Global capitalism sucks

[lucifer]

It's May day - someone has to tell the truth.

[Mandrake]

What does MayDay have to do with it? Are you Russian?

[bigperm]

lucifer is right... Capitalism is pretty bad. Giancarlo says he is a right wing corporatist... Some are here to help people, some are here to help themselves. Personally, I'd like to help people.

[atlas]

Suggest a feasible alternative.

-mk

[Hobbes]

Globalization (everyone under one government... perfect example: European Union) Sucks.

[Toefur]

Globalisism, Capitalism, Consumerism, Democracy, all need to dissappear from this planet!

[}:8) Supermoo]

Toefur, Happy 100! :)

Also, what do you guys suggest instead? just askin'...

[lucifer]

Originally posted by Hobbes
Globalization (everyone under one government... perfect example: European Union) Sucks.

Globalisation isn't everyone under the same government it is when there is no real government and the world becomes controlled by multinationals who are into making profit for a small percentage of the population while f***ing over the vast majority.

Sort of like the oil companies supporting bush so now they get to f**k alaska and treat it the same way that mexico gets treated

and drug companies making huge profits while people die - only reason the case in south africa got dropped was the information on how much profit they make would have to be released.

and not forgetting the US refusing to accept the kyoto - let's not mess up the world too much agreement

anyway I don't want to rant too much

alternatives

how about a society where people count more than money

'only when the last tree is cut down and the last river is polluted and the last fish is caught will man discover that he can't eat money' - some wise indian long ago

No I'm not russian

mayday is the international workers day (not just for commies)

[Todd]

I've heard this one a thousand times.. :)

A real simple answer for you is to look around at other countries and see what conditions their citizens live in. Many countries are doing great with their government but yet others are failing horribly. It depends upon what type of environment you are exposed to. Capitalism is the absolute worst right? Would you rather be in a country where citizens have no power or voice for that matter? Don't get me wrong the USA is not the perfect country and there are many other fine alternatives to the US but I don't see a problem with capitalism. A good general rule for this question is to look at where you now and then look around. Look at some other countries where living conditions are so incredibly poor that people die from common illnesses and their country is so poor they can't afford to improve conditions even if they needed to. The fact that your on a computer means that you have it better off then a lot of people; as your main concern isn't if you'll live but rather if your ISP is online. :) This is typically how I defend this debate.

Lucifer the issues you brought up are political issues but really have nothing to do with the capitalist system. The capitalist system is a general term to basically describe free enterprise where individuals and corporations run the system rather then the government.


how about a society where people count more than money

This will never work. Even if money isn't a valued item then we go back to bartership where we exchange items as a form of currency. Your computer is worth 1,000 cookies while my fax machine is worth 150 cookies. (Obviously using cookies as a basic example..) :) So now you've eliminated the form of money that we know of today and we exchange items, how is this better?

I don't forsee a society where 100% of people are taken care of with no complaints. If you believe in a higher power then that may be different but thats a completely different issue on itself. The best government is the government with common sense and the people's interest at heart. The only way you will see that form of government is if you have a diverse amount of people running the government who aren't able to abuse their power.

I've rambled on enough for one post but that's basically my take on this. :)

[lucifer]

many countries are poor due to the huge debts they have got into (usually for the personal wealth of dictators or from outside pressure)

about people not money

if I have $0 my views should be worth the same as some one with $1000000000.

on the whole though it is companies not people who have the power


The best government is the government with common sense and the people's interest at heart.

as opposed to one that is indebted to big buisnesses that paid for it's election expenses

[Mandrake]

Originally posted by lucifer

No I'm not russian

mayday is the international workers day (not just for commies)




Just wondering... Russia (and/or the former Soviet Union) is the only place I've heard of that really celebrates it. Nobody really notices it here in the U.S.

[Peo]

May 1st is 'celebrated' all over Europe and I'm sure in many other countries around the world. Not that it's as big as it used to be.

"as opposed to one that is indebted to big buisnesses that paid for it's election expenses"

I can agree somewhat to that complaint even though I'm a capitalist (atleast compared to Kim Jong Il ;))... Whatever happened to campaign finance reform?

[bigperm]

Alternatives... Well, when Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto, he detailed how to become a better society. First off, you start where we are, with the means of production owned by the bourgouis, and then you would go into socialism. Socialism, where major services are owned by the government, (Healthcare, Transportation, etc). From socialism, you would go into communism, where everybody owns the means of production, everybody is equal, and everything is free.

Please don't reply to this and say "Look at Russia! Look at China!" "Communism will never work!"

I am working on a website that will explain all of these things in detail, and you can read about it there, when I get it done.

Right now though, I am not going to argue the merits of one econimic system or another over a message board.

So there is my 8 cents.

[Todd]

if I have $0 my views should be worth the same as some one with $1000000000.

Who said they weren't? You can't influence how others perceive your view except by changing the way you present your viewpoint. I may think you're a fool or a genius, that would be my choice to make and you really can't change that opinion. There are things you can do to influence my opinion of course but you can't change it. I listen to reasoning and logic though so if you were to debate your point of view and provide reasoning and logic behind it you may influence me, but if I'm close-minded then you couldn't change it. Just a side note, I'm not calling you a genius nor a fool I am simply using it as an example.

Regarding countries being in debt the USA is a prime example. We have a huge national debt and we should be repaying it but it's not typically the citizens main concern. Why? It goes back to living conditions. Most people don't have to worry about food, clothing, shelter, all the necessities. Seeing as though most people are living in good conditions they don't perceive the debt as a problem. We should be concerned with it but most people aren't for the reasons listed above.

Free enterprise and political issues are very different things. If you want to debate political issues I would open a new thread in the general forum about a specific issue. So far your complaints have been more about political issues then the capitalist system so I would recommend opening a new thread if you want to debate political issues.

I was once told that the capitalist system is the worst form of system possible, except for all other choices. I won't disagree or agree with that comment. :)

I can however say that if you live in the USA and don't like the system then you have a simple choice, move to another country. It's straight forward thinking but you really can't change the system at this stage. I can only imagine what would happen if it was tried. :)

[lucifer]

but you really can't change the system at this stage

not a big vote for the democracy I thought the us was supposed to be;)

[Todd]

Originally posted by lucifer
not a big vote for the democracy I thought the us was supposed to be;)[/B]

I think you misunderstood. We can't change the capitalist system but again political issues can be taken care of. I'm saying we would have one heck of a time trying to convert to another form of government, not that we can't deal with issues that come up with new laws and ordinances. Very different topics. :)

[bigperm]

I think that the biggest possible change, that can be made in America, would be the Green Party way. It's not communism, it's not socialism. Just more social responsibility.

I am registered Green.

You can cruise around their site (http://www.greenparty.org) or just look at their 10 key values (http://www.greenparty.org/values.html). I think we can all agree on those.

[Mandrake]

I beleive in the philosophy of the Libertarian Party... Government is there to protect the country and its infrastructure and that's it. You should be free to live your life as you wish as long as it doesn't interfere with someone else living their life as they wish.

[lucifer]

I beleive in the philosophy of the Libertarian Party... Government is there to protect the country and its infrastructure and that's it. I hope that includes the people :)
You should be free to live your life as you wish as long as it doesn't interfere with someone else living their life as they wish.
this is where it gets tricky I want to drive my car and you want clean air. Where do we compromise :confused:

back to global capitalism for a moment the oil companies want to sell oil so they force the government to lower tax on it and disinform debate on any unwanted side effects

Any solution must involve enviromental issues being seriously included. Presently the only way is for 'bought governments' to place controls on and reduce demand for polluters

sadley bush is too SOLD :(

[Todd]

Originally posted by lucifer
this is where it gets tricky I want to drive my car and you want clean air. Where do we compromise :confused:

I would say that you can't restrict what we drive. You can feel free to buy an electric car and do as you please but you can't force it upon everyone else. If you want the clean air now before car manufacturers can improve things further then my suggestion is to buy an air purifier. ;)

We need to give car manufacturers to improve things on their own as well. We can't force them to improve things if they don't have the ability to do so on their own. The only way that I could see the government forcing them to change their cars is if there was absolutely no side effect to implementing this fix. Even if a viable alternative would be out right now you still have the problem of older cars. You can't force them to buy the new car and abandon their existing cars. For one you would seriously hurt the economy and you would anger a lot of citizens.

I find that most people that argue this pollution aspect drive on a daily basis. Take the bus and start car-pooling if you are going to argue this point. (You might do so, again a general comment)

Maybe monorails will become more industry standard in the future and the pollution will go down more but you still can't force people to stop driving the car that they prefer. After all the people sucking up all that gas and polluting so much are the same people that are paying the tax on gas, which is paying for the road, you want to drive on. :)

Don't even begin to attack the president for this one. The president alone can't change things by himself. It has to go to the house / senate before he can even approve it and at that stage people tack all sorts of things on to bills. If he disagrees with of the extra's that was tacked on then he has little choice but to veto it. This is usually why presidents state their objection / requirements before it reaches him. This way they usually won't tack on any extras that he has publicly objected to.

Most of this goes back to political issues again though and not the capitalist system.

[Doc]

"back to global capitalism for a moment the oil companies want to sell oil so they force the government to lower tax on it and disinform debate on any unwanted side effects "

Is it possible that others (besides corporations) are involved in the spreading of falsehoods? That perhaps the very organizations "informing" you of the dangers (in terms of the environment) of oil drilling are spreading their own form of propaganda to further their goals. Or is this tactic one solely employed by businessmen? The people who, I might add, are responsible for the lifestyle you lead today.

[Hobbes]

Look at China! Look at Russia! COMMUNISM JUST DOESN"T WORK! LOL.. No.. Actually, I think it would work quite well if it was done like the way the guy intended for it. Anyway. my 2cents


Originally posted by bigperm
Alternatives... Well, when Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto, he detailed how to become a better society. First off, you start where we are, with the means of production owned by the bourgouis, and then you would go into socialism. Socialism, where major services are owned by the government, (Healthcare, Transportation, etc). From socialism, you would go into communism, where everybody owns the means of production, everybody is equal, and everything is free.

Please don't reply to this and say "Look at Russia! Look at China!" "Communism will never work!"

I am working on a website that will explain all of these things in detail, and you can read about it there, when I get it done.

Right now though, I am not going to argue the merits of one econimic system or another over a message board.

So there is my 8 cents.

[Toefur]

YaY! 100 posts! LOL, not too far off that thousand now... ;-)

Just wanna say, as for communism... it's working pretty well in Cuba, isn't it? The majority of citizens love ol' Fidel; and the country has pretty damned decent health and education systems, and thats all with no outside help an' stuff.

As for cars, I believe that there are actually cars, designed and ready to go into production... that run on water. But this can't happen, why not? Because the big oil companies and such can't let this happen, 'cuz that would say byebye to their overly large amounts of money.

Yeah, theres lots of options.

I'm sure the decent one hasn't even been invented yet.

Until then, capitalism can go jump for all I car :)

[Doc]

The reason communism won't work is because it directly conflicts with human nature. People don't want everyone to be equal to them.

And Cuba!?!?!? You must be kidding me....they love Fidel?! Ever been to Miami? FULL of Cubans who didn't want to run up and hug Mr. Castro. How bout you head on over to Cuba for a while and see how it turns out....

(Gotta add one thing...edit)

"Overly" large amounts of money? And why exactly should oil companies have a limit on how much money they can make??

Do you honestly expect them to perform the service that they do for the amount of money that YOU decide is appropriate? How about I hop on over to your work place and put your salary at a level that I deem appropriate?

[Edited by Doc on 05-03-2001 at 12:27 AM]

[Webdude]

Originally posted by Doc
Do you honestly expect them to perform the service that they do for the amount of money that YOU decide is appropriate?

Hmmm, sounds like the old FWP discussion, but different industry :)

[}:8) Supermoo]

Originally posted by Toefur
As for cars, I believe that there are actually cars, designed and ready to go into production... that run on water. But this can't happen, why not? Because the big oil companies and such can't let this happen, 'cuz that would say byebye to their overly large amounts of money.

I've been informed several times by the fact that these cars have been invented although are almost instantly bought out by the oil companies. They pay the most, and buy all the plans, then deliberatley don't develop them.

So much for green fuel! ;)

[lucifer]

I would say that you can't restrict what we drive. You can feel free to buy an electric car and do as you please but you can't force it upon everyone else. If you want the clean air now before car manufacturers can improve things further then my suggestion is to buy an air purifier.


so when I drive past in my slightly leaky nuclear powered car that's fine.


Why is car use (and to widen the topic guns) a right that we should all have whilst being detrimental to the well being of others where as drugs which are detrimental to the users are deemed not allowed (except alcohol and tobacco)? I tell you the columbian drug barrons should have thrown a few $$$ in that presidential campaign.
Yes antisocial drug use causes problems but antisocial gun use is more deadly


The problem with capitalism is that it raises the interests of corporations above those of the public.

I know that most of us live in materialistic cultures (I read in some paper that something like 20% of all things people buy never get used) but how much of it is really needed I have loads of 'crap' which I have aquired over the years. Selling things people don't need is not the key to world success.

[Toefur]

Doc - All those cubans in miama are the criminals and con artists and such ;-)

As for the bit on water powered cars, I beleive you missed my point, Doc. No, i'm not asking for them to perform a service to us by losing all their money and letting water powered cars be produced... it's the fact that these extremely huge organisations have control over all of us. Most people I think would be happy to have a water powered car... and we all know it would do wonders for the environment... but, because of the capitalisttic ways, we don't even get the CHOICE to say, "I want this car that runs on water" or "screw these water cars, I want petroleum power!" They dictate to us what we use.

Supermoo - I reckon ---- Smith could do us australians a favour and develop these environmentally friendly cards, could make australai quite profitable ;-)

Selling things people don't need is not the key to world success.

But it's a key to greed and the success of capitalism...heh.

[Giancarlo]

I will be registered under the Republican Party, a by far more respectable party that can lead this country to greatness. The greater controls over the Economy that the Stupid Green and Democratic Party propose will do nothing but ruin the economy, and the Democratic Party is pretty much in shambles because of its rampant corruption and scandals.

[Todd]

Most people I think would be happy to have a water powered car... and we all know it would do wonders for the environment... but, because of the capitalisttic ways, we don't even get the CHOICE to say, "I want this car that runs on water" or "screw these water cars, I want petroleum power!" They dictate to us what we use.

Is there a water powered car out right now? No.. There is none that consumers can go buy right now. If it's not released then they obviously haven't perfected anything and don't think it's ready for the public.

Trust me when I say that if they had the technology and owned the patent they would try and develop it as they could make a fortune in this market if the car had no substantial problems or sound effects.

I've heard rumors of oil companies buying own any patents that may impact their business and from their POV it makes perfect sense. However, because of the free enterprise system the person holding the patent has the right to say no when the oil company offers to buy out the patent. No one is forcing you to do anything but your argument is the same as a person saying: "Where is my flying car? I saw on the news they were working on these a long time ago..."

If the product is not up to consumer’s standards it won't be released for obvious reasons. The only thing limiting you is the company’s standards for the product. If you can't wait for it then you should invent it yourself and you can release it. Obviously this is beyond what most of us can do and thus we wait for the product to be released.

Now just to clarify I have only heard others saying oil companies are buying out such patents. That could be a lie and the patents might not even work as expected. The bottom line is the system runs on supply and demand. I think the demand is there for an alternative fuel source and the supply will be filled eventually but first we have to wait until things are perfected. Now if you could prove that such actions went on you might have an arguing point regarding the capitalist system but again the person with the patent could have refused to sell it to them..

[Doc]

"it's the fact that these extremely huge organisations have control over all of us. Most people I think would be happy to have a water powered car... and we all know it would do wonders for the environment... but, because of the capitalisttic ways, we don't even get the CHOICE to say, "I want this car that runs on water" or "screw these water cars, I want petroleum power!" They dictate to us what we use."

And you honestly believe that without captialism, control would be returned to the people? :) Impossible. A few will always control the many. It's the nature of the world. It's the nature of man. The fact is that some men have greater abilities than others, and that these men will always eventually assume some sort of authority over the masses.

Additionally, capitalism IS the economic system that provides the MOST choice. Have you never heard of the long lines in the Soviet Union for bread and meat? Notice that I said bread and meat...not crackers, lunchables, caviar... etc.

[bigperm]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
I will be registered under the Republican Party, a by far more respectable party that can lead this country to greatness. The greater controls over the Economy that the Stupid Green and Democratic Party propose will do nothing but ruin the economy, and the Democratic Party is pretty much in shambles because of its rampant corruption and scandals.

I love it how people (republicans esp.) like to give vaugue, generalized reasons for their political choices, without actually proving a point one way or another. That lets them stay 'political' but they don't need to put any actual thought into it.

They shy away from political debate and 'details' and just say thing like "More respectable party" and "Stupid greens and democrats" or "The democaratic party is pretty much in shambles vecause of it's rampant corruption and scandals". What banal hearsay.

They also love to ask questions that you can't really answer, but make them look good. Like, on politically incorrect with Bill Maher, a republican asked him "Are you saying that in the last hundred years, family's have not contributed to the sucess of America?" It's like 'what the **** does that have to do with anything.'

OK Mr Smarty-pants republican... Explain how the biggest tax cut in this generation, and a 5% spending increase are good ideas, and will make this country more prosperous?

And you are going to register republican... So you aren't even 18 yet? Hah Hah.

Two little quotes for ya. Both From former president George Bush. (That G.W.'s dad...)

"I don't think atheists should be considered citizens"
"No no taxes" Which, you may or may not remember actually meant, "New taxes".

[Doc]

"OK Mr Smarty-pants republican... Explain how the biggest tax cut in this generation, and a 5% spending increase are good ideas, and will make this country more prosperous?"

Freeing up more money for corporations encourages them to invest it back into the economy, either through their own operations or via any of the many investment options available. Freeing up money for consumers encourages them to spend more, which directly puts it back into the economy and allows for even more expansion and investment.

The 5% spending increase is a necessary evil. I'm sure you're aware of the little devil known as inflation. The spending increase is needed to keep pace with inflation. Additionally, the Democrats are the ones pushing for higher increases in spending (this can be ignored unless you are of the mind that Republicans solely determine both tax cuts and budgets).

[Doc]

"They also love to ask questions that you can't really answer, but make them look good. Like, on politically incorrect with Bill Maher, a republican asked him "Are you saying that in the last hundred years, family's have not contributed to the sucess of America?" It's like 'what the **** does that have to do with anything.'"

Actually, if the topic of the moment happens to be whether or not traditional family lifestyles are important, then the question is entirely valid. Since you seem to be hitting Republicans so hard, what exactly are you? Dem, Green, Ind., or what?

As for me, in case you can't tell, I don't consider myself either (still looking for the right label), but I vote Republican, simply because I've yet to hear anything but alarmist filth from Dem candidates.

[lucifer]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
the Stupid Green ...will do nothing but ruin the economy

but maybe not the planet.

[Giancarlo]

Bigperm, you are misrepresentated in this Government. I am voting for the Republican Party for one reason: I want our Leadership to free up Captial that is stuck in Washington used by filthy, corrupt Democrats for their little projects. I am against Corruption, and this country has a lot of it. The Democrats want to do nothing but screw up this nation, by increasing taxes... well I got one thing to say to the tax increasers of this nation, go ahead make my day. Tax Increasements means reduced productivity, and reduced productivity means recession and plummenting demand. We must reduce taxs while increasing spending to ensure a bright prosperous future for all Americans, the Green and Democratic Party do not want a prosperous future that George W. Bush has planned because they want to turn the United States of America into an Socialist Screwball nation. I SAY: GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH! George W. Bush is not appealing to the Religious Crowd, but to the Atheist Crowd and I believe he has nothing against Atheism because it does not belong in the Government. That may be the only place where I might be in an slight disagreement with Bush but in every other area I agree with him. Now cut the crap and read a reliable source for a change, because you are clearly misrepresentated and need some help. And stop voting for the Corrupt Bureaucrats because in the last eight years corruption and scandals have filled the Press mainly about Democrats and their filthy lives.

[Edited by Giancarlo on 05-03-2001 at 06:41 PM]

[Mandrake]

http://www.lp.org

The only political party that makes sense!

[Giancarlo]

Ugh, Libertarian Party... for Free Trade, I am an isolationist. Unfornately that is not the suited party for me. And geez, Legalization of Drugs, the Libertarian Party is full of crap. Vote Republican!

[Giancarlo]

but maybe not the planet.

The Green Party wants to screw the nation's economy and the world's economy by putting strict controls over everything. Well I will fight if that occurs, because I don't want to live in an Communist State that the Green and Democratic Party suggest.

[bigperm]

We must reduce taxs while increasing spending to ensure a bright prosperous future for all Americans

That makes so much sense. I can't beleive I didn't think of that. Let's make it so that we get in less money, and then spend, EVEN MORE! That will take care of our national debt.

[meow]

Originally posted by Doc
Have you never heard of the long lines in the Soviet Union for bread and meat? Notice that I said bread and meat...not crackers, lunchables, caviar... etc.


http://www.us-history.com/photos/30301.html

[Todd]

Keep this thread clean guys. I don't mind intense debate but I don't want to see these personal attacks or challenges so to speak. If you have an issue with another member take it up with them off the forum. Now back to the topic...

[Doc]

Touche :)

So once we had something called the Great Depression. And the Soviets had what? The Eternal Depression.

[lucifer]

hopefully americans will learn at some point that the vision of the future that they belive in is unsustainable. America is part of the world however much it tries to pretend that it is a seperate entity with no connection with the rest of it.

the us has about 5% of the population but produces 25% of the carbon dioxide. If the other 95% were as wasteful then we would be truely F****D.

it is time for all the world to accept that you cannot live in isolation.

the wealth of america is based on the povety of others. If nothing else than sucess is measured in relative wealth. Capitalism needs unemployment and povery to create a mass of people prepared to do unwanted jobs for little/no money.

all talk of wealth trickling down through society is crap and has no evidence to support it.

capitalism will one day be looked at with the same disgust as slavery is now, although I fear that some contributers of this forum proberbly belive that as they are superiour to all the other people of the planet they should be worshiped and served by them.
And people said that the abolishion of slavery would destroy society/economy etc...

[Doc]

Population is irrelevant. Have you considered the fact that maybe we produce so much carbon dioxide because WE PRODUCE SO MUCH (referring the production of goods).


Originally posted by lucifer
the wealth of america is based on the povety of others. If nothing else than sucess is measured in relative wealth. Capitalism needs unemployment and povery to create a mass of people prepared to do unwanted jobs for little/no money.

Ah yes...because God forbid that some people have to jobs that don't please them. God forbid that not everyone earns the same amount of money. People should be paid irregardless of ability!

You continue to neglect one glaring fact. The poor of our country have a standard of living MUCH higher than the peoples of other nations. So evidently, some of the wealth DOES flow down.


]Originally posted by lucifer [B]
capitalism will one day be looked at with the same disgust as slavery is now, although I fear that some contributers of this forum proberbly belive that as they are superiour to all the other people of the planet they should be worshiped and served by them. {/B]


Sorry bub, but Capitalism will remain for many years to come, despite attempts to destroy it. As for feelings of superiority, YES I do believe that a nation which requires people to utilize their abilities to get ahead is superior to one which blindly equates everyone as the same. The facts are that all people are not created equal. There are a full range of levels of intelligence, from idiot to genius. All men fall within this range, and the worth of a man is determined by his abilities.

I've been hearing a lot of talk in which you and those who agree with you flout litanies of theories in which "America bad, evil beast of the world." Why not tell us what your preferred system is, and start telling us why it's so grand and great?

[meow]

Originally posted by Doc
Ah yes...because God forbid that some people have to jobs that don't please them. God forbid that not everyone earns the same amount of money.[/sarcasm
Correct! That's exactly what he did.

[sarcasm] People should be paid irregardless of ability!
I'm so glad to hear that if you some day are disabled (God forbid) you will find your place in the gutter comfortable.


The poor of our country have a standard of living MUCH higher than the peoples of other nations.
Really? To me it seems like you don't know very much about other countries or even about other neighborhoods than your own.

Your arguments are about as valid as those of a kid telling the others that he has a right to the last piece of pie because his father has the largest car. If you really are a kid, I'll hope you will excuse me.

[Doc]

Originally posted by Doc
[sarcasm] Ah yes...because God forbid that some people have to jobs that don't please them. God forbid that not everyone earns the same amount of money.[/sarcasm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




And when, pray tell, was this?


I'm so glad to hear that if you some day are disabled (God forbid) you will find your place in the gutter comfortable.

First, no I might not find my place in the gutter comfortable, but the fact remains that these people are provided for. They do not receive as much as those who actively contribute via business, but they receive more than they would when left to their own abilities. Explain something to me (rather than just tossing out a criticism with no support): Why should someone who does nothing receive the same as someone who saves a life each day, like a doctor?

Really? To me it seems like you don't know very much about other countries or even about other neighborhoods than your own. [/QUOTE]

If you know so much, then why don't you explain your position rather than making inflammatory comments about mine. I give a reason and provide the logic behind it. You toss out a criticism with nothing to back it up. Oh great and knowledgeable man of the world, have mercy on us ignorant knaves and share your supposed knowledge! :)


Your arguments are about as valid as those of a kid telling the others that he has a right to the last piece of pie because his father has the largest car. If you really are a kid, I'll hope you will excuse me.

Well, I'll assume that if my father has the largest car then I have the most money...correct? All things have a cost, so why shouldn't the one who has the most money be able to outbid the others and purchase the last piece of the pie? Futhermore, if you disagree with that logic and believe that purchasing power should not be the decisive factor, then I would like you to tell me WHO gets to decide who is WORTHY of the pie?

[Mandrake]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
Ugh, Libertarian Party... for Free Trade, I am an isolationist. Unfornately that is not the suited party for me. And geez, Legalization of Drugs, the Libertarian Party is full of crap. Vote Republican!

The Republican Party used to have a similar philosophy to the Libertarians, but they got lost somewhere along the way.

What's the point in this "War on Drugs" that our government has been undertaking? They have spent millions of dollars plus man-hours fighting drugs and drug-trafficking and the it's still as widespread as ever. It's a waste of time and tax money. Making it legal and taxing it would make the government better off in the long run... (i.e. making money off of it instead of spending it)... and would reduce crime as the vast majority of crime in this country is drug-related anymore.

[lucifer]

Originally posted by Doc

Well, I'll assume that if my father has the largest car then I have the most money...correct? All things have a cost, so why shouldn't the one who has the most money be able to outbid the others and purchase the last piece of the pie?

Ah so it's not ability that counts it's how much you inherit from your family

[Doc]

Ah so it's not ability that counts it's how much you inherit from your family

Not so. No system is perfect. The general measure used to value ability in any society is money. Now it is possible for someone to inherit a large sum of money and not have any ability whatsoever, but that's perfectly acceptable.

Why? Because the man who has money gets to decide what he does with it. He may purchase cars, he may buy a house or he may give it to charity. He also has the option of purchasing security for his family. That is where inheritance comes into play, and that is why men without ability may have more money than men that do. They are benefitting from the ability of their relatives. To deny a man the ability to leave his estate to his family is to decide for him what he may spend his money (the product of his abilities) on, and NO MAN has the right to decide for another.


Additionally, you took my statement out of the context in which it was said. A better example of the relationship between ability and money is possible, but I was rebutting the situation presented by Meow.

[bigperm]

http://www.stopthedrugwar.com

Thank you Mandrake for bringing that up. I think that the drug war is a big waste of money, and if you actually read (http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/2503/lyrics01.html) up on it... (http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_faq1.shtml) The only reason the marijuana is illegal is because that plant would have undermined big corporations in their production of other, more polluting natural fibers.

Hemp is the world's strongest natural fiber. Why is it illegal?

[lucifer]

Originally posted by Doc
Population is irrelevant. Have you considered the fact that maybe we produce so much carbon dioxide because WE PRODUCE SO MUCH (referring the production of goods)

I thought it was because

the average american car has a huge engine and uses loads of fuel compared to almost any other part of the world.

Energy conservation is not considered in making a purchase in some countries this is ranked more important than price by consumers. plus the american desire for bigger and better(?) consumer goods and irational belief that if it's efficiant then it must not do as good a job (hence lots of energy hungry products)

People using air conditioning when they could just open a window (or turn the heating off)

a belief that there are unlimited resources and that anything bad will just go away

eg californian electric supply -

be energy efficient = no powercuts

a huge percentage is wasted


Sorry this is not meant as an attack on all americans some of who can clearly think and are aware of their impact. All countries have lots of work to do but at least most are prepared to do something like sign the kyoto agreement

[lucifer]

Originally posted by bigperm
http://www.stopthedrugwar.com

Thank you Mandrake for bringing that up. I think that the drug war is a big waste of money, and if you actually read (http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/2503/lyrics01.html) up on it... (http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_faq1.shtml) The only reason the marijuana is illegal is because that plant would have undermined big corporations in their production of other, more polluting natural fibers.

Hemp is the world's strongest natural fiber. Why is it illegal?

used to be laws in many countries requiring it's cultivation (rope for the navy)

[Doc]

Well my father actually happens to work in the nuclear power industry. He once worked at a place called Rancho Seco outside Sacramento, California. This plant supplied power for dominant portions of the state. It was closed by environmentalists who claimed it was dangerous. They chose to purchase power from out of state rather than use an effective, safe means of generating power.

The problems in California are a result of stupidity and are a clear example of how misinformed masses can do more harm than good.

[QUOTE]Sorry this is not meant as an attack on all americans some of who can clearly think and are aware of their impact. All countries have lots of work to do but at least most are prepared to do something like sign the kyoto agreement

This is actually becoming a rather common refrain amongst some of you. Signing the Kyoto agreement will not result in drastic changes. It is a ploy by those who pull the strings. The true intent of the Kyoto agreement is to provide a means by which UN Security Forces may "justifiably" invade nations and undermine their sovereignity. It is an attempt to strengthen the one organization which is attempting to bring about world government, something which all of us should fear.

[lucifer]

Originally posted by Doc
The poor of our country have a standard of living MUCH higher than the peoples of other nations

I agree with meow. It would seem you don't get out much.

Did anyone tell you that the stuff you see on the TV isn't all real. America may be the land of the free for some and yes if you've got money life can be very good, but there is some serious poverty and deprevation about proberbly hidden away from your nice white (an assumption I know) suburb



It might also interest you that there are some people in other countries that have a high standard of living though quality of life is, I feel, a better measure.

[Doc]

Did anyone tell you that the stuff you see on the TV isn't all real. America may be the land of the free for some and yes if you've got money life can be very good, but there is some serious poverty and deprevation about proberbly hidden away from your nice white (an assumption I know) suburb

DEAR GOD! THERE'S POVERTY IN AMERICA!?...

I'm aware of this. I'm also aware that quality of life is directly related to freedom.

FYI - I don't watch TV. And the fact that all your arguments boil down to insults reveals the fact that you have nothing to support your ideals with. You call yourself Lucifer. You insult my positions instead of supporting your own, and you ACTUALLY BELIEVE that you are fit to judge ME? PFFFFT....

Your ignorance is only compounded by the fact that you refuse to acknowledge it....

I've asked you before and i'll ask you again. What is the solution? What is the magical system that you have knowledge of, but I don't? And please try to come up with your own thoughts...the petty rhetoric you've been citing can be found on any television channel.

[lucifer]

Originally posted by Doc
nuclear power industry......effective, safe means of generating power.


3 mile island chenoble - I know its all different and everything is safe and tested - just like nasa's mars lander ;)


clear example of how misinformed masses can do more harm than good.

like the bush supporters
(sorry that was low)


The true intent of the Kyoto agreement is to provide a means by which UN Security Forces may "justifiably" invade nations and undermine their sovereignity. It is an attempt to strengthen the one organization which is attempting to bring about world government, something which all of us should fear.

The us may fear the undermining of it's position as self elected world police - though only over issues that effect it's interests like oil

but the kyoto agreement was designed to buy time before really doing something about environmental change

It's a first step

[Doc]

And just exactly how do you know so much? You present me as ignorant, yet you have not justified your right to call me such.

[meow]

Originally posted by Doc
[QUOTE}eg californian electric supply -
Well my father actually happens to work in the nuclear power industry


Ouch! Yeah, radiation can do nasty things to your genes. :D
(Sorry, but you ask for it)

[lucifer]

Originally posted by Doc
And just exactly how do you know so much? You present me as ignorant, yet you have not justified your right to call me such.


Sorry I'm not trying to be personal - just expressing my views

anyway I have to go drink beer ...

plus I was inspired by a recent post by bigperm ;)

catch you's later

[Todd]

Originally posted by bigperm
http://www.stopthedrugwar.com
Hemp is the world's strongest natural fiber. Why is it illegal?

I think that's for another thread. I can fight both sides of the legalizing drugs issue as well. Feel free to start a thread about it. I'm more against legalization then for but mainly because the effects (I believe) it will have on the country.


Originally posted by lucifer
People using air conditioning when they could just open a window (or turn the heating off)

In regards to California they have some incredibly hot weather there at times and I can't blame them for using the AC. If you live in the states I'm sure you've seen many new stories about the elderly and when their AC goes out they can dehydrate and die. This is obviously only impacting only a select few but if this is a slam against air conditioning I think you should move on... :) The same applies for when the heat goes out and it's negative ten degrees out. It's a serious issue and getting rid of heat / ac isn't a fix. Cutting down on its usage may be a temporary solution.


a belief that there are unlimited resources and that anything bad will just go away

That is purely speculation on your side. I can't recall hearing one president, senator, or anyone say that the problems will just go away without doing anything. Which means to me that you are making a guess that people think this. When people refer to an issue as needing time it's not that they are dismissing it but rather saying things need to change before it can be dealt with.


eg californian electric supply - be energy efficient = no powercuts; a huge percentage is wasted

True some may be wasted. With these power cuts they are slowing down the economy as well. I just heard that some oil refineries are located in CA and if their power is cut much more then gas will go up even more as their is less of a supply. The key is to be more efficient until new solutions are found. There are many other natural resource alternatives to generate power and eventually when they are put in place these issues should go away. The key is to manage it effeciently enough so that as the demand increases your supply increases as much; hence the need for better planning. Generating power should not be difficult by using solar/wind/hydroelectric/etc power.


Sorry this is not meant as an attack on all americans some of who can clearly think and are aware of their impact. All countries have lots of work to do but at least most are prepared to do something like sign the kyoto agreement

I don't think it's being perceived as an attack against us but rather a debate. I think you have good intentions to help the environment but the path that we take to get there will be where the controversy is.

I'm curious to know though if you’re against capitalism and against so much of what is being done in the US then what are you for? Anyone can gripe about problems (as they perceive them) but it's not quite as easy to come up with solutions. I won't say the US government is perfect by any means but I think we're doing quite well considering everything that is being dealt with.

[bigperm]

anyway I have to go drink beer ...

That's exaclty what I think about it too. It's friday... Time to go and have fun. A funny story... Me and a bunch of friends went up to this cabin in virginia. It's a huge cabin, with 50 beds, and in the middle of 850 acres of land on the side of a mountain. So we got a bunch of beer, and went up there. Well, when we got there, we found a troop of boy scouts camping there without permission, saying that they've been coming there for years. Well they guy that owns the cabin was with us, and decided not to make them leave, and we partied anyway, and just let them do whatever it is that they do. Well, I was sitting around the campfire, talking to one of my buds, and one of their scout leaders comes up to me, and starts talking politics. Before we even started debating, I turned to my friend Charlie, and whispered in his ear "He's a narc". Then we went on to discuss all kinds of things, he being a republican, and me being... well... me. We got really loud, and after he said that he thinks that people with more money are better than people with less money, I stopped even listening to him. Turns out, he is a prosecuter for the county that I live in in North Carolina. NARC! Also, I had a court date coming up, and I hoped he wasn't procescuting against me, because I was drinking the whole time we debated (I was 18 at the time).

Everytime he said something dumb, I would drink a beer. That is how I feel about this thread. I am going to go drink a lot of beer.

:::He turned out to not be my prosecuter
And as far as the magical solution, well I don't have it, but Jello Biafra here has a pretty good start I think.
http://www.greens.org/jellobiafra/jello.htm

[atlas]

Originally posted by lucifer

Originally posted by Doc
nuclear power industry......effective, safe means of generating power.


3 mile island chenoble - I know its all different and everything is safe and tested - just like nasa's mars lander ;)



Have you read much about the generation of nuclear power? If you did, you wouldn't make such statements. Go read the facts.

If it weren't for all the radioactive waste that is generated it would be easily the best form of power generation. If an appropriate solution to that problem is found then it will be even better. It's a clean, reliable, and safe power source.

The part that makes it expensive is the safety -- precisely what chernobyl didn't have.

Maybe you'll agree nuclear is the solution in later years when we run out of fossil fuels....

-mk

[Doc]

thanks bigperm for posting that link...showed me things about the Green party i didn't know...

"We donÆt need a flat tax, but a flattening tax, to truly level the playing field. After all, what causes more damage to the planet, drug addiction or wealth addiction? Hopefully the maximum wage will raise enough money to fill the cups of everyone who makes less than $100,000 so weÆll all be even. And can we please find a clearer, sexier term than æsingle-payer health careÆ next time itÆs a ballot initiative?"

---ok...check yes next to socialist


"Abolish the Military"

---because those friendly people in the rest of the world will respect our rights without one...(i'm being sarcastic again)


"And the CIA, NSA, DIA, DEA, ATF, hopefully the FBI, and disband all SWAT teams."

---because we don't need spies or counter-intelligence organizations....nobody is spying on us...certainly not the Chinese, Russians etc..:)


"Withdraw from NAFTA and the World Trade Organization."

---not a bad idea actually..these organizations only further the globalization process...the process which leads to world government and oppression..(oh..and i'm serious..not being sarcastic this time)


"Irradiated and GM (Genetically Mutilated) frankenfood and other products must be labeled. "

---this would make me happy :)


"End the war on drugs"

----do it...I lean libertarian on this one...I believe that people have the right to decide for themselves...if they wanna smoke crack and shoot some heroin...let them...so long as they don't come crying to me when they start to die...


"Make police officers stand for election every four years, voted on by the districts they patrol."

---we wouldn't have many winners...:)

The rest of the ideas were pretty out there, and pretty much served to turn the entire message into one big whacko speech. :)

OH well, enough posts for the day. I'm off to drink that beer that everyone keeps talking about. If I'm lucky I'll get to oppress the poor and kill some trees while I'm out there. :D

[Doc]

Before I go, I must thank Atlas for his knowledgeable answer. :D

And meow..the radiation did get me...i'm 6'5" and I never got my wisdom teeth!!!! (yes i realize that neither one of those facts is unusual)

[atlas]

Originally posted by lucifer

I thought it was because

the average american car has a huge engine and uses loads of fuel compared to almost any other part of the world.


I actually agree with this point. People drive big SUVs that guzzle gas -- and they don't need the power.

As another point though -- North America is much more spread out than Europe. People need to go farther to places and the mass-transit systems don't provide ways to get to many places -- thus cars are almost a necessity. In Europe there is less space (more dense) and gas is taxed highly to discourage the use of the car.



Energy conservation is not considered in making a purchase in some countries this is ranked more important than price by consumers. plus the american desire for bigger and better(?) consumer goods and irational belief that if it's efficiant then it must not do as good a job (hence lots of energy hungry products)

People using air conditioning when they could just open a window (or turn the heating off)


Hmmm.. go to Nevada and live there without A/C for the summer :) That should be sufficient to explain why people have A/C in those areas.



a belief that there are unlimited resources and that anything bad will just go away

eg californian electric supply -

be energy efficient = no powercuts

a huge percentage is wasted


True, some is wasted, yet you miss the main point of the issue. The main problem is that the economics of the situation didn't work as planned. When California they deregulated their power system they improperly set some of the restrictions and rules on the buying of power. In turn, the power plants that needed to get built didn't get built. Economics.....



Sorry this is not meant as an attack on all americans some of who can clearly think and are aware of their impact. All countries have lots of work to do but at least most are prepared to do something like sign the kyoto agreement


Try looking at the pollution third world countries produce. China managed to duck out of all emissions controls.

It's certainly not the truth that all scientists agree with the theory of global warming.

Guess who uses the most energy and pollute the most... New cars have strict pollution regulations. Poor people drive the old cars that are broken with the catalytic converter gone 100,000 miles ago. Their houses have the old windows, old insulation, and poor weatherstripping. We don't need to put harsh and expensive regulations on the business that is already under controls -- instead use money to help rebuild the poor neighborhoods and fix their homes. More rules aren't going to help.

-mk


[Edited by atlas on 05-04-2001 at 04:10 PM]

[Giancarlo]

God, I am like the Pat Buchanan compared to some of you... so you want this nation to be a nation without the system of justice and laws? Do you want this nation to be a system where a few get everything, like in Communism? Well not when I am alive because if any of you get into politics I will make your life miserable. So you want to increase taxes on those who spend in this nation, and reduce productivity? Well that is not the philosophy that our foundings fathers would of wanted. Do you want to increase taxes, so unemployment goes up and people can't afford it? Do you want to increase the Poverty line like the Democrat's have been doing for the past eight years, believe me the Republicans care about all Classes. That is why we are working on building up the wealth and strength of the Middle and Upper Classes so they can expand, and the Lower Class can reduce itself. The Democrats propose new programs to drive the Middle Class to bankruptcy, and yes this may help the Lower Class, but it will increase the size of the Lower Class because the taxes will send the Lower-Middle and even Middle-Middle Classes to the Lower Class.

[atlas]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
God, I am like the Pat Buchanan compared to some of you... so you want this nation to be a nation without the system of justice and laws? Do you want this nation to be a system where a few get everything, like in Communism?


Communism isn't the only way to even out wealth, nor is socialism (which assumes government run businesses). Having a more progressive tax system than the one currently in place would even it out more -- much like many European countries have. I would rather see a tax system in between the European one and the American one.



Well not when I am alive because if any of you get into politics I will make your life miserable. So you want to increase taxes on those who spend in this nation, and reduce productivity? Well that is not the philosophy that our foundings fathers would of wanted. Do you want to increase taxes, so unemployment goes up and people can't afford it?


What economics is this based on? If you study taxation you'll find that the employer generally will only end up paying 10% of the taxes placed on employment -- and if the tax is neutral it won't change people's behavior.



Do you want to increase the Poverty line like the Democrat's have been doing for the past eight years, believe me the Republicans care about all Classes. That is why we are working on building up the wealth and strength of the Middle and Upper Classes so they can expand, and the Lower Class can reduce itself. The Democrats propose new programs to drive the Middle Class to bankruptcy, and yes this may help the Lower Class, but it will increase the size of the Lower Class because the taxes will send the Lower-Middle and even Middle-Middle Classes to the Lower Class.


This is pretty poor economic theory, where did this come from? Overall the market is more efficient as the playing field becomes more equal --> more competition.

I don't know who wrote this earlier, but removing ourselves from WTO and NAFTA?! Why would we want to do that? It allows further specicialization of labor in which everyone benefits. Building a wall around our country doesn't help. Where do you think all your computer parts were built?

With that said, I generally vote and hold conservative positions, but I'm not registered with any party. I study issues and don't buy into political rhetoric.

-mk

[atlas]

Looking further back.... this is an interesting thread -- yet full of inaccurate information


Originally posted by lucifer
and drug companies making huge profits while people die - only reason the case in south africa got dropped was the information on how much profit they make would have to be released.


Hmmm.. they already disclose their profits. Most, if not all, drug companies are publically traded. They have to post their earnings, profit reports, etc.

As for them making profits, if they weren't given patents (to keep generics from competing against them) they would be driven out of business and there would be no incentive to ever develop new drugs. The Africa case was dropped since generics were going to be allowed there and the drug makers would have lost even more (rather than accepting the lower rate)

-mk

[Giancarlo]

The thing is with me is that I am Far-Right on Economic Issues and Centerist on Social Issues.

[Mandrake]

The Libertarian philosophy is eliminate income tax (an the IRS along with it) and rely solely on sales tax. That way, those who save money will be rewarded and those who spend frivolously will pay. Cut back on all the government bloat and waste and just concentrate on the main issues of law enforcement and national defense and sales tax would be more than enough.

[bigperm]

Do you want this nation to be a system where a few get everything, like in Communism?

Do you not know what communism is?

[lucifer]

Originally posted by atlas
Looking further back.... this is an interesting thread -- yet full of inaccurate information


Originally posted by lucifer
and drug companies making huge profits while people die - only reason the case in south africa got dropped was the information on how much profit they make would have to be released.


Hmmm.. they already disclose their profits. Most, if not all, drug companies are publically traded. They have to post their earnings, profit reports, etc.

-mk

they only produce general figures nothing specific to individual products - this is all classified and could cause them embarassing problems if released

more money is spent by them on advertising than on r+d.
(I know several people in glaxo-smithcline or whatever it's called after the recent merger)

[lucifer]

Originally posted by Todd


Originally posted by lucifer
People using air conditioning when they could just open a window (or turn the heating off)

In regards to California they have some incredibly hot weather there at times and I can't blame them for using the AC

Sometimes we need heating and cooling true. But how many of you work in offices with the heating on and all the windows open? I certainly have in my time. Sometime we need to use resources the problem is using them just because we can - people need to take more responsibility for their actions. It's like the car. if your going 200 meters you can walk instead. If you need to go 20 miles to pick up a new washing machine then yes a car is a good idea. It's keeping things in proportion. I'm not suggesting that heating/cooling should be outlawed. Butmaybe occassional when your sat at home in your T-shirt and you feel a little cold you might put on a jumper not the heating - just a thought ;)



a belief that there are unlimited resources and that anything bad will just go away

That is purely speculation on your side. .... Which means to me that you are making a guess that people think this.

....

The key is to be more efficient until new solutions are found. There are many other natural resource alternatives to generate power and eventually when they are put in place these issues should go away

this is where I get this idea from.. we need to be more efficient and stay more efficient. depite dreams of cold fussion and perpetual motion the concept of endless energy is unrealistic and just a way of saying we don't need to worry about this it will all go away!

[lucifer]

Originally posted by atlas

Have you read much about the generation of nuclear power? If you did, you wouldn't make such statements. Go read the facts.

If it weren't for all the radioactive waste that is generated it would be easily the best form of power generation. If an appropriate solution to that problem is found then it will be even better. It's a clean, reliable, and safe power source.

The part that makes it expensive is the safety -- precisely what chernobyl didn't have.

Maybe you'll agree nuclear is the solution in later years when we run out of fossil fuels....

-mk



the problem with nuclear power is the radioactive waste!!! The rest of it is fine

nuclear powerplants were set up purley to manufacture weapons grade plutoniom energy generation was just a byproduct - OK we now have enough for all the warheads we need so the reason may be different now but nuclear power production is about vested interests doing well not based on any sound economic sence - the cost of storing the waste (no-one has worked out any solution so they store it in the hope that someday they will work out how to dispose of it.) is massive especially when the storage time could well be 100,000 years.

I don't have anything against nuclear power but an industry that produces deadly materials that it doesn't know how to deal with is a big concern in my books

the issue about safety is an important one but the problem with it is that nothing is 100% safe however planned things are! what is important is what will happen when things go wrong and with a nuclear instalation when things go wrong they go very wrong - there are leaks of radioactive waste from such places frequently plus they are allowed to discharge a 'safe' amount anyway (plus they get a big say in what is safe) I gave the nasa mars as an illustration that however well planned things can go wrong -


another nasa story

The old challanger explosion is an example of a concern that was ignored - the engineers who made one of the rubber bits discovered there was a big problem if the temperature was too low at launch time. Nasa was informed they said 'I'm sure everything will be fine' the engineers said no you won't be it'll all go wrong wait for warmer weather. Nasa didn't want to change the launch date so the sent it anyway. It blew up - that was a suprise

accidents happen people make mistakes

[Giancarlo]

Do you not know what communism is?

Yeah I do, it makes everyone equal. Makes everyone become equally poor.

[atlas]

Originally posted by lucifer

the problem with nuclear power is the radioactive waste!!! The rest of it is fine

nuclear powerplants were set up purley to manufacture weapons grade plutoniom energy generation was just a byproduct


This displays a lack of knowledge regarding the nuclear power industry.



- OK we now have enough for all the warheads we need so the reason may be different now but nuclear power production is about vested interests doing well not based on any sound economic sence - the cost of storing the waste (no-one has worked out any solution so they store it in the hope that someday they will work out how to dispose of it.) is massive especially when the storage time could well be 100,000 years.
I don't have anything against nuclear power but an industry that produces deadly materials that it doesn't know how to deal with is a big concern in my books


There are many options that are available for the high-level radioactive waste. It's based more on people refusing to commit to a location rather than additional tests needing to be done. Various procedures, such as vitrification can remove the risk considerably.



the issue about safety is an important one but the problem with it is that nothing is 100% safe however planned things are! what is important is what will happen when things go wrong and with a nuclear instalation when things go wrong they go very wrong - there are leaks of radioactive waste from such places frequently plus they are allowed to discharge a 'safe' amount anyway (plus they get a big say in what is safe) I gave the nasa mars as an illustration that however well planned things can go wrong -


Leaks? Yes, perhaps on the nuclear reservations where the government was working, and where poorly-built low-level waste sites are built now -- not the power facilities.



frequently plus they are allowed to discharge a 'safe' amount anyway


Uhhh.... now where did you pull that from? The only think they discharge is steam and/or hot water.



another nasa story

The old challanger explosion is an example of a concern that was ignored - the engineers who made one of the rubber bits discovered there was a big problem if the temperature was too low at launch time. Nasa was informed they said 'I'm sure everything will be fine' the engineers said no you won't be it'll all go wrong wait for warmer weather. Nasa didn't want to change the launch date so the sent it anyway. It blew up - that was a suprise

accidents happen people make mistakes

I think we all know the story of the Challenger. What does this have to do with nuclear power? Travelling to space is inherently unsafe due to the fact you really can't add as many safety features, etc due to weight considerations and such. That was also just plain stupidity on their part.

Places such as Chernobyl lacked a containment dome, so if something went wrong -- then yes there would be a problem, like it did. The fact is that when it's properly built, like those in the US, Canada, and western Europe there aren't problems.

Three Mile Island: There were tons of problems there. Amazingly enough only a small part of radiation was released.

-mk

[Doc]

nuclear powerplants were set up purley to manufacture weapons grade plutoniom energy generation was just a byproduct - OK we now have enough for all the warheads we need so the reason may be different now but nuclear power production is about vested interests doing well not based on any sound economic sence - the cost of storing the waste (no-one has worked out any solution so they store it in the hope that someday they will work out how to dispose of it.) is massive especially when the storage time could well be 100,000 years.

Alright, now who doesn't get out much? No sound economic sense?!?


I don't have anything against nuclear power but an industry that produces deadly materials that it doesn't know how to deal with is a big concern in my books

They store the waste in facilities which prevent it causing harm to anyone or anything. They KNOW how to deal with it and they do. What would you like them to do, turn the waste into bunnies?


the issue about safety is an important one but the problem with it is that nothing is 100% safe however planned things are! what is important is what will happen when things go wrong and with a nuclear instalation when things go wrong they go very wrong - there are leaks of radioactive waste from such places frequently

Oh really! How about you list about a dozen American incidents involving radiation leaks? Our plants are HEAVILY regulated, and the safety systems are redundant. One thing happens and the whole plant stops. Nuclear plants don't continuously produce power. When they are producing power they produce more than enough for consumption and store some for the times when a minor problem occurs.

"When things go wrong, they go very wrong.."

That is blatantly false. NEVER has a person in the United States been killed as a result of radiation from a malfunction.



plus they are allowed to discharge a 'safe' amount anyway (plus they get a big say in what is safe) I gave the nasa mars as an illustration that however well planned things can go wrong

That is false also. They neither are allowed to discharge any radiation, nor are they given a say in what is safe. A federal agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, has permanent employees staffed at each plant. When ANYTHING happens, these guys are in the thick of the action making sure everyone behaves according to the book. The penalties for violations are VERY steep.

Your statements are a prime example of the misinformation and propaganda commonly used by proponents of extremist environmentalism.

[Giancarlo]

The Last little incident was the Three Mile High incident in 1979. It didn't kill anyone, and it was repaired. The Cherynobyl Accident was because of inexperienced Soviet Nuclear Workers, and the US isn't like that so Nuclear Power is real reliable and the best source for energy.

[bigperm]

I think that nuclear power stations are only good for 75 years? Someone told me that...

[atlas]

Originally posted by bigperm
I think that nuclear power stations are only good for 75 years? Someone told me that...

I don't know the specifics there, but that may be the case. The reality is that powerplants do need to be rebuilt regardless of what type they are: coal, natural gas, nuclear.

-mk

[Giancarlo]

Then we can replace old plants, Bigperm. Look lets have an constructive talk here... because I am tired of all of this. Fossil Fuel Plants I heard have to replaced in what... 60 or 50 years? Nuclear Power is still the best source of power out there to help power the Private Sector in getting the best rights for the people in captialism.

[bigperm]

Well, did you know that every single nuclear wastse diposal facility is on the west of the missisippi river? So all of the ones on the east side would have a rather expensive trek to take their waste all the way over there. Wouldn't it be cheaper and easier for them to just dump it behind a school or something? I don't know... I don't really have strong opinions about power supplies, I think that it all sucks because we don't really have control over any of it.

So if that water car comes out... How much do you think water will cost? Also, I saw a thing on dateline about a car in france that ran on compressed air... anybody else see that?

[Giancarlo]

Unfornately, those will be too expensive or won't be used at all. The Fuel Cell is a new innovation that will be arriving sooner or later... and is actually out now but is extremely expensive. I suggest, if you live in a country that has cheap, Natural Gas... where you can get some cars converted to that standard. In Argentina, my family might get our $30,000 Chrysler Sport SE Minivan to that standard because we paid enough for the car already. CNG, Compressed Natural Gas is an clean yet cheap way which is rare because usually clean means very, very expensive. For a first, it does not reduce the horsepower or how fast the car go as originally thought, because the Natural Gas is utilized more efficently then before. CNG costs $2/Gallon here, and Regular 87 Gasoline costs $4.50/Gallon.

I usually side with the Pro-Nuclear, Pro-Petroleum Corporations.

[atlas]

Originally posted by bigperm
Well, did you know that every single nuclear wastse diposal facility is on the west of the missisippi river? So all of the ones on the east side would have a rather expensive trek to take their waste all the way over there. Wouldn't it be cheaper and easier for them to just dump it behind a school or something? I don't know... I don't really have strong opinions about power supplies, I think that it all sucks because we don't really have control over any of it.


What nuclear waste disposal facilities? There's Yucca Mountain and that's not operational.... The government has some other facility of it's own for waste from plutonium production that is also not operational yet.

Other than that all dumps are low-level (not spent fuel rods from nuclear reactors) radioactive waste facilities. Currently, most spent fuel rods are stored at the plants themselves in casks.



So if that water car comes out... How much do you think water will cost? Also, I saw a thing on dateline about a car in france that ran on compressed air... anybody else see that?

I think it'll be a while before we come up with a viable alternative power source for cars. If they ever get it working and safe, the hydrogen car would be great.

-mk

[bigperm]

The Fuel Cell is a new innovation that will be arriving sooner or later...

I have a book from the 70's here saying the exact same thing.

[lucifer]

Back to the topic of global capitalism sucking.

one of my major concerns is around globalisation. Many of the views expressed so far seem to indicate a general level of support for a democratic system of government where leaders are elected by the population. Although there is much debate in how such systems should work (I am not aware of any two countries having the same system) it would seem more fair than other methods of powerholding - dictatorship, monarchy etc. At least there are built in methods of removing unwanted elements even if occassional people such as hitler get into power.

I would say at this point that democracy and capitalism though seen by some as being related are still independent of each other you do not need one to have the other.

Capitalist globalisation is a direct threat to democracy as multinational companies end up wielding more power and influence than the populations of countries - maybe if the whole planet was one big county this might be easier to deal with but this approach is not one that I advocate apart from being unfeasable, unachievable etc..

The corporate agendas are set by individuals with vested interests who are unelected and often with short sighted profit driven viewpoints.

Globalisation also further seperates the distances of supply and production. Consumers are left unaware of the impact of their choices on society. Many kids don't know milk comes from cows. OK we know that but do we really know all about how say are pc's are produced the conditions of the workers the polution caused as well as what will happen when we bung it in a skip in 5 years time when our now super amazing 1.7MHz 512MB dream machine has become 'a pile of crap we wouldn't even use to send emails on'.

There is too much information for us to know it all but if things happen localy we are better able to see the consequences.

I believe that the solution has to involve people on a local basis making decisions that affect them but being aware of the global consequences. Manufacturers must take responsibility for what they produce all the way from the gathering of raw materials to their eventual disposal.

that'll do for now .....

[Giancarlo]

And bigperm, that is what books will say about this new water power...