Thanks for making my point more explicit. Sadly, I think there are quite a few people who are totally comfortable with this as long as the target is a class of people they despise (religious conservatives, in this case; and yes, I'm aware that this class has no shortage of authoritarian fantasies of its own).
Sure thing... And yes, both sides have those fantasies, which is sad...
As a side note, I think the "or else what" question is rather fair. We have rules about not robbing banks, as an example, and the "or else what" answer is: "Or else if we catch you we'll put you in prison for a long time".
The problem with vaccines is that even if you threaten to put me in prison, that doesn't solve your actual concern about infections, unless of course you plan to start strapping people to tables and forceably injecting them. And if you do that, then what is the point of prison?
Frankly, I think anyone who supports that viewpoint is rather sad.
Simply: banishment. You refuse to live by the rules of polite society, and your presence is a risk to that society, then you should be banished.
To where, the moon?
Does American Citizenship no longer mean anything? Do other nations have to take me? The world no longer has empty land to send people to, like it once did (Australia, for example).
Or would you just execute anyone who doesn't get injected?
If you don't see how evil that idea is, you're either a kid who hasn't grown up yet, or you have learned nothing from history and will be very sorry some day if you ever get your way.
such as installing on every residential structure in the US. that alone with panels would create more energy than the entire planet uses. add in commercial and you double it. Just from installing in the US.
Citation needed... Frankly, I think you're smoking something, so prove it...
No, it is completely true, your link doesn't even respond to what I said.
I said that the percentage of INCOME that Americans pay to the government has never been higher, and you responded with a chart comparing gross tax receipts to GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT, which is not people's income.
The total percentage of people's income that goes to the government is higher today than at any point in US history.
This is why vaccines should be 100% mandatory unless there is a valid medical reason.
Do you have any idea how evil that idea really is?
No, of course you don't, or you likely wouldn't have said it.
So what you're REALLY saying is that you support the Government going door to door, strapping people down against their will, and injecting stuff into their bodies.
Doesn't sound as noble when you put it that way, does it?
It's true for houses, but not necessarily true for poorly insulated huts made of sticks, paper, and single-pane windows.
Sigh...
Why I'm even bothering to respond to an AC, I don't know, but anyway...
Putting aside how wrong your comment really is, the only houses that have enough roof area to cover in solar and provide for 100% of their energy needs are either really expensive specially designed houses that are not normal, or houses that live in climates that don't see large swings in temp.
I live in Texas, it is 100+ in the summer and 30ish in the Winter, we use a lot of heat and a lot of AC.
I don't have a house made up sticks, paper, and single-pane windows, even if you think the snark is funny.
The amount of energy that a house of 5 people that needs to be heated and cooled in Texas exceeds the roof space of that house.
It would be nearly impossible, at any price, to make my house use 2/3 less power. Even if you doubled the price of the house, you would have trouble doing that.
Ah, I see the problem. You have no idea what taxes are for or how they work.
No, you don't understand at all...
The post I was responding to said "tax the fuck out of the wealthy so they can't afford to be charitable".
In reply to that post, I was 100% correct. If you take all the money from the wealthy, then you only have poor people left. Government doesn't create an economy or jobs, it just spends other people's money to the poor house.
Looking around the world, every nation that thinks they can take the wealthy's money and hand it out is poor.
Meh, I see that often, but you have to take into account the whole picture, not just that.
Almost no one paid that, there were far more exemptions and write-offs back then. For example, you used to be able to deduct your interest payments on a car and credits cards, but you can't anymore.
The reality is that the percentage of income that Americans pay to the government has never been higher than it is today.
For what? The raw panels? The installed cost? The sellable cost?
Since you quote it in kWh, I would have to assume you mean the sellable cost.
Maybe it will get there, but it needs to drop an order of magnitude or more to get there, it is way far away from that happening.
Wind is already as low as 3.65c per Kwh in places.
Where? Does that price include any tax breaks or other subsidies? It is closer to double that price in Texas and we have more wind power than any other US state.
Solar panels are dropping in price about 40% per annum, that's is extremely fast and invalidates your claim that the price won't drop fast enough
That can't keep up, and there are external reasons besides the cost of making panels that it has been dropping. It also is the cost of raw panels, not the cost of installation.
Even if the panels were free, it largely doesn't matter. The cost to install solar has little to do with the cost of panels, those are already cheap.
Also the race is on across the world to create better cheaper batteries, the best solutions use harmless abundant cheap recyclable chemicals.
Yea, it has been that way for a long time... call me when it happens...
This could all be solved tomorrow if we invented cold fusion as well, but until that happens, we shouldn't count on it.
There are other math problems that you miss. Even if the entire world-wide production of cars were instantly changed to EVs, it would still take 27 years to replace all the cars in the world with an EV.
Since that ISN'T going to happen, we'll still be driving hundreds of millions of gas cars in 2,100.
I'm totally on board with the problem, but the solutions would require far more than humanity is actually willing to do.
As a side note, I agree with your overall post, but wanted to quote this.
Sadly, I think our future IS bleak, because people in general are stupid and don't want to learn.
I used to think CO2 wasn't a problem, but I've done reading and learning and I see the issues. What is worse, I see what would have to be done to do anything about them, and frankly, I don't think any of it is going to happen.
nuclear will only get more expensive whilst renewables and storage costs continue to plummet.
It is worth looking at WHY nuclear is expensive... it shouldn't be, but it is, and I suspect lots of reasons have nothing to do with the cost to physically build a reactor.
As a side note, while it is true that renewables and storage costs do continue to drop, they won't drop fast enough to make a difference in the outcome of climate change.
The "wind and solar will solve everything crowd" has a major math problem, one they don't want to admit or address.
Consider that if you cover the roof of a typical house in solar panels, they will generate more energy than what is used by that house.
There are several things wrong with that statement.
First, that isn't true of all houses. I've had my house looked at, covering my roof would provide only 1/3 of my total energy use, and that is taking into account multiple energy efficient improvements that I've made.
Second, houses do NOT use the majority of power. They actually are a modest user of power. Manufacturing and industrial uses use far more power.
No, you have not. The cost is the price you pay at the spot market where you buy that power. Why do you care how the producer comes to that cost?
Because much of wind and solar isn't a "free market". Texas for example, is the leading producer of Wind in the US. Why is that? It is because they are guaranteed a market, they get government dollars for selling their power at any price, which is why at night, they more or less give that power away. They are guaranteed first sale and are paid for being there.
That says German average price is 35 cents per kWh.
Do you dispute that number being the average across Germany?
The US number given is 12 cents, and that is accurate for the average, but I pay much less, just over 7 cents in Texas. That doesn't make the 12 cent number wrong, just that it isn't MY number.
Maybe your number is lower, but I suspect that 35 cents is correct as a national average in Germany.
Buchanan argues citing F.H. Hinsley, John Lukacs, and Alan Clark, Hitler's peace offers to Britain in the summer of 1940 were real, and Churchill was wrong to refuse them.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, you should really stand up, the point wooshed over your head...
I'd love to help you, but you really need more help than can be had here.
Who's to say there isn't a cupcake in orbit around Pluto? I'm not saying there is, but the question has to be answered.
A cupcake in orbit around Pluto doesn't affect me, that's the difference.
You would think that, wouldn't you?
Shame you never lived in the USSR where 100% of the jobs were created by the government, since that was such a paradise...
Or I guess you could go visit Cuba today and see how nice that place is...
It is a shame that our education system is so poor, as to produce people like you.
Thanks for making my point more explicit. Sadly, I think there are quite a few people who are totally comfortable with this as long as the target is a class of people they despise (religious conservatives, in this case; and yes, I'm aware that this class has no shortage of authoritarian fantasies of its own).
Sure thing... And yes, both sides have those fantasies, which is sad...
As a side note, I think the "or else what" question is rather fair. We have rules about not robbing banks, as an example, and the "or else what" answer is: "Or else if we catch you we'll put you in prison for a long time".
The problem with vaccines is that even if you threaten to put me in prison, that doesn't solve your actual concern about infections, unless of course you plan to start strapping people to tables and forceably injecting them. And if you do that, then what is the point of prison?
Frankly, I think anyone who supports that viewpoint is rather sad.
Simply: banishment. You refuse to live by the rules of polite society, and your presence is a risk to that society, then you should be banished.
To where, the moon?
Does American Citizenship no longer mean anything? Do other nations have to take me? The world no longer has empty land to send people to, like it once did (Australia, for example).
Or would you just execute anyone who doesn't get injected?
If you don't see how evil that idea is, you're either a kid who hasn't grown up yet, or you have learned nothing from history and will be very sorry some day if you ever get your way.
This isnt pie in the sky dreaming
Yes it is... If it were that simple, we'd do it.
such as installing on every residential structure in the US. that alone with panels would create more energy than the entire planet uses. add in commercial and you double it. Just from installing in the US.
Citation needed... Frankly, I think you're smoking something, so prove it...
Which means if you refuse to get vaccinated and then help to spread disease you should be liable for that. Like criminally liable.
Wow, I didn't know the son of Hitler was alive and well...
You really are a fool, you know that? No, of course you don't, fools rarely do.
Your ideas are evil, thankfully saner people are in charge.
Or here's a more general objection: should adults also be required to be vaccinated against HPV?
Another point is, lets say he says the answer is yes...
Any time you say something is "required", you then also have to answer the question, "or else what?"
Lets say you decree that I must be vaccinated. Ok, now I refuse, so now what?
Do you suggest that government teams go around person to person and hold people down against a table and inject them against their will?
I don't know about you, but frankly, that is worse than anything nature might throw my way, that is evil, pure and simple.
No, it is completely true, your link doesn't even respond to what I said.
I said that the percentage of INCOME that Americans pay to the government has never been higher, and you responded with a chart comparing gross tax receipts to GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT, which is not people's income.
The total percentage of people's income that goes to the government is higher today than at any point in US history.
This is why vaccines should be 100% mandatory unless there is a valid medical reason.
Do you have any idea how evil that idea really is?
No, of course you don't, or you likely wouldn't have said it.
So what you're REALLY saying is that you support the Government going door to door, strapping people down against their will, and injecting stuff into their bodies.
Doesn't sound as noble when you put it that way, does it?
It's true for houses, but not necessarily true for poorly insulated huts made of sticks, paper, and single-pane windows.
Sigh...
Why I'm even bothering to respond to an AC, I don't know, but anyway...
Putting aside how wrong your comment really is, the only houses that have enough roof area to cover in solar and provide for 100% of their energy needs are either really expensive specially designed houses that are not normal, or houses that live in climates that don't see large swings in temp.
I live in Texas, it is 100+ in the summer and 30ish in the Winter, we use a lot of heat and a lot of AC.
I don't have a house made up sticks, paper, and single-pane windows, even if you think the snark is funny.
The amount of energy that a house of 5 people that needs to be heated and cooled in Texas exceeds the roof space of that house.
It would be nearly impossible, at any price, to make my house use 2/3 less power. Even if you doubled the price of the house, you would have trouble doing that.
Ah, I see the problem. You have no idea what taxes are for or how they work.
No, you don't understand at all...
The post I was responding to said "tax the fuck out of the wealthy so they can't afford to be charitable".
In reply to that post, I was 100% correct. If you take all the money from the wealthy, then you only have poor people left. Government doesn't create an economy or jobs, it just spends other people's money to the poor house.
Looking around the world, every nation that thinks they can take the wealthy's money and hand it out is poor.
Natural gas is fine, but it isn't a long term solution, it still puts out too much CO2.
(at one point the top bracket was taxed at 91%)
Meh, I see that often, but you have to take into account the whole picture, not just that.
Almost no one paid that, there were far more exemptions and write-offs back then. For example, you used to be able to deduct your interest payments on a car and credits cards, but you can't anymore.
The reality is that the percentage of income that Americans pay to the government has never been higher than it is today.
Solar is expected to fall as low as 1c per kWh
For what? The raw panels? The installed cost? The sellable cost?
Since you quote it in kWh, I would have to assume you mean the sellable cost.
Maybe it will get there, but it needs to drop an order of magnitude or more to get there, it is way far away from that happening.
Wind is already as low as 3.65c per Kwh in places.
Where? Does that price include any tax breaks or other subsidies? It is closer to double that price in Texas and we have more wind power than any other US state.
Solar panels are dropping in price about 40% per annum, that's is extremely fast and invalidates your claim that the price won't drop fast enough
That can't keep up, and there are external reasons besides the cost of making panels that it has been dropping. It also is the cost of raw panels, not the cost of installation.
Even if the panels were free, it largely doesn't matter. The cost to install solar has little to do with the cost of panels, those are already cheap.
Also the race is on across the world to create better cheaper batteries, the best solutions use harmless abundant cheap recyclable chemicals.
Yea, it has been that way for a long time... call me when it happens...
This could all be solved tomorrow if we invented cold fusion as well, but until that happens, we shouldn't count on it.
There are other math problems that you miss. Even if the entire world-wide production of cars were instantly changed to EVs, it would still take 27 years to replace all the cars in the world with an EV.
Since that ISN'T going to happen, we'll still be driving hundreds of millions of gas cars in 2,100.
I'm totally on board with the problem, but the solutions would require far more than humanity is actually willing to do.
Our future can be bleak if we do too much coal.
As a side note, I agree with your overall post, but wanted to quote this.
Sadly, I think our future IS bleak, because people in general are stupid and don't want to learn.
I used to think CO2 wasn't a problem, but I've done reading and learning and I see the issues. What is worse, I see what would have to be done to do anything about them, and frankly, I don't think any of it is going to happen.
We're so screwed, it is sad...
nuclear will only get more expensive whilst renewables and storage costs continue to plummet.
It is worth looking at WHY nuclear is expensive... it shouldn't be, but it is, and I suspect lots of reasons have nothing to do with the cost to physically build a reactor.
As a side note, while it is true that renewables and storage costs do continue to drop, they won't drop fast enough to make a difference in the outcome of climate change.
The "wind and solar will solve everything crowd" has a major math problem, one they don't want to admit or address.
Consider that if you cover the roof of a typical house in solar panels, they will generate more energy than what is used by that house.
There are several things wrong with that statement.
First, that isn't true of all houses. I've had my house looked at, covering my roof would provide only 1/3 of my total energy use, and that is taking into account multiple energy efficient improvements that I've made.
Second, houses do NOT use the majority of power. They actually are a modest user of power. Manufacturing and industrial uses use far more power.
No, we can't replace coal with nuclear because cooling resouces are already strained with coal.
Then what would you replace coal with?
Because it isn't going to be wind and solar...
You have nuclear... or you have more coal... or perhaps some natural gas/oil tossed in there for good fun...
No, you have not. The cost is the price you pay at the spot market where you buy that power. Why do you care how the producer comes to that cost?
Because much of wind and solar isn't a "free market". Texas for example, is the leading producer of Wind in the US. Why is that? It is because they are guaranteed a market, they get government dollars for selling their power at any price, which is why at night, they more or less give that power away. They are guaranteed first sale and are paid for being there.
It is not a free and open market.
https://www.ovoenergy.com/guid...
That says German average price is 35 cents per kWh.
Do you dispute that number being the average across Germany?
The US number given is 12 cents, and that is accurate for the average, but I pay much less, just over 7 cents in Texas. That doesn't make the 12 cent number wrong, just that it isn't MY number.
Maybe your number is lower, but I suspect that 35 cents is correct as a national average in Germany.
Wind and solar ARE cheap. That's why they're bing built so many places.
No, they aren't...
They "appear cheap" because of government tax subsidies, but otherwise they make no financial sense whatsoever.
Tax the fuck out of the wealthy so they can't afford to be charitable and it won't even be needed.
Sure, but that has been done.... did you not learn anything from history?
The USSR is a perfect example of what happens when you take all wealth from people and give it to the state.
If I may make a suggestion...
http://www.amazon.com/Diplomac...
Henry Kissinger wrote a book called Diplomacy that has a decently large section on WWII, and you might find another point of view there.
Another book:
http://www.amazon.com/Churchil...
Buchanan argues citing F.H. Hinsley, John Lukacs, and Alan Clark, Hitler's peace offers to Britain in the summer of 1940 were real, and Churchill was wrong to refuse them.
The consumer end of computers is moving away from MS Windows, towards Android and iOS.
Yea, but that really isn't happening...
Don't confuse the adoption of large numbers of Android and iOS devices with the removal of Windows devices.
The former can be added without removing the latter.
Now, if people get laptops and desktops with Android and iOS, that would be different, but that isn't happening.