Oh yes, because we are just so good at decisively fixing things with the power of government! That's what we do the best - fix things before they hurt us. Yeah.
IF his calculations are anywhere near correct, then it's 13,000 x 100 or 1,300,000 pipes that drill down to 5KM. It takes a few months to do that work with one pipe. He is spreading the pipes thinly, about 1 per every 60 square meters. There is also a little matter of infrastructure on top - there would have to be a city built around that area, lots of fuels will have to be used, lots of people will have to be housed clothed, it's not a simple task at all. Even if you have 10 people working on 1 pipe (if works was simultaneous), that's 13,000,000 people.
Say it takes 6 months to drill that deep with 10 people and a rig. So you can go with one crew for 6,000,000 years, but they say the eruptions happen every 300,000 years, so that's no good.
If you have 10,000 crews, that's 100,000 people, that's 20,000 holes in a year.
That's still going to take 65 years.
I wonder if people can do any of that, sure sounds like a huge project without much profit behind it.
Redundant much? You said the same thing twice! That's more than once!
- this is/. you are supposed to repeat yourself over and over and over and over. Maybe one of these days we'll come up with a way just to reference what we have said earlier by creating some form of a link that could reference the original source....... no, that would never work.
And they were all wrong, it's not capitalism that failed, it's government regulating and selling the regulating power that failed. Gov't printing money (and inflating bubbles with free money and regulations) that failed. It's gov't fake insurance that failed (anything from FDIC Freddie/Fannie and FHA to SS, Medicare and all sorts of regulations that are designed in a way that increases cost of doing business.)
The problem is constraining the government, not capitalism.
Politicians also have to be connected, it's not easy to be elected in the first place, so there is something there, they are not the dumbest of the dumb.
But they also don't end up building profitable companies and they don't end up with hundreds of millions and billions of dollars, so they are clearly not as smart as many businessmen, but they are much lazier.
TODAY no nuclear power plant would get insurance, but if gov't wasn't there providing fake insurance (and all insurance that gov't provides is fake, it only relies on money printing, not on any actual insurance, as in interest bearing assets). If gov't is not subsidizing an activity, the price for activity goes down due to increase of competition, because subsidies imply various regulations that prevent competition.
If nuclear power was too expensive today, it would only mean one thing: the pricing structure of nuclear power is not worth the effort. But you don't know any of this, because the market is completely distorted by the government.
No, the person doesn't have to be smarter to be able to profit massively in a system that is basically designed to be corrupt.
The people who are in government are mostly massively incompetent in almost anything, but they are still competent at selling power, and in reality that's a product that's EASY TO SELL. They don't have to go and sell it:) Lobbyists come to them with the money, it's hard not to make massive amounts of money even if you are as dumb as a bush.
Hold on, hold on, that insurance shouldn't be there subsidized by any government. The cost of investment must include the cost of insurance, and you are wrong thinking that a private entity cannot get into that.
There are plenty of things that are even MORE expensive than nuclear power plants that are done privately. The cost of building a new microchip fabrication facility is at least in the same ballpark.
At least with gov't out of the picture, there would have been adequate insurance bought (which is also the same moral hazard of fake gov't insurance that BP fell into with the 70million USD liability cap and the banks with all the mortgage guarantees and home owners with all those initially cheap, variable rate mortgages and the SS ponzi scheme and Medicare and wars, all of these are gov't guaranteed and all of these are failures.)
I don't have to pretend, that's what free market DID do before intervention by government, that really started in 1913.
Free market DID create all sorts of things and it DID provide all sorts of research. From airplanes, to cars, to telephones (so the phone infrastructure), and electrical power plants (and that infrastructure) and roads and rail roads as well, which were destroyed during the ridiculous 'new deal'.
The transistor is all pure research, but it was useful and it was done privately. Same with thousands of other things, from chemicals to electronics to medicines and metallurgy and tools and even rockets. Even physics and math and chemistry and medicine models, not just practice, but theory. Gov't was in fact tiny before it got itself the power to print money and collect taxes that were not proportionate to people's spending, but instead proportionate to people's earnings, which threw gov't, as a spending item off balance with the rest of the economy.
If you want to avoid a catastrophic shock to the system when energy prices spike with no ready to deploy alternatives already going, however, it can't.
- actually it's gov't complacency, liking to protect its preferred monopolies and power is what causes the shocks. Market without gov't distortion knows about the coming change in energy by looking at prices, the futures contracts and options. All that gov't tries to do leads to higher prices, but unfortunately that's just inflation and it confuses the market, doesn't let it know IN TIME whether there is a need for more energy production and for new investments into any sort of alternative energy resources.
As to oil spiking in price - only in DOLLARS, but it's falling in price in real money, because there is less usage of oil overall in US because of the depression US is in (also caused by gov't resource misallocations and moral hazards and money printing and regulations that cause massive spikes in labor and other business costs in basic terms.)
The government sets out to do what? Gov't doesn't do what you think it does, it doesn't at all do what you think it does and it doesn't at all have the ideals that you think it should.
Also no poor nation cares about its environment, when a nation is poor, the people in it are only concerned with what they will eat tomorrow, not how to make their environment more pleasant or clean, etc. It is absolutely necessary that the nation becomes very very wealth before it can ever start thinking about such secondary things as what comes tomorrow when environment is hurt.
Also gov't is in fact doing everything it can to ruin the environment as opposed to what you believe, because all the offices set all these rules to make sure that only those companies, who pay for the privilege can get access to those resources. When BP spilled the oil in Gulf of Mexico it did so because it had gov't assurances on one hand, that any liability above 70 Million USD will be covered and on the other it couldn't drill in less deep waters due to gov't regulations. This is just another case of collective schizophrenia, designed to make it look nice for the public, get it out of the eye sight, don't let it be an eye sore, who cares about the consequences.
Gov't owns all these lands, which is wrong, because gov't can't own anything, can't price anything, can't figure out what risk is. So it allows companies to do mining, like coal mining in the so called 'public' spaces, so the company doesn't have to pay for the place, it doesn't have to buy it, it doesn't have to pay rent or royalties, and even whatever royalties it does pay are not market set (so they are definitely wrong and likely to the low side.)
However because the land is 'public' and company didn't buy it and doesn't have to sell it, it just destroys it. That's what mountain strip mining is - they destroy the mountains, drop the rocks into valleys/lakes/rivers/forests, destroy those lands, don't have to sell those lands, don't have to be responsible to a real owner about any of the damage, and you think that gov't 'sets out to save.... environment of the planet'.
Which planet do you come from that you don't know simple things? Gov't is not there to help you, it exists just to occupy the power-vacuum and politicians go there to get rich, not to do anything closely related to actual 'sacrifice' (as it used to be in USA at first).
As to administrators - that's right. We don't need gov't regulations because markets regulate much better.
If you don't buy a product and many people don't buy it, the company goes bust. If you buy a product and many other individuals do, the company makes profit and you get a nice product you like.
You think gov't is full of wise man who will do something to help you and it's not full of greedy people who are just NOT smart enough to do this in private business, but ARE smart enough to figure out how to steal it without work?
The only reason that nuclear power was introduced when it was introduced and the reason it works the way it works were government subsidies, that's true. But it's false to say that nuclear power exists because of government subsidies. People were working on this outside of government, the physics and mathematics of this were being discovered and the work was done privately.
What I am talking about is gov't stepping out of the way and removing its subsidies and allowing the market to set prices correctly thus allowing the proper credit to be allocated into the necessary businesses, who then will try to make profit by looking at all different ways energy can be generated. Gov't can always step in and subsidize something it THINKS has to be subsidized, but it doesn't know, doesn't have any idea what market would choose for and at what prices.
Everything. Federal reserve, income taxes, prohibition (because in reality income taxes and prohibition are closely related, as prior to income taxes introduction, 50% of gov't funding was coming from so called 'saloon tax' - alcohol sales.) You can thank the feminist anti-saloon movement for ensuring that gov't started with the income taxes as well, by the way.
There is no irony, this could be any forum on any network that didn't have to be specifically using the packet switch protocol designed with a gov't subsidy. It's not like there were no networks before TCP/IP was created.
With DARPA the gov't had a goal of using it for its military, and you don't know how much money is spent that is wasted and never transforms into anything. Sure, TCP/IP is a success in itself, it doesn't mean it had to be this specific protocol.
Here is a good video of Schiff giving a presentation in 2006 (and he gave a similar one in 2005, but there is no video unfortunately), this addresses the mortgage bankers and he is telling them what is going to happen and how and why. As to 'when', he always gets it wrong by about 2 years, I think he is a bit pessimistic about ability of gov't to screw things up harder by pushing the consequences of their policies just a little further with just a little more action.
I suppose somebody in government watched this video.
But the gov't shouldn't be subsidizing anything, it shouldn't be taxing/borrowing/printing and subsidizing with that money. It should leave people alone and should allow them to work it out in the market.
How would gov't know that the best course of action is these solar panels or anything for that matter? What gov't should be doing is stepping out of the way, dramatically shrinking its own spending (now 10% of US population is working for gov't, this includes contractors and military, this gov't force should be 100 times smaller).
But the point is that private sector has to figure out the way, companies must try and fail, most of them will fail, somebody will figure something and if that doesn't happen, then there is no way, and gov't spending is just a waste and another resource mis-allocation.
They really shouldn't be preventing private companies and people from trying more stuff with nuclear power, that's most likely the only true source of energy that we will be able to use once oil and coal and gas run out. Nuclear and at some point thermonuclear. Solar is great for local applications, but it will not replace the constant need for energy that only things like oil/coal/gas/nuclear/hydro can supply. At some point this will become the revelation that people don't have a choice and they have to rely on nuclear.
In USA the government usurped power from the people, created all sorts of unelected offices and departments, which created tens and hundreds of thousands of various rules and government uses these to make money by selling special privileges to avoid the rules.
In China government allows free market as long as there is no political competition and all of the investment capital and businesses came there and created all of these companies, built all of these factories and various infrastructures, and now this stuff is making Chinese wealthy enough that they are questioning the legitimacy of government and gov't doesn't like it.
Neither country as free market, but China actually has the closest thing to free market, which is by de-facto the case (all of the investments and production capacity) and the government problem itself (it's now in a dilemma, all of this productivity made the Chinese too independent and difficult to control by centralized gov't system.)
USA is nowhere near free market, China is much closer to the idea of free market, similar where USA was in 19 century and before 1913.
The death sentence is all creepy and stuff, but this doesn't mean there is no free market, just the punishment for what they can catch you on is pretty severe.
You are wrong. You are wrong de-facto, as China attracts more and more investment capital and talent (the same way USA used to back in 19 and beginning of 20th centuries) and USA is losing it.
Most of the productive capacity added in the last decade was in China, while US was losing of its own. This speaks volumes, much more than I can say here by that fact itself.
OMG, so my skill of using a keyboard then has put me into a complete untenable position, career wise. I've been using a keyboard for over 28 years now. What do you people use today, do you talk into your mouse?
This is cruel and unusual punishment. Listen, either these individuals are dangerous and shouldn't be let out of prisons, or they are 'reformed' (whatever that means) and they are let out of prisons because they are NOT dangerous.
You can't continue punishing people once they are done with their actual punishment, this is insane.
while in USA the more and more oppressive government managed to destroy free market, in China the free market is just maybe managing to destroy the totalitarian government.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh yes, because we are just so good at decisively fixing things with the power of government! That's what we do the best - fix things before they hurt us. Yeah.
IF his calculations are anywhere near correct, then it's 13,000 x 100 or 1,300,000 pipes that drill down to 5KM. It takes a few months to do that work with one pipe. He is spreading the pipes thinly, about 1 per every 60 square meters. There is also a little matter of infrastructure on top - there would have to be a city built around that area, lots of fuels will have to be used, lots of people will have to be housed clothed, it's not a simple task at all. Even if you have 10 people working on 1 pipe (if works was simultaneous), that's 13,000,000 people.
Say it takes 6 months to drill that deep with 10 people and a rig. So you can go with one crew for 6,000,000 years, but they say the eruptions happen every 300,000 years, so that's no good.
If you have 10,000 crews, that's 100,000 people, that's 20,000 holes in a year.
That's still going to take 65 years.
I wonder if people can do any of that, sure sounds like a huge project without much profit behind it.
Redundant much? You said the same thing twice! That's more than once!
- this is /. you are supposed to repeat yourself over and over and over and over. Maybe one of these days we'll come up with a way just to reference what we have said earlier by creating some form of a link that could reference the original source....... no, that would never work.
no, that's how he normally talks to girls.
no, I normally think about the right to Bear arms.
And they were all wrong, it's not capitalism that failed, it's government regulating and selling the regulating power that failed. Gov't printing money (and inflating bubbles with free money and regulations) that failed. It's gov't fake insurance that failed (anything from FDIC Freddie/Fannie and FHA to SS, Medicare and all sorts of regulations that are designed in a way that increases cost of doing business.)
The problem is constraining the government, not capitalism.
Politicians also have to be connected, it's not easy to be elected in the first place, so there is something there, they are not the dumbest of the dumb.
But they also don't end up building profitable companies and they don't end up with hundreds of millions and billions of dollars, so they are clearly not as smart as many businessmen, but they are much lazier.
TODAY no nuclear power plant would get insurance, but if gov't wasn't there providing fake insurance (and all insurance that gov't provides is fake, it only relies on money printing, not on any actual insurance, as in interest bearing assets). If gov't is not subsidizing an activity, the price for activity goes down due to increase of competition, because subsidies imply various regulations that prevent competition.
If nuclear power was too expensive today, it would only mean one thing: the pricing structure of nuclear power is not worth the effort. But you don't know any of this, because the market is completely distorted by the government.
No, the person doesn't have to be smarter to be able to profit massively in a system that is basically designed to be corrupt.
The people who are in government are mostly massively incompetent in almost anything, but they are still competent at selling power, and in reality that's a product that's EASY TO SELL. They don't have to go and sell it :) Lobbyists come to them with the money, it's hard not to make massive amounts of money even if you are as dumb as a bush.
Hold on, hold on, that insurance shouldn't be there subsidized by any government. The cost of investment must include the cost of insurance, and you are wrong thinking that a private entity cannot get into that.
There are plenty of things that are even MORE expensive than nuclear power plants that are done privately. The cost of building a new microchip fabrication facility is at least in the same ballpark.
At least with gov't out of the picture, there would have been adequate insurance bought (which is also the same moral hazard of fake gov't insurance that BP fell into with the 70million USD liability cap and the banks with all the mortgage guarantees and home owners with all those initially cheap, variable rate mortgages and the SS ponzi scheme and Medicare and wars, all of these are gov't guaranteed and all of these are failures.)
I don't have to pretend, that's what free market DID do before intervention by government, that really started in 1913.
Free market DID create all sorts of things and it DID provide all sorts of research. From airplanes, to cars, to telephones (so the phone infrastructure), and electrical power plants (and that infrastructure) and roads and rail roads as well, which were destroyed during the ridiculous 'new deal'.
The transistor is all pure research, but it was useful and it was done privately. Same with thousands of other things, from chemicals to electronics to medicines and metallurgy and tools and even rockets. Even physics and math and chemistry and medicine models, not just practice, but theory. Gov't was in fact tiny before it got itself the power to print money and collect taxes that were not proportionate to people's spending, but instead proportionate to people's earnings, which threw gov't, as a spending item off balance with the rest of the economy.
Roads are done privately all the time, I like driving on private roads, they are never closed and they are always better than public. The Internet's precursor were really phones, and the infrastructure there was private UNTIL gov't stepped in and destroyed it and created one giant monopoly destroying thousands of competitors in the process.
If you want to avoid a catastrophic shock to the system when energy prices spike with no ready to deploy alternatives already going, however, it can't.
- actually it's gov't complacency, liking to protect its preferred monopolies and power is what causes the shocks. Market without gov't distortion knows about the coming change in energy by looking at prices, the futures contracts and options. All that gov't tries to do leads to higher prices, but unfortunately that's just inflation and it confuses the market, doesn't let it know IN TIME whether there is a need for more energy production and for new investments into any sort of alternative energy resources.
There WILL be a shock and it is going to be caused by the government that can't even understand simple arithmetic.
As to oil spiking in price - only in DOLLARS, but it's falling in price in real money, because there is less usage of oil overall in US because of the depression US is in (also caused by gov't resource misallocations and moral hazards and money printing and regulations that cause massive spikes in labor and other business costs in basic terms.)
The government sets out to do what? Gov't doesn't do what you think it does, it doesn't at all do what you think it does and it doesn't at all have the ideals that you think it should.
Also no poor nation cares about its environment, when a nation is poor, the people in it are only concerned with what they will eat tomorrow, not how to make their environment more pleasant or clean, etc. It is absolutely necessary that the nation becomes very very wealth before it can ever start thinking about such secondary things as what comes tomorrow when environment is hurt.
Also gov't is in fact doing everything it can to ruin the environment as opposed to what you believe, because all the offices set all these rules to make sure that only those companies, who pay for the privilege can get access to those resources. When BP spilled the oil in Gulf of Mexico it did so because it had gov't assurances on one hand, that any liability above 70 Million USD will be covered and on the other it couldn't drill in less deep waters due to gov't regulations. This is just another case of collective schizophrenia, designed to make it look nice for the public, get it out of the eye sight, don't let it be an eye sore, who cares about the consequences.
Gov't owns all these lands, which is wrong, because gov't can't own anything, can't price anything, can't figure out what risk is. So it allows companies to do mining, like coal mining in the so called 'public' spaces, so the company doesn't have to pay for the place, it doesn't have to buy it, it doesn't have to pay rent or royalties, and even whatever royalties it does pay are not market set (so they are definitely wrong and likely to the low side.)
However because the land is 'public' and company didn't buy it and doesn't have to sell it, it just destroys it. That's what mountain strip mining is - they destroy the mountains, drop the rocks into valleys/lakes/rivers/forests, destroy those lands, don't have to sell those lands, don't have to be responsible to a real owner about any of the damage, and you think that gov't 'sets out to save .... environment of the planet'.
Which planet do you come from that you don't know simple things? Gov't is not there to help you, it exists just to occupy the power-vacuum and politicians go there to get rich, not to do anything closely related to actual 'sacrifice' (as it used to be in USA at first).
As to administrators - that's right. We don't need gov't regulations because markets regulate much better.
If you don't buy a product and many people don't buy it, the company goes bust. If you buy a product and many other individuals do, the company makes profit and you get a nice product you like.
You think gov't is full of wise man who will do something to help you and it's not full of greedy people who are just NOT smart enough to do this in private business, but ARE smart enough to figure out how to steal it without work?
How old are you?
The only reason that nuclear power was introduced when it was introduced and the reason it works the way it works were government subsidies, that's true. But it's false to say that nuclear power exists because of government subsidies. People were working on this outside of government, the physics and mathematics of this were being discovered and the work was done privately.
What I am talking about is gov't stepping out of the way and removing its subsidies and allowing the market to set prices correctly thus allowing the proper credit to be allocated into the necessary businesses, who then will try to make profit by looking at all different ways energy can be generated. Gov't can always step in and subsidize something it THINKS has to be subsidized, but it doesn't know, doesn't have any idea what market would choose for and at what prices.
I suppose you don't believe in arithmetic then?
Everything. Federal reserve, income taxes, prohibition (because in reality income taxes and prohibition are closely related, as prior to income taxes introduction, 50% of gov't funding was coming from so called 'saloon tax' - alcohol sales.) You can thank the feminist anti-saloon movement for ensuring that gov't started with the income taxes as well, by the way.
There is no irony, this could be any forum on any network that didn't have to be specifically using the packet switch protocol designed with a gov't subsidy. It's not like there were no networks before TCP/IP was created.
With DARPA the gov't had a goal of using it for its military, and you don't know how much money is spent that is wasted and never transforms into anything. Sure, TCP/IP is a success in itself, it doesn't mean it had to be this specific protocol.
Actually Apple products cost a kidney.
Here is a good video of Schiff giving a presentation in 2006 (and he gave a similar one in 2005, but there is no video unfortunately), this addresses the mortgage bankers and he is telling them what is going to happen and how and why. As to 'when', he always gets it wrong by about 2 years, I think he is a bit pessimistic about ability of gov't to screw things up harder by pushing the consequences of their policies just a little further with just a little more action.
I suppose somebody in government watched this video.
But the gov't shouldn't be subsidizing anything, it shouldn't be taxing/borrowing/printing and subsidizing with that money. It should leave people alone and should allow them to work it out in the market.
How would gov't know that the best course of action is these solar panels or anything for that matter? What gov't should be doing is stepping out of the way, dramatically shrinking its own spending (now 10% of US population is working for gov't, this includes contractors and military, this gov't force should be 100 times smaller).
But the point is that private sector has to figure out the way, companies must try and fail, most of them will fail, somebody will figure something and if that doesn't happen, then there is no way, and gov't spending is just a waste and another resource mis-allocation.
They really shouldn't be preventing private companies and people from trying more stuff with nuclear power, that's most likely the only true source of energy that we will be able to use once oil and coal and gas run out. Nuclear and at some point thermonuclear. Solar is great for local applications, but it will not replace the constant need for energy that only things like oil/coal/gas/nuclear/hydro can supply. At some point this will become the revelation that people don't have a choice and they have to rely on nuclear.
As I said many times - I want my nuclear car.
In USA the government usurped power from the people, created all sorts of unelected offices and departments, which created tens and hundreds of thousands of various rules and government uses these to make money by selling special privileges to avoid the rules.
In China government allows free market as long as there is no political competition and all of the investment capital and businesses came there and created all of these companies, built all of these factories and various infrastructures, and now this stuff is making Chinese wealthy enough that they are questioning the legitimacy of government and gov't doesn't like it.
Neither country as free market, but China actually has the closest thing to free market, which is by de-facto the case (all of the investments and production capacity) and the government problem itself (it's now in a dilemma, all of this productivity made the Chinese too independent and difficult to control by centralized gov't system.)
USA is nowhere near free market, China is much closer to the idea of free market, similar where USA was in 19 century and before 1913.
The death sentence is all creepy and stuff, but this doesn't mean there is no free market, just the punishment for what they can catch you on is pretty severe.
You are wrong. You are wrong de-facto, as China attracts more and more investment capital and talent (the same way USA used to back in 19 and beginning of 20th centuries) and USA is losing it.
Most of the productive capacity added in the last decade was in China, while US was losing of its own. This speaks volumes, much more than I can say here by that fact itself.
I don't believe that you are a human, you are an AI troll.
That's right, you all heard me right here, on /. This is not a rumor, this is true. Please make sure everybody knows.
--
Do I win the Internets?
OMG, so my skill of using a keyboard then has put me into a complete untenable position, career wise. I've been using a keyboard for over 28 years now. What do you people use today, do you talk into your mouse?
This is cruel and unusual punishment. Listen, either these individuals are dangerous and shouldn't be let out of prisons, or they are 'reformed' (whatever that means) and they are let out of prisons because they are NOT dangerous.
You can't continue punishing people once they are done with their actual punishment, this is insane.
while in USA the more and more oppressive government managed to destroy free market, in China the free market is just maybe managing to destroy the totalitarian government.