- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:14 pm to Paluka
quote:
I thought we had these in Antarctica?
I'm sure you can mine thorium there but I don't see why there would be any reactors there
Did you get this from the Q thread or something?
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:15 pm to Powerman
I'm a huge yang fan, a lot of people just sumarrily dismiss him and his ideas - but if you dig deeper there is a lot good substance and forward thinking.
One of the biggest reasons I support him is that I think he would attempt to make changes to give more political power back to the voters and restore the public trust in our democracy.
Also, our political class are too old and dont understand technology. The questions they ask during these congressional hearings are all you need to see to realize they dont even understand fairly simple concepts such as net neutrality. They dont even have a committee to regulate and review technological advancements and how they may impact our society as they come about.
One of the biggest reasons I support him is that I think he would attempt to make changes to give more political power back to the voters and restore the public trust in our democracy.
Also, our political class are too old and dont understand technology. The questions they ask during these congressional hearings are all you need to see to realize they dont even understand fairly simple concepts such as net neutrality. They dont even have a committee to regulate and review technological advancements and how they may impact our society as they come about.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:20 pm to Sneaky__Sally
Also if anyone is curious about some of his positions / policies I'd be happy to answer. I try not to inject yang all over the place on this board, but am happy to talk with curious or open minded people
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:31 pm to Powerman
quote:Oh. So you're a proponent of wasting perfectly operating infrastructure at tax payer expense. Makes sense. Malinvestment *is* the way to build wealth. Brilliant plan.
It's about replacing existing means of generation like coal/natural gas and renewables with cheaper and more environmentally friendly options.
quote:Ah yes. The "maybe if we surrender fast enough they will be nice to us" argument. No thanks.
You might think that climate change is complete nonsense but there are a lot of powerful people that don't think it's nonsense and they're going to address it one way or the other. I'd prefer they address it in a more practical way that won't cause electricity prices to soar and in a way that doesn't waste global mineral resources on pipe dreams.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:33 pm to Powerman
quote:You've confused confiscation of wealth with building of wealth.
Why aren't you writing checks and/or getting VC money?
-----
I pay taxes. I have a preference on how those taxes are utilized, particularly when it comes to energy issues.
Your claim was "And you could find the money for that by immediately eliminating all renewable initiatives at the federal level." Do you believe that, or not?
quote:Jeff Bezos started in an 8x12 shared office space... what's stopping you, if this is so easy?
I'm just some middle class guy. I'm not going to be funding energy research.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:36 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Oh. So you're a proponent of wasting perfectly operating infrastructure at tax payer expense. Makes sense. Malinvestment *is* the way to build wealth. Brilliant plan.
I'm all about taxpayers funding exploratory research into technologies that are too expensive/not profitable for the private sector to pursue.. provided that research is made public or available.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:38 pm to bmy
quote:So generous with other peoples money. How noble of you.
I'm all about taxpayers funding exploratory research into technologies that are too expensive/not profitable for the private sector to pursue.. provided that research is made public or available.
But why Thorium reactors and not something like turning sand into gold? Or stopping aging or time travel? As long as it's made public...
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:44 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
So generous with other peoples money. How noble of you.
That's your typical government worker
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:52 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Oh. So you're a proponent of wasting perfectly operating infrastructure at tax payer expense. Makes sense. Malinvestment *is* the way to build wealth. Brilliant plan.
It's going to happen anyway
Whether you want it to or not
quote:
Ah yes. The "maybe if we surrender fast enough they will be nice to us" argument. No thanks.
Stubborn mindsets like this will lead to poorer outcomes
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:53 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
That's your typical government worker
I work in the private sector
I don't support using additional funds for this research. I support diverting existing funds in that direction and moving away from subsidies for pipe dreams.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:54 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
But why Thorium reactors and not something like turning sand into gold? Or stopping aging or time travel? As long as it's made public...
You love being annoying and useless don't you?
One has tangible value and the others are nonsense
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:54 pm to Powerman
quote:
I work in the private sector
I was referring to bmy
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:55 pm to Powerman
Yang is the most visionary candidate for sure
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:56 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Your claim was "And you could find the money for that by immediately eliminating all renewable initiatives at the federal level." Do you believe that, or not?
We spend roughly 7 billion a year on green energy subsidies
Completely eliminate that over a 10 year period and divert a portion of those funds to investing in nuclear infrastructure and you get a much better return on investment.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:58 pm to Powerman
Has one actually been built yet? If not this is more like all those Silicon Valley computer simulated process that didn't work making alternative energy
Posted on 11/16/19 at 1:04 pm to CitizenK
quote:
Has one actually been built yet?
Yes. This isn't necessarily a technological hurdle so much as a political one.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 1:04 pm to CitizenK
Apparently the only operational one is in India. It doesn't compete economically and produces a LOT of radioactive waste.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 1:07 pm to CitizenK
quote:
Apparently the only operational one is in India. It doesn't compete economically and produces a LOT of radioactive waste.
I think we could do better than India
Posted on 11/16/19 at 1:08 pm to CitizenK
quote:
Apparently the only operational one is in India.
They have something like 25% of the world's Thorium reserves
Page 3 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News