Natural hydro plant is where the difference in water levels (and thus the primary method of energy generation) does not have to be artificially constructed. There are hydro plants where you basically pump water up into a reservoir or you artificially create or enlarge a difference or construct a dam which can only be used intermittently due to a shortage of water. Those kinds of things are hard and costly and generally not worth it.
Solar plants and wind turbines also need oversight, maintenance etc by a highly trained crew. Any power plant does actually.
Or a river. Any body of water, artificial or natural, that can sufficiently cool the system. Those small reactors which manufacturers like Hitachi builds could technically ship anywhere in the world (if it weren't for import/export regulations) will automatically slow and shut down when there is insufficient cooling (the fission can't sustain itself like bigger reactors). They are geared towards small municipalities that only have a few million dollars to spend and basically are hands-off for the entirety of their 50-something year operation.
About 7% of average business revenue is lost in theft, the majority of which is employee theft. For small coffee/food shops/chains and restaurants this number is a lot higher. Going cashless prevents the majority of theft, even if they have to pay 1-2% for the credit card fees.
Depends on the business. In a shop like a hair salon, you basically rent out a chair to whatever hair person and they handle their business privately while handing over a percentage based on the number of customers they served.
Going cashless is an easy way to both have yourself handle the money, check your subcontractors aren't underreporting their customers and avoid having your subcontractor walk away after a few weeks without ever paying the fees (and going to court over a few hundred dollars which they'll dispute the veracity of vehemently is simply not worth it).
For coffee shops and similar places about 7% of revenue is lost due to theft, it's hard to prove even with CCTV, but going cashless basically eliminates employee theft which consists of the majority of theft within a business (more even than shoplifters and fraud)
Depends on the transaction. If you have a signed contract that says otherwise, cash may not be acceptable. Eg if we have an agreement to exchange a good, you can't suddenly say that I have to accept cash because you wanted to keep both goods, especially in real estate and business this would give rich people the right to pretty much buy anything by fraudulently entering into contracts and then offering cash of the "current value" (vs. the potential value) in exchange.
For example, if that were true, I could buy pretty much any business by entering into an agreement to buy your company out in exchange for a seat at the board and shares from mine then when I get the papers for your company signed, instead of countersigning, I immediately offer you cash for the current value of the business. The poor business partner could do the same in the other direction, agreeing to get thousands of shares for the 'value' of your business, accept the shares and then offer a pittance for them in cash based on the value of your business.
It is contract law. In the first case you enter into a contract where the tender has been (albeit informally or verbally) agreed upon. You can describe in the contract whatever you want, I want to be paid in gold ingots or check or cash or bitcoin - you exchange a good for the tender whatever that is. If both parties don't agree, nobody is owed anything.
In the second case you incur a debt and then have to repay that debt. Debts in the US can be paid in various ways but cash is legally tender "for all debts incurred, public and private", you can pay any debt in cash, regardless of how that debt was incurred. At this point, both parties agreed or failed to agree how to pay back the debt and unless you have a signed contract that says another exchange was agreed upon, you have to accept cash or give back what you got out of the exchange.
If people can't work, they tend to riot, look at France and a lot of other places in Europe. Riots haven't happened and happiness and wealth in the US has gone up significantly in the last few decades. There are less people now at minimum wage within the US than 20 years ago even during a major, artificially prolonged recession and massive tax increases that made it significantly better to hire only part time.
I doubt Canada ships their oil transatlantic when I got it most my life from the Russians. Even so, with all that money coming in from oil, they still haven't managed to fund a good universal healthcare with wait times for emergency surgery now up to 9 months.
They all want to hire part time only because then they don't have to pay the Obama fine/tax for "universal" health care. These effects were fully predicted and now that ACA fines have been thrown out, more people are hiring again.
700MW of peak wind only produces 280MW on average, not the same as a continuous 700MW from a reactor. Also, your 700MW wind farm is a pile of rust in as little as 5 years with most farms only lasting 10 years and shreds close to 10,000 birds per year including endangered species of eagles and owls. Meanwhile most reactors are operating 50-70 years, well over their planned 40 years lifespan.
So really, you're comparing $60M + operating cost over 5-10 years (and not counting disposal, which few defunct sites have been disposed of) with a $240M investment over 7 times as long.
Chernobyl is pretty much the worst that could've happened (which was partially due to Russian weapons testing and untrained operators), but only a few decades later, wildlife has fully recovered in the area and some people have continued to live there.
Nuclear reactors provide one of the cheapest sources of energy besides natural hydro plants.
The problem is regulation. If you have to pay people for 5-10 years to do nothing with a new plant and then another 5-10 years to replace the rods when the fuel is only 10% spent, you're artificially inflating the price and even with all that, if you can get a plant built you're still cheaper than solar and wind.
The problem with nuclear is not the technology, a reactor can theoretically run for a decade without needing refueling, the US Navy is building them to last the lifetime of a ship (75 years) without any refueling . A modern reactor can take up the size of a small shed in your backyard (if you have a cooling pool nearby). But we're not building those because someone may steal a rod of "weapons grade" fuel.
Dead load: yes, live loads typically aren't that great to deal with, with people dancing, you could easily exceed even the 250kg/sqm You're talking about concrete (sub)floors, typically floors on other floors are constructed out of wood with metal beams or engineered wood as main supports (or lots of regular wood beams for older houses) that do warp and break if there is a lot of live load.
We're also talking about a person renting out his McMansion - mansions are designed to look gaudy but are otherwise very poorly constructed to save on costs. The guy also had a hot tub, that's a lot of dead load already, about 500kg/sqm well exceeding design loads for a typical house.
There's a big difference between a teenager inviting some kids over for a party and it goes wrong than one adult renting out his entire mansion on New Year's Day.
Bed-and-breakfast typically has the owner (or at least staff) on site. This sounded more like a house rental and he had a poor renter. That's why you don't keep your stuff around when you rent out or you make sure the security covers the place.
You don't need to do a pre-auth, just a credit check. Hotels will sue you for damage and will win in court. AirBnB is typically an illegal house rental, not a hotel stay, to begin with and kind of falls under "you should've gotten a bigger security payment".
I used to live near the ocean which is a big tourist place in summer, people would rent out rooms or houses for thousands of dollars per month and security payments for twice or three times as much, they would have shitty couches and furniture and keep it pretty barebones all summer long. Shit got damaged, you'd end up making a profit.
Still, we have record low unemployment rates. 86% of people didn't go out of a job, we would have chaos.
We have never had jobs for 90% of the population, hell, the army rejects the first 10% of the population outright for having too low of an IQ, they can't even be trained to do anything useful without losing them funding in the process. They then go on to only accepts 20% of its workforce for the next 21% of people because they can do simple things but having too much of them would be counterproductive. Businesses know these things as well.
In the same effect, 99% of farmers have gone out of business, people will find something useful and more productive to do. Productivity has skyrocketed as automation stepped in, across the board. You don't die at 30 because of disease anymore, you don't need to have 8 kids to have 2 survive, everyone in America is in the 1% globally speaking, nearly everyone in the world is in the 1% historically, more 'poor people' die of "king's disease" and "honeyed urine" than of hunger, we all eat better than a royal banquet every November.
I haven't yet seen an invention on par with the steam engine and the transistor over the past decade, combining AI and automation has started but all efforts to fully replace a workforce kind of flopped so far - even Amazon who has invested heavily in its warehouse automation is now employing more people than it did when it was fully packing those boxes manually.
Rates were never doubling and only government plans (Medicare/Medicaid) were doing poorly.
Employer insurance costs were going up by ~$300/family/year between 1998 and 2010, with some bumps of $700 during the the recession. ACA kicked in and they jumped up $750 the first and $1500 the year after that (as ACA went fully into effect) and increased consistently at $700-something every year since.
That would be true, if there were no waste. The second law of thermodynamics and all. Eventually you have to produce something of value and sell it for a profit. And then the whole thing comes tumbling down because the people with more "profit" end up "winning" more than others and either the government takes it at gunpoint (thus offering no value for risk and investment, USSR style) or you end up with a progressive tax system and a system that gives (more) money to poor people but you can't give them straight up money because some people are bad at managing money and thus they end up self-selecting to be poor and homeless, so you give them... I know, food stamps and housing and job training and cell phones and free health care. Hey, you already live in a pretty socialist utopia that didn't end up a dictatorship (yet).
And what has Canada produced since the 1960's besides Justin Bieber? Canada is approximately the same size as the US with approximately the same resources and has ten times less people to feed; if you can't scale it in Canada, how will you scale ten-fold in the US?
Most illegals use stolen identities, hence the trope that they pay taxes (actually their employers do, not them) but don't get anything out.
Trying to figure out who is illegal is a months long process per person and then there are leftists that will sue you for discrimination for even cooperating with the government and the illegal will disappear with another stolen identity.
Properly managed, digital media can also last for millenia. ZFS for example is built exactly for this purpose. The problem is that we have very few people that know what they're doing in tech and that happens with dead tree print too, most books have not and will never survive because their paper has been made too cheap, too acidic, not bound but glued etc. etc.
Does the female version of the app come with rockem sockem robots attached? You're on a public platform where people's thoughts are brought to you unfiltered. I am surprised that only 1 in every 125000 messages is mean to a woman.
How about you ignore that 1 message and read the other 124999. Or like me, read none.
Organic farming still requires fertilizer and herbicides and pesticides. If organic were cheaper, it wouldn't cost three times as much to get it because a smarter farmer would undercut his neighbor. Organic is either done by the very small willing to fill a niche or the very large looking to get some marketing through that overpriced market share.
Farmers don't get solar panels because, even with subsidies, the return is still at least 10 years if not nonexistent because they also get fuel (oil) subsidies. I see a lot of farmers with small solar panels for remote sensing but not to run an industrial barn because you can't put enough panels on said barn to produce sufficient energy and if you have to use or buy land for it, it's a waste.
The problem with all these "ecological" options is that they're neither cheap (low risk) nor cost effective (as to offset the risk and loans required). Farming is done pretty much at razor thin margins, huge risks are taken yearly to shave a few cents per unit sold. Farmers buy $250k-1M worth of equipment at a time. If a few thousand dollars of solar or switching to organic stands to make them money it will happen.
5 miles? In the ghetto, you have dozens of cornerstores and at least one if not two grocery stores in a 5 mile radius. People that make inferences about poor in the ghetto should live there first. Itâ(TM)s not lack of access that makes people poor, in the US youâ(TM)re given plenty of equal opportunity to make a better life.
Iâ(TM)ve been poor and middle class in rural and cities in Europe, rural Appalachia, US inner city ghettos and upper class suburban areas. Life is hard and Iâ(TM)ve made poor choices but thatâ(TM)s no excuse for me to blame others for my plight. Alcohol and drugs in all those communities are perpetuated not by an upper privileged class and an invisible hand but by and large within each of those communities.
Slashdot Mirror
Natural hydro plant is where the difference in water levels (and thus the primary method of energy generation) does not have to be artificially constructed. There are hydro plants where you basically pump water up into a reservoir or you artificially create or enlarge a difference or construct a dam which can only be used intermittently due to a shortage of water. Those kinds of things are hard and costly and generally not worth it.
Solar plants and wind turbines also need oversight, maintenance etc by a highly trained crew. Any power plant does actually.
Or a river. Any body of water, artificial or natural, that can sufficiently cool the system. Those small reactors which manufacturers like Hitachi builds could technically ship anywhere in the world (if it weren't for import/export regulations) will automatically slow and shut down when there is insufficient cooling (the fission can't sustain itself like bigger reactors). They are geared towards small municipalities that only have a few million dollars to spend and basically are hands-off for the entirety of their 50-something year operation.
About 7% of average business revenue is lost in theft, the majority of which is employee theft. For small coffee/food shops/chains and restaurants this number is a lot higher. Going cashless prevents the majority of theft, even if they have to pay 1-2% for the credit card fees.
Depends on the business. In a shop like a hair salon, you basically rent out a chair to whatever hair person and they handle their business privately while handing over a percentage based on the number of customers they served.
Going cashless is an easy way to both have yourself handle the money, check your subcontractors aren't underreporting their customers and avoid having your subcontractor walk away after a few weeks without ever paying the fees (and going to court over a few hundred dollars which they'll dispute the veracity of vehemently is simply not worth it).
For coffee shops and similar places about 7% of revenue is lost due to theft, it's hard to prove even with CCTV, but going cashless basically eliminates employee theft which consists of the majority of theft within a business (more even than shoplifters and fraud)
Depends on the transaction. If you have a signed contract that says otherwise, cash may not be acceptable. Eg if we have an agreement to exchange a good, you can't suddenly say that I have to accept cash because you wanted to keep both goods, especially in real estate and business this would give rich people the right to pretty much buy anything by fraudulently entering into contracts and then offering cash of the "current value" (vs. the potential value) in exchange.
For example, if that were true, I could buy pretty much any business by entering into an agreement to buy your company out in exchange for a seat at the board and shares from mine then when I get the papers for your company signed, instead of countersigning, I immediately offer you cash for the current value of the business. The poor business partner could do the same in the other direction, agreeing to get thousands of shares for the 'value' of your business, accept the shares and then offer a pittance for them in cash based on the value of your business.
It is contract law.
In the first case you enter into a contract where the tender has been (albeit informally or verbally) agreed upon. You can describe in the contract whatever you want, I want to be paid in gold ingots or check or cash or bitcoin - you exchange a good for the tender whatever that is. If both parties don't agree, nobody is owed anything.
In the second case you incur a debt and then have to repay that debt. Debts in the US can be paid in various ways but cash is legally tender "for all debts incurred, public and private", you can pay any debt in cash, regardless of how that debt was incurred. At this point, both parties agreed or failed to agree how to pay back the debt and unless you have a signed contract that says another exchange was agreed upon, you have to accept cash or give back what you got out of the exchange.
If people can't work, they tend to riot, look at France and a lot of other places in Europe. Riots haven't happened and happiness and wealth in the US has gone up significantly in the last few decades. There are less people now at minimum wage within the US than 20 years ago even during a major, artificially prolonged recession and massive tax increases that made it significantly better to hire only part time.
I doubt Canada ships their oil transatlantic when I got it most my life from the Russians. Even so, with all that money coming in from oil, they still haven't managed to fund a good universal healthcare with wait times for emergency surgery now up to 9 months.
They all want to hire part time only because then they don't have to pay the Obama fine/tax for "universal" health care. These effects were fully predicted and now that ACA fines have been thrown out, more people are hiring again.
700MW of peak wind only produces 280MW on average, not the same as a continuous 700MW from a reactor. Also, your 700MW wind farm is a pile of rust in as little as 5 years with most farms only lasting 10 years and shreds close to 10,000 birds per year including endangered species of eagles and owls. Meanwhile most reactors are operating 50-70 years, well over their planned 40 years lifespan.
So really, you're comparing $60M + operating cost over 5-10 years (and not counting disposal, which few defunct sites have been disposed of) with a $240M investment over 7 times as long.
Chernobyl is pretty much the worst that could've happened (which was partially due to Russian weapons testing and untrained operators), but only a few decades later, wildlife has fully recovered in the area and some people have continued to live there.
Nuclear reactors provide one of the cheapest sources of energy besides natural hydro plants.
The problem is regulation. If you have to pay people for 5-10 years to do nothing with a new plant and then another 5-10 years to replace the rods when the fuel is only 10% spent, you're artificially inflating the price and even with all that, if you can get a plant built you're still cheaper than solar and wind.
The problem with nuclear is not the technology, a reactor can theoretically run for a decade without needing refueling, the US Navy is building them to last the lifetime of a ship (75 years) without any refueling . A modern reactor can take up the size of a small shed in your backyard (if you have a cooling pool nearby). But we're not building those because someone may steal a rod of "weapons grade" fuel.
Dead load: yes, live loads typically aren't that great to deal with, with people dancing, you could easily exceed even the 250kg/sqm You're talking about concrete (sub)floors, typically floors on other floors are constructed out of wood with metal beams or engineered wood as main supports (or lots of regular wood beams for older houses) that do warp and break if there is a lot of live load.
We're also talking about a person renting out his McMansion - mansions are designed to look gaudy but are otherwise very poorly constructed to save on costs. The guy also had a hot tub, that's a lot of dead load already, about 500kg/sqm well exceeding design loads for a typical house.
There's a big difference between a teenager inviting some kids over for a party and it goes wrong than one adult renting out his entire mansion on New Year's Day.
Bed-and-breakfast typically has the owner (or at least staff) on site. This sounded more like a house rental and he had a poor renter. That's why you don't keep your stuff around when you rent out or you make sure the security covers the place.
You don't need to do a pre-auth, just a credit check. Hotels will sue you for damage and will win in court. AirBnB is typically an illegal house rental, not a hotel stay, to begin with and kind of falls under "you should've gotten a bigger security payment".
I used to live near the ocean which is a big tourist place in summer, people would rent out rooms or houses for thousands of dollars per month and security payments for twice or three times as much, they would have shitty couches and furniture and keep it pretty barebones all summer long. Shit got damaged, you'd end up making a profit.
Still, we have record low unemployment rates. 86% of people didn't go out of a job, we would have chaos.
We have never had jobs for 90% of the population, hell, the army rejects the first 10% of the population outright for having too low of an IQ, they can't even be trained to do anything useful without losing them funding in the process. They then go on to only accepts 20% of its workforce for the next 21% of people because they can do simple things but having too much of them would be counterproductive. Businesses know these things as well.
In the same effect, 99% of farmers have gone out of business, people will find something useful and more productive to do. Productivity has skyrocketed as automation stepped in, across the board. You don't die at 30 because of disease anymore, you don't need to have 8 kids to have 2 survive, everyone in America is in the 1% globally speaking, nearly everyone in the world is in the 1% historically, more 'poor people' die of "king's disease" and "honeyed urine" than of hunger, we all eat better than a royal banquet every November.
I haven't yet seen an invention on par with the steam engine and the transistor over the past decade, combining AI and automation has started but all efforts to fully replace a workforce kind of flopped so far - even Amazon who has invested heavily in its warehouse automation is now employing more people than it did when it was fully packing those boxes manually.
Theory (actually: conjecture and hypothesis) yes. The scientific theory proves you wrong.
Rates were never doubling and only government plans (Medicare/Medicaid) were doing poorly.
Employer insurance costs were going up by ~$300/family/year between 1998 and 2010, with some bumps of $700 during the the recession. ACA kicked in and they jumped up $750 the first and $1500 the year after that (as ACA went fully into effect) and increased consistently at $700-something every year since.
That would be true, if there were no waste. The second law of thermodynamics and all. Eventually you have to produce something of value and sell it for a profit. And then the whole thing comes tumbling down because the people with more "profit" end up "winning" more than others and either the government takes it at gunpoint (thus offering no value for risk and investment, USSR style) or you end up with a progressive tax system and a system that gives (more) money to poor people but you can't give them straight up money because some people are bad at managing money and thus they end up self-selecting to be poor and homeless, so you give them ... I know, food stamps and housing and job training and cell phones and free health care. Hey, you already live in a pretty socialist utopia that didn't end up a dictatorship (yet).
And what has Canada produced since the 1960's besides Justin Bieber? Canada is approximately the same size as the US with approximately the same resources and has ten times less people to feed; if you can't scale it in Canada, how will you scale ten-fold in the US?
Master electricians don't top out at $50k, they can easily fetch $25-35/h and up to $100/h as a (sub)contractor.
Blue collar labor has some upwards mobility for those that are smart enough.
Most illegals use stolen identities, hence the trope that they pay taxes (actually their employers do, not them) but don't get anything out.
Trying to figure out who is illegal is a months long process per person and then there are leftists that will sue you for discrimination for even cooperating with the government and the illegal will disappear with another stolen identity.
Properly managed, digital media can also last for millenia. ZFS for example is built exactly for this purpose. The problem is that we have very few people that know what they're doing in tech and that happens with dead tree print too, most books have not and will never survive because their paper has been made too cheap, too acidic, not bound but glued etc. etc.
Does the female version of the app come with rockem sockem robots attached? You're on a public platform where people's thoughts are brought to you unfiltered. I am surprised that only 1 in every 125000 messages is mean to a woman.
How about you ignore that 1 message and read the other 124999. Or like me, read none.
Organic farming still requires fertilizer and herbicides and pesticides. If organic were cheaper, it wouldn't cost three times as much to get it because a smarter farmer would undercut his neighbor. Organic is either done by the very small willing to fill a niche or the very large looking to get some marketing through that overpriced market share.
Farmers don't get solar panels because, even with subsidies, the return is still at least 10 years if not nonexistent because they also get fuel (oil) subsidies. I see a lot of farmers with small solar panels for remote sensing but not to run an industrial barn because you can't put enough panels on said barn to produce sufficient energy and if you have to use or buy land for it, it's a waste.
The problem with all these "ecological" options is that they're neither cheap (low risk) nor cost effective (as to offset the risk and loans required). Farming is done pretty much at razor thin margins, huge risks are taken yearly to shave a few cents per unit sold. Farmers buy $250k-1M worth of equipment at a time. If a few thousand dollars of solar or switching to organic stands to make them money it will happen.
5 miles? In the ghetto, you have dozens of cornerstores and at least one if not two grocery stores in a 5 mile radius. People that make inferences about poor in the ghetto should live there first. Itâ(TM)s not lack of access that makes people poor, in the US youâ(TM)re given plenty of equal opportunity to make a better life.
Iâ(TM)ve been poor and middle class in rural and cities in Europe, rural Appalachia, US inner city ghettos and upper class suburban areas. Life is hard and Iâ(TM)ve made poor choices but thatâ(TM)s no excuse for me to blame others for my plight. Alcohol and drugs in all those communities are perpetuated not by an upper privileged class and an invisible hand but by and large within each of those communities.