The markedly different rates in arrests, deaths, and criminal assaults between Tea Party events and OWS events is a matter of public record and not up for debate. The fact that this reflects poorly on the character of your typical OWS participant is an uncomfortably obvious inference. You can cry about 'Ad Homs', and tell me to 'shut the hell up', but that doesn't change the history of the two camps. It's funny how leftists always want right wingers to shut up, and how right-wingers always want the leftists to keep talking (and dig their hole deeper.)
This tendency also allows one to make additional obvious inferences that reflect poorly on leftists such as yourself.
Yeah, all those weapons, and not a single rape, murder, or arrest, unlike the 'occupy' protests.
It's kind of interesting, really- to an American with any sort of historical sense and personal sense of responsibility, carrying a firearm means taking responsibility for your own safety (vs waiting for the cops), for the safety of your family (vs waiting for the cops), and for the safe handling of said fire arm.
As compared to the OWS mobs, who found themselves in a different spot than in life than they originally planned. Those people, instead of dealing with reality as it was, decided to go demand other people give them what they want (a job fitting what they think their station in life is.)
There's a pretty stark contrast: 1) Tea Party- leave us alone, spend government funds wisely, and we'll take care of the rest. 2) OWS- We demand you fix all our problems for us! This isn't fair!
The presence of guns doesn't represent a threat of impending violence, but a deep sense of personal responsibility that is clearly utterly absent in OWS camps. One might observe that the deep sense of personal responsibility is both an alien concept to the OWS's, and the cause of their personal problems.
Where did you grow up, such that you're utterly unaware of local Chambers of Commerce that are clearly non-governmental?
Seriously, they're in every town around here, and they're always running some booth at a fair or some charity event.
It's been well known to me, for years, that the local chamber of commerce is comprised of local business owners. I'm honestly not sure how anyone could be confused about the non-governmental status of any level of CoC.
That'll be the easiest way until the first few guys are able to deny investigators access to their computer. After that law enforcement folks will start drilling locks and accessing case insides to bypass the switches. I suppose with a combination of gps & acelleration sensors, you could eventually up the game until they have to ex-EOD guys with advanced computer skills to secure access to a running computer.
There's probably money to be made building a hard-drive slot internal device that will do all this for you.
You'd need a device that could maybe short the power supply to cause the fuse to blow under certain movement conditions, and then a running process that would shutdown the computer if this device was disconnected.
I was going to post that, but then you beat me to the punch.
The final 'trick' to such a computer would be some sort of acceleration sensor that would wipe the drive if the computer was moved, or some mechanical device that fries it to the same effect- for example, unloading the feet of the case closes a circuit, powering up a neon sign transformer that lights up a pile of iron and aluminum dust- aka thermite- on top of the hard drive.
The acceleration sensor is a safer bet, because the cops will probably be offended if the computer they're carrying starts spewing molten metal.
Driving up to the local DEA office, walking in with the device, and waving it around to the receptionist.
Demand to talk to the office accounts payable guy, and tell them that you charge the standard mileage rate for toting around government property, and s/he should come outside and mark the mileage on the car.
Then bill the feds $0.44 cents a mile for every mile you drive with it on.
I don't think you'd ever collect, but it sounds like a fun thing to do- you could even mess with them in small claims court after a while.
People can look at the photos, watch the videos, and see what the aftermath of one of these disasters is, and then listen to the Greek chorus of "It's the media, it's the liberals, nuclear power is the safest......" and on and on and on.
It took a natural disaster that killed 10,000+ people in minutes to overwhelm the engineered safeguards of the crappiest style of nuclear reactor built in non-soviet countries.
I'm waiting for your tears over those 10,000 people who died immediately. Do you think maybe they'd trade a few extra years for some radiation dose?
If you want to avoid bad human decisions, maybe we should forbid GE from building any more of their BWR's without a real containment building- you know, the 2+ million cubic feet buildings with 3' of concrete and enough steel rebar to make a six inch shell.
Past that, we can demand that emergency generators can be built in diverse locations, and sufficiently high seawalls be built.
You seem somewhat pro-nuke, so I'm not really sure what your point is. I am rather familiar with a 1980's era nuclear facility that's implemented tons of lessons from three mile island (requiring millions of dollars in extra equipment), and these P.O.S. GE Mark I's predate that event.
At least two of those units were due to close within the year. What kind of expense is justified when the units will be decommissioned within a short time frame? Do you spend a unit's entire profits for a year to make a design improvement that will make it safer for a fairly unlikely scenario, when the unit will be shut down before that year is up?
Do you shutter the unit early as soon as you decide it's not as perfectly safe as you like? Then what do you replace that electricity with? Coal? Another nuke plant?
It's easy to come along after a disaster and say 'You should have known! You should have done better!"
And maybe they reasonably could have- but you've never been faced with the question of weighing risks vs costs vs (the short) remaining life of these units. You don't have to come up with hundreds of megawatts of replacement electricity on an island nation if you decide to shutter it early. You're not the one who has to go to the (japanese equivalent of) the public utility commission and explain why you want to raise the rates to build millions of dollars (yen?) in improvements to a plant that shuts down in just a few short years.
Alternately, you don't have to visit that same PUC and explain that you're going to shut down the plant because, despite it's decades long history, it's unsafe, and you need a rate increase to throw up a carbon-burning coal plant until you can get a safer nuke plant online.
In essence, you're second guessing decisions made over 40 years ago, in the infancy of commercial nuclear power, by executives long dead. You're second guessing the decisions of current executives who had an old, not completely safe set of units, due for closure within 2011.
You presume that all knowledge we currently have was always available, and you assume infinite financial and electrical resources were available to address the intrinsic safety of plants that had operated successfully for decades. How many of these assumptions do you now stand by?
Stop the fear mongering. The protesters simply want to return to sanity.
That's what they want, sure- it's just that these folks have a poor definition of what 'sanity' is. With this crowd, getting what they want would be akin to David Letterman making big changes to brain surgery to 'return to sanity.' It is, to be gentle, not their area of expertise, as you so clearly illustrate as follows:
Other main concerns are the inefficient privatized health-care and education system. Changing to a european style public system would solve this.
You haven't been paying attention to the very significant European financial problems that have been going on of late.
To quote a famous European, "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."
That's what's happening now. Your otherwise righteous anger at the crony corporatism we've seen in the US won't lead to money being magically generated to fund all that OWS folks demand.
The Occupy Wall St effort was a 1-day affair - it happened, everyone went home, they could be safely ignored. Much harder to ignore is thousands of people protesting every single day from 7 AM to 7 PM.
The trouble is, these protesters don't have any real problems, so they're only motivated by a desire to meet a certain ideological criteria that's popular in certain circles. This makes them look 'hip', 'daring', 'edgy', 'compassionate', etc to their target audience- their circle of like minded friends and internet allies. When enough effort has been expended to accomplish that, everyone goes home and plays X-box.
So this is what's actually needed, if you want to really get things going in New York and elsewhere: 1. Wait for Washington to force unemployment benefits to run out, as the Republicans seem intent on doing.
At that point, most rational folks redouble their efforts to go out and find a job, or some way to be of value to their fellow citizens, such that they get paid. Their life might get harder, I admit that. There might be a few folks who would prefer to go the European route- that is, riot and obstruct what economic activity continues, on the mistaken belief that there's no limit to the size of the dependent class in society.
2. Offer free food and shelter to anyone coming to New York to protest at Wall St (or Washington DC to protest at the Mall or the Pentagon).
Who's going to pay for that? Anyone with sufficient funds would be better off using that money to further their own interests, not gather a bunch of smelly malcontents on the off hope of getting some policy changed.
3. Wait for the crowd of malcontented, malnourished, homeless unemployed people to show up. Give them signs, demands, chants etc to start off with.
Ah, here's the meat of the matter: Your fantasy that you possess the knowledge necessary to lead the 'malcontented, malnourish, homeless unemployed' people into some glorious new future society. Hey, when I was a kid, I had a hero fantasy or two as well. Then I realized that I really needed to straighten out my self first, improve my position in life, and that other folks need to do the same.
The real people who would compose the unwashed masses you would lead to 'victory over wallstreet' all have things they can do to improve their lot in life- and those people will be doing those things, not drifting towards NYC, because they know what's gonna put food on their table.
This is why all the protestors (sometimes violent) that show up at these events are all middle class or better kids who know where their next meal is coming from, and figure mommy will bail them out if they get arrested for some punk stunt. They figure they're heroes for the poor and downtrodden by going to these protests. If they really wanted to help, they'd teach the values, ethics, and philosophies that allowed their parents to succeed to chronically poor communities.
I know the economy is in the shitter right now, and the fortunes of an individual will vary with their surroundings. Long term, however, one's fate is in their hands- not the hands of some kid with a hero fantasy.
'Full Retail Price' in the medical world is often less than you would imagine. Hospitals routinely offer a 30% or better discount for paying in cash. Many medical establishments are likely the same way, for the same reason- dealing with insurance companies, medicare, or the VA requires a great deal of administrative overhead.
Yes, I've asked a few times. The next few times you find yourself in the business office of a medical establishment, ask them what the cash discount is. You might be surprised at what the typical response is.
Why are you distressed? Offended, sure, but distressed? It's a pathetic, desperate attack by someone who knows the winds are shifting away from his faulty ideals.
Think. Okay. I think using 'Gun Deaths' to make the point you're trying to make is statistical chicancery. You should subtract suicides from those numbers. Only the elderly and infirm need a gun to kill themselves- everyone else finds a different method if required. Then you should subtract self defense & home invasion shootings, because those aren't detrimental to society.
What's left might be a reasonable aproximation of gun-based violent crimes. Oh, and then you should compare the overall violent crime rates in those states you cited.
Wealthier populations consume more but breed less. Paradoxically, then, one interested in saving the earth should consider promoting economic growth.
The second angle for that is being 'green' is something only wealthy, advanced, economies can afford. I suppose one could argue that a family of 12 dirt farmers in sub-Saharan Africa is more 'green' than a family of four in America- but the economies between the two extremes are typically the worst, and that's where a lot of the world is situated.
Increasing the wealth of all those nations in between would reduce their population growth and allow them the money to pursue 'green' technology.
It's interesting that cooperation and yielding to others is considered "un-American" by at least some Americans. That simple statements speaks volumes about the dire straights that the United States is in.
You were trolled. That simple statement speaks volumes about your prejudices against the United States, and your willingness to bite into anything that fits them.
Why would anyone pay more for labor than they had to? You, or anyone else? Adding a union to the mix doesn't make the labor of the lawn-mowing boy worth more- it simply extorts a higher price. And if the homeowner mows it himself, doesn't that deprive the neighborhood boys of any money at all?
How is that an improvement over some kid getting paid $20 ?
If the neighborhood kid is 'underpaid', as you claim, why does he do it in the first place? Why mow lawns at all if you're not happy with how you're getting paid? If he acts voluntarily, and is paid voluntarily, both the homeowner and the lawn-mowing boy must think they benefit from the transaction.
Who are you to judge otherwise?
Aside from that, if you don't want to be replaced by someone who can be up to the task in no time, doesn't it behoove you, as a person, to develop skills that are rarer, in demand, and hence worth more?
I'd pay just about anyone with a pulse to mow my lawn, because if he screws it up, you won't be able to tell in two weeks. On the other hand, I want a competent plumber- and I'll pay for one- because leaky pipes have much higher consequences.
I was asking about one paying more than they have to for a particular good or service. I don't particularly care about Belgium's practice's, I care about what one does voluntarily with their money when one is lecturing other people what to do with theirs.
Show me the stone tablets where this is inscribed. Why should all the money go to shareholders or in bonuses to people who are already very well off ? Why can't a company offer awesome wages and benefits to all its employees when it can afford it like Apple clearly can ? This reality is what you make it.
Show me yourself, paying more than you have to, for a good or service, because you want them to earn a living wage. Then show me you doing that day in and day out. Neighborhood kid will mow your lawn for $20. Landscaping service will do the exact same job for $50. Who are you going to hire? Your buddy's daughter will watch your kids for $5 an hour and be happy about it. The local college girl wants $15 an hour. Both are sufficient for the job. Who are you going to hire?
Make sure you put your money where your mouth is, before you start demanding that other people put their money where your mouth is.
But weren't last few generations of reactors also supposed to be literally failsafe? Never in a thousand years would we see the types of accidents we've had five or so of in the last forty years? We were assured that by people who literally swore on their childrens' lives that it would be perfectly safe.
You might notice that the Fukishima Daichi plants that are in trouble are GE Mark I designs. That's mark 1. As in the first designs. Do you think engineers have learned a few things in the decades since?
As a side note, do you think the folks who drowned to death or were crushed when that wave hit might, if given the chance,not mind a little radiation? I bring up this morbid defense because it took a natural disaster that killed over 10,000 people immediately, in a country well-prepared for this sort of thing, to overwhelm this 40 year old design. Have some perspective!
That being said, there are design decisions that matter. I'm a fan of containment domes for this reason- there's a lot more volume to absorb the energy caused by a loss of heat sink.
Spent fuel pools can be put below grade- so they're easier to fill and their walls are backed by concrete and earth.
Many nuclear power plants are built with these features, which would have lessened this disaster significantly.
Lie to me once, shame on me. Lie to me twice... don't let the spent fuel pool blow up and contaminate your farmland on the way out.
Now go shake your fist at the earth itself for killing >10,000 people right off the bat, and wiping cities off the map.
Slashdot Mirror
The markedly different rates in arrests, deaths, and criminal assaults between Tea Party events and OWS events is a matter of public record and not up for debate.
The fact that this reflects poorly on the character of your typical OWS participant is an uncomfortably obvious inference.
You can cry about 'Ad Homs', and tell me to 'shut the hell up', but that doesn't change the history of the two camps.
It's funny how leftists always want right wingers to shut up, and how right-wingers always want the leftists to keep talking (and dig their hole deeper.)
This tendency also allows one to make additional obvious inferences that reflect poorly on leftists such as yourself.
Yeah, all those weapons, and not a single rape, murder, or arrest, unlike the 'occupy' protests.
It's kind of interesting, really- to an American with any sort of historical sense and personal sense of responsibility, carrying a firearm means taking responsibility for your own safety (vs waiting for the cops), for the safety of your family (vs waiting for the cops), and for the safe handling of said fire arm.
As compared to the OWS mobs, who found themselves in a different spot than in life than they originally planned. Those people, instead of dealing with reality as it was, decided to go demand other people give them what they want (a job fitting what they think their station in life is.)
There's a pretty stark contrast:
1) Tea Party- leave us alone, spend government funds wisely, and we'll take care of the rest.
2) OWS- We demand you fix all our problems for us! This isn't fair!
The presence of guns doesn't represent a threat of impending violence, but a deep sense of personal responsibility that is clearly utterly absent in OWS camps. One might observe that the deep sense of personal responsibility is both an alien concept to the OWS's, and the cause of their personal problems.
Government is not just about maintaining wealth, it's about maintaining civil society, which we all benefit from.
I might not have as much resources that need protecting as Bill Gates, but it means just as much to me personally to have them protected.
Where did you grow up, such that you're utterly unaware of local Chambers of Commerce that are clearly non-governmental?
Seriously, they're in every town around here, and they're always running some booth at a fair or some charity event.
It's been well known to me, for years, that the local chamber of commerce is comprised of local business owners. I'm honestly not sure how anyone could be confused about the non-governmental status of any level of CoC.
What would you call the government-whoring scientists who know their next grant comes from giving politicians an excuse to grab more money and power?
Oh, I know, 'Alarmist.'
That'll be the easiest way until the first few guys are able to deny investigators access to their computer. After that law enforcement folks will start drilling locks and accessing case insides to bypass the switches.
I suppose with a combination of gps & acelleration sensors, you could eventually up the game until they have to ex-EOD guys with advanced computer skills to secure access to a running computer.
There's probably money to be made building a hard-drive slot internal device that will do all this for you.
You'd need a device that could maybe short the power supply to cause the fuse to blow under certain movement conditions, and then a running process that would shutdown the computer if this device was disconnected.
I was going to post that, but then you beat me to the punch.
The final 'trick' to such a computer would be some sort of acceleration sensor that would wipe the drive if the computer was moved, or some mechanical device that fries it to the same effect- for example, unloading the feet of the case closes a circuit, powering up a neon sign transformer that lights up a pile of iron and aluminum dust- aka thermite- on top of the hard drive.
The acceleration sensor is a safer bet, because the cops will probably be offended if the computer they're carrying starts spewing molten metal.
Driving up to the local DEA office, walking in with the device, and waving it around to the receptionist.
Demand to talk to the office accounts payable guy, and tell them that you charge the standard mileage rate for toting around government property, and s/he should come outside and mark the mileage on the car.
Then bill the feds $0.44 cents a mile for every mile you drive with it on.
I don't think you'd ever collect, but it sounds like a fun thing to do- you could even mess with them in small claims court after a while.
It took a natural disaster that killed 10,000+ people in minutes to overwhelm the engineered safeguards of the crappiest style of nuclear reactor built in non-soviet countries.
I'm waiting for your tears over those 10,000 people who died immediately. Do you think maybe they'd trade a few extra years for some radiation dose?
If you want to avoid bad human decisions, maybe we should forbid GE from building any more of their BWR's without a real containment building- you know, the 2+ million cubic feet buildings with 3' of concrete and enough steel rebar to make a six inch shell.
Past that, we can demand that emergency generators can be built in diverse locations, and sufficiently high seawalls be built.
You seem somewhat pro-nuke, so I'm not really sure what your point is. I am rather familiar with a 1980's era nuclear facility that's implemented tons of lessons from three mile island (requiring millions of dollars in extra equipment), and these P.O.S. GE Mark I's predate that event.
At least two of those units were due to close within the year. What kind of expense is justified when the units will be decommissioned within a short time frame? Do you spend a unit's entire profits for a year to make a design improvement that will make it safer for a fairly unlikely scenario, when the unit will be shut down before that year is up?
Do you shutter the unit early as soon as you decide it's not as perfectly safe as you like? Then what do you replace that electricity with? Coal? Another nuke plant?
It's easy to come along after a disaster and say 'You should have known! You should have done better!"
And maybe they reasonably could have- but you've never been faced with the question of weighing risks vs costs vs (the short) remaining life of these units. You don't have to come up with hundreds of megawatts of replacement electricity on an island nation if you decide to shutter it early. You're not the one who has to go to the (japanese equivalent of) the public utility commission and explain why you want to raise the rates to build millions of dollars (yen?) in improvements to a plant that shuts down in just a few short years.
Alternately, you don't have to visit that same PUC and explain that you're going to shut down the plant because, despite it's decades long history, it's unsafe, and you need a rate increase to throw up a carbon-burning coal plant until you can get a safer nuke plant online.
In essence, you're second guessing decisions made over 40 years ago, in the infancy of commercial nuclear power, by executives long dead. You're second guessing the decisions of current executives who had an old, not completely safe set of units, due for closure within 2011.
You presume that all knowledge we currently have was always available, and you assume infinite financial and electrical resources were available to address the intrinsic safety of plants that had operated successfully for decades.
How many of these assumptions do you now stand by?
Rivers and Oceans also provide a heat sink, which needs to be rather significant for a heat engine that tosses away 2/3's of it's power.
That's what they want, sure- it's just that these folks have a poor definition of what 'sanity' is. With this crowd, getting what they want would be akin to David Letterman making big changes to brain surgery to 'return to sanity.' It is, to be gentle, not their area of expertise, as you so clearly illustrate as follows:
You haven't been paying attention to the very significant European financial problems that have been going on of late.
To quote a famous European, "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."
That's what's happening now. Your otherwise righteous anger at the crony corporatism we've seen in the US won't lead to money being magically generated to fund all that OWS folks demand.
The trouble is, these protesters don't have any real problems, so they're only motivated by a desire to meet a certain ideological criteria that's popular in certain circles. This makes them look 'hip', 'daring', 'edgy', 'compassionate', etc to their target audience- their circle of like minded friends and internet allies. When enough effort has been expended to accomplish that, everyone goes home and plays X-box.
At that point, most rational folks redouble their efforts to go out and find a job, or some way to be of value to their fellow citizens, such that they get paid. Their life might get harder, I admit that. There might be a few folks who would prefer to go the European route- that is, riot and obstruct what economic activity continues, on the mistaken belief that there's no limit to the size of the dependent class in society.
Who's going to pay for that? Anyone with sufficient funds would be better off using that money to further their own interests, not gather a bunch of smelly malcontents on the off hope of getting some policy changed.
Ah, here's the meat of the matter: Your fantasy that you possess the knowledge necessary to lead the 'malcontented, malnourish, homeless unemployed' people into some glorious new future society. Hey, when I was a kid, I had a hero fantasy or two as well. Then I realized that I really needed to straighten out my self first, improve my position in life, and that other folks need to do the same.
The real people who would compose the unwashed masses you would lead to 'victory over wallstreet' all have things they can do to improve their lot in life- and those people will be doing those things, not drifting towards NYC, because they know what's gonna put food on their table.
This is why all the protestors (sometimes violent) that show up at these events are all middle class or better kids who know where their next meal is coming from, and figure mommy will bail them out if they get arrested for some punk stunt. They figure they're heroes for the poor and downtrodden by going to these protests. If they really wanted to help, they'd teach the values, ethics, and philosophies that allowed their parents to succeed to chronically poor communities.
I know the economy is in the shitter right now, and the fortunes of an individual will vary with their surroundings. Long term, however, one's fate is in their hands- not the hands of some kid with a hero fantasy.
'Full Retail Price' in the medical world is often less than you would imagine. Hospitals routinely offer a 30% or better discount for paying in cash. Many medical establishments are likely the same way, for the same reason- dealing with insurance companies, medicare, or the VA requires a great deal of administrative overhead.
Yes, I've asked a few times. The next few times you find yourself in the business office of a medical establishment, ask them what the cash discount is. You might be surprised at what the typical response is.
The UK Government's Struggle with basic law and order.
Now the stench of desperation is just plain overwhelming.
Why are you distressed? Offended, sure, but distressed? It's a pathetic, desperate attack by someone who knows the winds are shifting away from his faulty ideals.
Nonetheless, I'm glad you set him straight.
That kind of pointless add-on attack, which is completely immaterial to your point, reeks of desperation.
Good.
Think.
Okay. I think using 'Gun Deaths' to make the point you're trying to make is statistical chicancery.
You should subtract suicides from those numbers. Only the elderly and infirm need a gun to kill themselves- everyone else finds a different method if required.
Then you should subtract self defense & home invasion shootings, because those aren't detrimental to society.
What's left might be a reasonable aproximation of gun-based violent crimes.
Oh, and then you should compare the overall violent crime rates in those states you cited.
Think.
Wealthier populations consume more but breed less. Paradoxically, then, one interested in saving the earth should consider promoting economic growth.
The second angle for that is being 'green' is something only wealthy, advanced, economies can afford. I suppose one could argue that a family of 12 dirt farmers in sub-Saharan Africa is more 'green' than a family of four in America- but the economies between the two extremes are typically the worst, and that's where a lot of the world is situated.
Increasing the wealth of all those nations in between would reduce their population growth and allow them the money to pursue 'green' technology.
It's interesting that cooperation and yielding to others is considered "un-American" by at least some Americans. That simple statements speaks volumes about the dire straights that the United States is in.
You were trolled. That simple statement speaks volumes about your prejudices against the United States, and your willingness to bite into anything that fits them.
You're straining pretty hard to keep yourself convinced that Obama is some kind of good guy and republicans are pure evil.
Is it working?
Why would anyone pay more for labor than they had to? You, or anyone else? Adding a union to the mix doesn't make the labor of the lawn-mowing boy worth more- it simply extorts a higher price. And if the homeowner mows it himself, doesn't that deprive the neighborhood boys of any money at all?
How is that an improvement over some kid getting paid $20 ?
If the neighborhood kid is 'underpaid', as you claim, why does he do it in the first place? Why mow lawns at all if you're not happy with how you're getting paid? If he acts voluntarily, and is paid voluntarily, both the homeowner and the lawn-mowing boy must think they benefit from the transaction.
Who are you to judge otherwise?
Aside from that, if you don't want to be replaced by someone who can be up to the task in no time, doesn't it behoove you, as a person, to develop skills that are rarer, in demand, and hence worth more?
I'd pay just about anyone with a pulse to mow my lawn, because if he screws it up, you won't be able to tell in two weeks.
On the other hand, I want a competent plumber- and I'll pay for one- because leaky pipes have much higher consequences.
I was asking about one paying more than they have to for a particular good or service. I don't particularly care about Belgium's practice's, I care about what one does voluntarily with their money when one is lecturing other people what to do with theirs.
Show me yourself, paying more than you have to, for a good or service, because you want them to earn a living wage.
Then show me you doing that day in and day out. Neighborhood kid will mow your lawn for $20. Landscaping service will do the exact same job for $50. Who are you going to hire? Your buddy's daughter will watch your kids for $5 an hour and be happy about it. The local college girl wants $15 an hour. Both are sufficient for the job. Who are you going to hire?
Make sure you put your money where your mouth is, before you start demanding that other people put their money where your mouth is.
You might notice that the Fukishima Daichi plants that are in trouble are GE Mark I designs. That's mark 1. As in the first designs. Do you think engineers have learned a few things in the decades since?
As a side note, do you think the folks who drowned to death or were crushed when that wave hit might, if given the chance,not mind a little radiation? I bring up this morbid defense because it took a natural disaster that killed over 10,000 people immediately, in a country well-prepared for this sort of thing, to overwhelm this 40 year old design. Have some perspective!
That being said, there are design decisions that matter. I'm a fan of containment domes for this reason- there's a lot more volume to absorb the energy caused by a loss of heat sink.
Spent fuel pools can be put below grade- so they're easier to fill and their walls are backed by concrete and earth.
Many nuclear power plants are built with these features, which would have lessened this disaster significantly.
Now go shake your fist at the earth itself for killing >10,000 people right off the bat, and wiping cities off the map.