Re: nuclear power

From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Tue Jun 05 2001 - 00:56:54 MDT


Anne Marie Tobias wrote:
>
> Howdy all,

> > Uh, because the technology is not yet mature and power efficient
> > and scalable enough?
>
> Actually, the technology is fine... from little I've been able to gleen,
>
> it's primarily a production problem... and getting appropriate funding.
> The question I have is... why can't they get funding? The science is
> solid, and the benefit clear? Very strange...
>

The case obviously does not impress the money sources yet. No
need for international conspiracies to "explain" it.

> > > Why did the energy crisis suddenly blossom, when
> > > fossil fuels strongest advocate entered the white house? Why
> >
> > Any fool with a calculator and basic math could see California
> > was in for energy chaos at some point. You can't blame
> > everything on da Bush.
>
> What I can blame on GW is change of climate. While The House
> that Bill Built was making the rules, California could hull brech as
> often as it wanted, and as long as the economic engine was still
> printing fresh money, Bill would be happy to run interference. The
> minute that GW came into office, the contaiment field was turned
> off and California experienced the sudden vacuum of space. Talk
> about the final frontier!!! Only what got sucked out was out state
> wealth... we spaced our money!
>

Yeah, wasn't it wonderful when the Fed was printing a lot of
fresh money and the stock market bubble was getting more and
mroe inflated? What a high! The KA-BOOM. Bubble go POP. Now
we cry for Presistent DADDY to bring back our fun.

 
> > > As long as there is more profit in being stupid, why would'nt
> > > you ever expect the people in power to do all they can to kill
> > > the smart. It's just good business.
> > >
> >
> > Uh, because you live in this world and in this world the
> > relative wealth and well-being of the economy and others does
> > have a direct impact on your own wealth and well-being? Killing
> > the smart is neither smart, profitable or "good business".
> >
> > - samantha
>
> In this world... we have given up the sanity of a planned future, for
> the need to appease the quarterly beast. The only sound one here's

"Planned future"??? Like the USSR used to try to do? Are you
sure you live on this earth? Planned by whom? No State, no
group of geniuses can plan out an economic future and no amount
of dictatorial power can force reality to conform to any such
Plan. Didn't the collapse of such "planned" economies teach us
anything?

Bussiness is short term focused in large measure because
government has destroyed any possibility of longer term focus.
Its rules shift and morph even faster than the technological
landscape. Its favor and removal of favor are a delirious
tyrant wrecking havoc in every boardroom and in every
individual's economic life.

No, it is not more of that kind of "planned future" that we
need.

> is the mantra quarterly profits. There is no room for subtlety, no
> time for longterm planning, there is no justification for moral debate,
> and pandering to philosophic musing is just not going to feed the
> bulldog... what you do is you make a profit this quarter... and if you
> want to stay the CEO, and keep getting those 7 digit per anum, pay
> checks you keep doing whatever it is that you're told to do... That
> profit this quarter demands that you do.

Do you think this environment just fell out of the sky? Do you
think having government take over is any sort of solution?

>
> If 2,000 Indians die in Bhopal, because you cut corners... tough
> noogies, if you clear cut the entire freaking state of Washington, too
> bad so sad... if you have to lock 10 year old girls in labor camp
> conditions to work for 16 hours a day for enough rice to feed a
> chipmunk, and all 110 of them burn to death because nobody gave
> someone a key to let them out in case of fire... hey it was a glitch a
> bad business decision...
>

Here we go we the string of ills that supposedly justify utterly
dumping on business and playing up the role of government
planning as the only enlightened solution. That is truly sad.
And despicable in light of the many tens of millions of people
slaughtered by the acceptance of such reasoning.
 
> By the way... that last one... sounds like China huh... it was... it's
> also Los Angeles... in the clothing district. Scary... really...
>

A missing key doesn't exactly compare to what China and Russia
did with their planned economies and the millions killed not be
a glitch but on purpose for the service of the Plan.
 
> Until we begin to leave behind concepts that have been drug with
> us for the last ten millenium, or longer, that let us treat one another
> as things and not people... that make power and profit more
> important that the future of humanity in general and people in
> specific, and until we become completely clear that advances in

Freedom and free markets are not an old concept. They are
relatively new and largely not understood. They are one
interpretation of what it really means to be truly for and of
the people.

> technology will soon amplify even small slides in morality into
> gross misconducts compromising large populations... until we
> are very clear about that as a society, we are going to have ever
> greater trouble with stupidity calling the day.
>

Agreed. But the abrogation of human rights because we don't
understand their basis or because too many of us consider them
only as fueling "greed" will lead straight to a global
dictatorship when modern and coming technology is added. A
dictatorship where your ever movement and every word is
monitored or able to be monitored at any time. In such a world
we must have very strong understanding of and respect for
individual rights of self-determination. We must understand
that we cannot win by over-control no matter how lofty our
intentions and how vaunted our intellect.

- samantha



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:58 MST