Can A Liberal Help Me Understand This True Story?

well considering they spied for Stalin and gave him the bomb when he was slowly starving 60 million to death, and are now electing Obama/Sanders types who is surprised to see the liberals are communists or at least useful idiots for communists.

 

so if Stalin had raised fees 60 million would not have starved to death? If we gave more money to the VA veterans would not die waiting for service??

 

1) any pragmatic ideas will represent right wing ideology.
2) without ideas there is nothing. Thus it seems you are perfectly confused imagining a pragmatic idea is not really an idea. Sad.

 

You need to think a little harder. Florida Power and Light has had nuclear permits for two new plants for years. Why don't they build them? Easy, project cost of a billion bucks a copy. The NRC has accelerated the approval process for years, but no takers. Want a plant in your backyard built without a permit? Free market and all.

 

Evidence in the link I provided. The energy density of fissile material vastly exceeds the density of conventional energy sources. The limitation is not the development of the resource. The limitation is the danger posed by the the utilisation of the resource. The cost of creating the reactor is relatively low compared to the cost of ameliorating the public to the danger posed by creating the reactor.

 

The claim was that nuclear power was not possible without public funding.

What I mean by prohibitive is that it's the government that prohibits the development of the technology. It's not that the technology isn't something that can be developed through a profit motive. It's that a fear of the technology creates a disincentive. Whether that fear is rational or not is certainly up for debate, but the problem isn't with the free market. It's with the attempt to regulate the free market.

 

I too have had fast service from Amazon and other commercial ventures. I needed to talk to the CA bureau of Real Estate and was on hold for longer than 40 minutes. Bless CA and our Democrats.

 

I blame the hydrogen bomb for the confusion and fear created over the atomic production of electric power. Folks, the reactor is not the bomb.

 

no but spent fuel almost is and Japan taught us the reactor is not worth the risk.

 

Sure, it's that. It's Chernobyl. It's five Mile island. It's the fear that your children will have three eyeballs.

The problem is that the energy to create is also the energy to destroy. That fear, right or wrong, limits our progress.

 

if the fear is right is improves our progress.

 

Op .... Here in Cali , the lines at any and all DMV 's are literally ... Out the door to the parking lot !

It takes hours to get anything done !

And most in line are illegals .... Js

 

Possibly. Fear is not something that is entirely rational. It skews toward preservation, not toward progress. Preservation means protecting what currently exists, not what's possible in the future.

Revisit my argument about the regulation of life saving drugs. It's not in the regulator's interest to save lives. It's in the regulator's interest to limit his exposure to the loss of life. That distinction does not produce the greatest number of saved lives. It is mathematically impossible.

 

If there are 10 proposed cancer cures in front of a regulator and 9 are statistically sure to result in the loss of life, is it in his best interest to guess which one will result in positive change, or to deny then all?

 

A risk that the insurance company doesn’t want to take.

 

There are many things that the government does more efficiently and effectively than the private sector. Policing and fire protection, infrastructure, services of various kinds.

And yes, there are some things that the government cannot do efficiently and effectively such as providing consumers with goods and services of various kinds.

The private sector is efficient and effective in some ways but it is exploitative and needs to be properly regulated in order not take advantage and cause more harm than good.

 

Single payer explains why it is cheaper to manufacture vehicles in Canada than the USA because the automakers don't have to pass along the costs of healthcare in the price of the vehicles.

 

Denial of care kills people and the greed based HMO's were all about denying coverage.

 

<Rule 3/4> It’s against the law for an ER to deny care to any human being who comes in.

 

BS. And you are too blindly partisan ideologically to see through that filter. Which is why I am an Independent and yourself a member of a ideological driven tribe.

Ideas can be based upon ideology, right or left, or upon a desire to find out what works without being left or right ideologically. That defines pragmatism. Understand? Take off that filter and perhaps that might help?

 

And we because of ideology forget what works, when tried, for it contradicted an ideological belief and then rejected and amnesia sets in.

For instance, we know that a family unit involving a mated couple yields the best for society, but the left wing ideology must reject it, or so that seems to have happened as they defend single parent homes. So an ideology and a value system based upon that negates reality. It is utter stupidity of course but it is what it is.

 

Makes no sense to have competition in the DMV. IMHO, the key is to elect good people to run it. Locally, the DMV is at the County Tax Collector's office, and he runs a tight ship. Basically speaking, it's because the person running the DMV here is a local, and wants things to work. This is a much better thing than having the DMVs be responsible to bureaucrats at the state level. Government services should be supplied at the lowest level possible, closest to the people.

 

Idiots allowed a nuclear plant to have it's generators in a tsunami zone.

 

There are so many ways to refute your point that is somehow comparing a private company to a government entity which is and of itself kind of weird, but just so that I can understand where you are coming from are you advocating privatizing the DMV? You would be OK with giving the authority to print up basically citizenship cards or voting identification to Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg? or are you saying that the DMV should operate like a private company (close all unprofitable branches, apply supply and demand economics, have different tiers of service etc....)?
I am sure that if the DMV closed all of it's Benson Hurst offices, renewed all the Manhattan offices and charged 5000$ for a drivers liscence, they would make a pretty penny (the Martin Shkreli special we'll call it). Is that what you are advocating? Or competition sets in, and indeed your wait time will be less at the DMV, but now Bezos and Zuckerberg are in charge of printing up American IDs, and now have ALL your info ("sure, to get your drivers licsence all you need is to give us your date of Birth, social security number, and an email address")
Yes, public services tend to be less efficient than private industry by its very nature, but there are some services you do not want to privatize. The DMV certainly seems to be one of them. Now if you want less wait time, the answer is simple: more funding. More employees to process the paper, better offices, and a decent pay so that you attract uber competent people, not people looking for dead end jobs. pretty simple really.

 

I am reminded of 2008, when I needed to get a passport for my newborn, as we were moving to France.
At that time a law had either just been passed or was going to pass, requiring passports rather than drivers licsenses to travel to Canada and Mexico. So there was a glut of people applying for passports. Impossible to get an appointment by phone (recorded message actually said 'we are not taking any appointments'). The passport agencies did however clearly have deals with private 'expaditing'companies, for upwards of 200$ if I recall, you could magically get an apointment. A service that costs 40$.
I do not want Amazon running the DMV, passport agencies, public transportation etc...