'm interested, i was actually thinking of starting a slightly related venture myself...
i fully support highspeed rail btw. just pointing out loonie greenie ideology.
"While increased development isn’t quite our taste, we certainly support low carbon transportation like rail service, " so they support increased poverty, starvation, and death rates?
agents of the foreign empire are declaring their intent to force more people to pay tax.
cancel the bailout, screw the financial speculators, and invest in the REAL economy! wallstreet != "growth engine"... whoever invented that needs to be shot. the real growth engine is when we have millions of high paying, blue collar, industrial jobs... we CAN have this, but we need to have a very well funded space program... we basically need to make a declaration that we are going to industrialize the moon, develop fusion power, and colonize mars... make a 50 year plan and fully fund it. ... for every $1 invested in apollo we made $15 back as of 25 years ago, who knows how much we've made back as of today. but to put it in raw dollar terms like that, even tho it was "profitable" (for those simple minded people who only see dollars) is a disgrace because we have much more value that you cannot put dollar values on... it inspired an entire generation to want to go into science and engineering... it really lifted the human spirit to be able to think in terms of being able to accomplish the impossible.
so in short, f*ck london and wallstreet, the bankers can go to hell, and we want advanced technology to be properly funded!!!
well i'd consider the markets themselves to be ponzi schemes as well, because growth requires new money in. we should shut it all down and audit EVERYTHING just like roosevelt. for a president that just loves to compare himself to FDR anyway... they're complete opposites.
we CAN however have a credit dollar whose value is the physical investments it is invested into. we shouldn't write off fiat money but we should write off hyperinflationary fiat money, especially privitized hyperinflationary fiat money like the fed.
Step 1) audit the fed
Step 2) shine light into the darkest corner of the universe
Step 3) rally public outcry to shut it down and replace it with a nationalized institution that makes specifically deliberate long term investments in physical infrastructure
Step 4) profit (everyone has a job and we get all new gear like maglev rail and a real space program)
fund all drug development with government credit and make the results free to anyone to manufacture... problem solved.
social darwinism does indeed back the ideologies of the nazi party and its offshoots the conservation movement, eugenics movement, and ultimately the environmentalists as well... this is because fascism began in the british empire, where it was birthed, endorsed, and bailed out (twice) by london and wall street. the print media lavishly heaped praise upon fascist regimes, calling them model governments. fascist (british monarchy friendly) forces even tried to unseat FDR in a failed revolutionary attempt in the USA, the so-called business plot. british royals even sent their children to the hitler youth for summer camp, as well as other nazi related organizations.
british royals have been known to deplore modern medicine and infrastructure because it works against "natural selection." people who are less "economically fit," they argue, shouldn't reproduce and spread their genes, so they claim we should not have public health care, we should "reduce our population" (genocide thru starvation, etc.), food and fuels should be price rationed, and "resources" should be preserved (for the anglo-americans). nothing about this statement by the legislature is surprising, and if it indeed is based upon this line of thinking with this history in mind, i applaud it.
Humans are not bacteria. We do not reproduce like bacteria. We do not consume resources and die off. Humans, unlike any other animals, possess the unique ability to alter their environment. This results in improvements to efficiency and productivity so it is possible to support greater and greater populations. Don't fall victim to such sophistry.
I disagree, and I think you're promoting a dangerous line of thinking. Fission will take care of our energy needs for the next 30 years. I'm confident with appropriate funding we'll have fusion power by then, at least D-T fusion.
Consider that there is enough He3 on the moon to start up a D-He3 fusion economy. Once we get reliable He3 fusion going we'll be able to travel easily to the outer solar system. NTR propulsion technology can only take one so far... By then, if the political body is doing it's job, looking after the general welfare, and not selling us into a banker's dictatorship, we'll have a base on mars as well, which will be a sort of central hub of the solar system.
Together with our colonies on Mars and Titan, we'll be tapping into the new middle east-- Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune harbor massive reserves of He3, enough to power all of our needs way into the future. We'll be expanding across the galaxy before the Sol system appears to be running low on reserves.
Your line of thinking IS Malthusian, and it is very dangerous. There is no energy shortage, there is no problem with overpopulation, there is only a disease of thought. A certain line of thinking, the sort of corruption that brings empire into politics is the problem. These sort of ideas about 0% growth are what kills civilizations.
It's not free when you consider how inefficient the power sources are, how inefficiently electricity alone creates H2, and how expensive these systems are to construct. Think of it terms of steel needed for construction, land area needed, and CONTINUOUS power generation. "Renewables" are terrible. Nuclear plants can create distilled water, H2, AND electricity. It's all about making best use of the massive amount of heat energy available.
Production occurs more easily at higher temperatures.
United Nuclear claims to store it as a hydride... thoughts?
lol
Thank you. If I had mod points I'd mod you up. People believe lies and myths about nuclear power. The fuel can be reprocessed and recycled. About 97% can be reclaimed. The remainder has valuable medical isotopes that can be extracted. The residual amount can be bombarded with neutrons to reduce it's halflife down to the point where it's easily manageable.
We should immediately begin constructing new reactors globally. We need to build something like 3TW of new power generation to get the rest of the world to a standard of living approximating that of the USA... Think about 3TW of continuous power. It's impossible without nuclear or coal... Why do you want to go backwards in technology? By far the highest energy per unit is found in nuclear... we must rapidly roll out nuclear plants, for those are the only kind that suit our needs.
Fusion is seriously around the corner... we only need to get about 3 times more efficient to reach ignition. It's a walk in the park with the proper funding...
No, but when used with Thorium in fast breeder reactors, it basically is.
The only way to create hydrogen efficiently is with a nuclear power source.