Advertisement
by Pagan Trapistan » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:16 pm
by Achidyemay » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:26 pm
by Pagan Trapistan » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:31 pm
by Liriena » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:32 pm
Pagan Trapistan wrote:The free market hasnt been a force for innovation, that was the military that started the internet. All the market did was create a big ass bubble and a bunch of media platforms that censor themselves to death. That shit is just wrong.
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Western Vale Confederacy » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:34 pm
Liriena wrote:Pagan Trapistan wrote:The free market hasnt been a force for innovation, that was the military that started the internet. All the market did was create a big ass bubble and a bunch of media platforms that censor themselves to death. That shit is just wrong.
State-funded research gave us the components to create the iPhone. The free market gave us the marketing-fueled yearly ritual of buying an only marginally upgraded version of it while trying to ignore the fact that the factory making them has suicide prevention nets.
by Liriena » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:37 pm
Western Vale Confederacy wrote:Liriena wrote:State-funded research gave us the components to create the iPhone. The free market gave us the marketing-fueled yearly ritual of buying an only marginally upgraded version of it while trying to ignore the fact that the factory making them has suicide prevention nets.
I certainly don't see those space exploration companies do anything useful aside from basic deliveries into orbit (which NASA, a state-owned organization, began) and worthless publicity stunts.
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Western Vale Confederacy » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:40 pm
by Pagan Trapistan » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:49 pm
Western Vale Confederacy wrote:I certainly don't see those space exploration companies do anything useful aside from basic deliveries into orbit (which NASA, a state-owned organization, began) and worthless publicity stunts.
by Achidyemay » Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:59 pm
Pagan Trapistan wrote:Yes but it would be simpler to just have the state start rolling out solar panels.
You may not like the state, but the political system will run a lot better once some Chinese systems are implemented to sort this shit out.
by Pagan Trapistan » Sat Jan 12, 2019 1:13 pm
Achidyemay wrote:The state can give me solar panels, that's cool, but let me install them please, I am the steward of this land, I know where they should and shouldn't go. When the government eminent domains, things always get messy.
by Novus America » Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:08 pm
Pagan Trapistan wrote:Yes but it would be simpler to just have the state start rolling out solar panels.
You may not like the state, but the political system will run a lot better once some Chinese systems are implemented to sort this shit out.
by Novus America » Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:10 pm
Liriena wrote:Pagan Trapistan wrote:The free market hasnt been a force for innovation, that was the military that started the internet. All the market did was create a big ass bubble and a bunch of media platforms that censor themselves to death. That shit is just wrong.
State-funded research gave us the components to create the iPhone. The free market gave us the marketing-fueled yearly ritual of buying an only marginally upgraded version of it while trying to ignore the fact that the factory making them has suicide prevention nets.
by Auze » Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:39 pm
Novus America wrote:Pagan Trapistan wrote:Yes but it would be simpler to just have the state start rolling out solar panels.
You may not like the state, but the political system will run a lot better once some Chinese systems are implemented to sort this shit out.
Rapant corruption, slave labor, and dumping dangerous by-products of the manufacturing process into rivers?
No thanks.
We should make our own solar panels, and make them in a more sustainable manner.
Carbon emissions are not the only source of pollution, and not always the worst.
China has a horrible environmental record. Sure they have made some recent positive steps, but still refuse to reign in overcapacity of their zombie companies.
But solar alone will not solve the problem.
It takes up too much space and uses up to many resources, plus is not reliable enough.
The most reliable and most environmentally friendly power source is nuclear, it uses the least amount of resources and land per unit of power produced.
by Novus America » Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:46 pm
Auze wrote:Novus America wrote:
Rapant corruption, slave labor, and dumping dangerous by-products of the manufacturing process into rivers?
No thanks.
We should make our own solar panels, and make them in a more sustainable manner.
Carbon emissions are not the only source of pollution, and not always the worst.
China has a horrible environmental record. Sure they have made some recent positive steps, but still refuse to reign in overcapacity of their zombie companies.
But solar alone will not solve the problem.
It takes up too much space and uses up to many resources, plus is not reliable enough.
The most reliable and most environmentally friendly power source is nuclear, it uses the least amount of resources and land per unit of power produced.
You are mistaken about the amount of land needed for renewables. Not only that but you seem to ignore the construction time and costs of nuclear power plants, as well as the requirement for a fuel that high quality ore for minimum waste or carbon is in not very high supply. Nuclear may serve a purpose, but not nearly as much as renewables can.
by Achidyemay » Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:47 pm
Auze wrote:Novus America wrote:
Rapant corruption, slave labor, and dumping dangerous by-products of the manufacturing process into rivers?
No thanks.
We should make our own solar panels, and make them in a more sustainable manner.
Carbon emissions are not the only source of pollution, and not always the worst.
China has a horrible environmental record. Sure they have made some recent positive steps, but still refuse to reign in overcapacity of their zombie companies.
But solar alone will not solve the problem.
It takes up too much space and uses up to many resources, plus is not reliable enough.
The most reliable and most environmentally friendly power source is nuclear, it uses the least amount of resources and land per unit of power produced.
You are mistaken about the amount of land needed for renewables. Not only that but you seem to ignore the construction time and costs of nuclear power plants, as well as the requirement for a fuel that high quality ore for minimum waste or carbon is in not very high supply. Nuclear may serve a purpose, but not nearly as much as renewables can.
by Novus America » Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:54 pm
Achidyemay wrote:Auze wrote:You are mistaken about the amount of land needed for renewables. Not only that but you seem to ignore the construction time and costs of nuclear power plants, as well as the requirement for a fuel that high quality ore for minimum waste or carbon is in not very high supply. Nuclear may serve a purpose, but not nearly as much as renewables can.
I would add that we still have no clue what to do with the waste and for the most part we just sort of barrel it up
by Imperializt Russia » Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:48 am
Pagan Trapistan wrote:Carbon tax is pointless. If they're doing something economically productive, and you want to go green, tax them normally and put it toward solar panels (or other technology). Don't punish productivity (carbon), just use said productivity to fuel progress and less-polluting technology (instead of badly made jets).
China was massively subsidizing solar panels long before talking about a minor carbon tax late 2017, and thats the sensible way to do it. They might have a ways to go environmentally, but they've been putting more into it than the U.S..
Shaping the market is nonsense. The market just goes to Indian telemarketets. You only want the market at all to ramp up development before going technosocialism.
Thats what China does. (Okay maybe not but I can dream)
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Imperializt Russia » Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:50 am
Achidyemay wrote:I would add that we still have no clue what to do with the waste and for the most part we just sort of barrel it up
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Western Vale Confederacy » Thu Jan 17, 2019 12:37 am
Arlenton wrote:"Green" doesn't quite seem very "industrial". Quotes in the OP don't have me convinced.
by Confederate States of German America » Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:02 am
Western Vale Confederacy wrote:Arlenton wrote:"Green" doesn't quite seem very "industrial". Quotes in the OP don't have me convinced.
Most "green deals" fail horribly because they somehow decide that nuclear and hydroelectric (literally THE two most efficient green power sources) power is either too dangerous or too destructive, and thus go for alternate means of electricity generation that are too expensive, too situational/unreliable, or experimental.
by Western Vale Confederacy » Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:50 am
Confederate States of German America wrote:Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
Most "green deals" fail horribly because they somehow decide that nuclear and hydroelectric (literally THE two most efficient green power sources) power is either too dangerous or too destructive, and thus go for alternate means of electricity generation that are too expensive, too situational/unreliable, or experimental.
I use to be a big advocate for Space Based Solar Power until I realized doing such means you're effectively creating a new breed of WMD weapons.
by Imperializt Russia » Thu Jan 17, 2019 3:49 am
Confederate States of German America wrote:Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
Most "green deals" fail horribly because they somehow decide that nuclear and hydroelectric (literally THE two most efficient green power sources) power is either too dangerous or too destructive, and thus go for alternate means of electricity generation that are too expensive, too situational/unreliable, or experimental.
I use to be a big advocate for Space Based Solar Power until I realized doing such means you're effectively creating a new breed of WMD weapons.
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Esternial » Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:08 am
Novus America wrote:Achidyemay wrote:I would add that we still have no clue what to do with the waste and for the most part we just sort of barrel it up
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... lanet/amp/
All power sources produce waste, but nuclear produces only a tiny amount compared to the power produced. Production of solar panels creates far more toxic waste.
Barreling up nuclear waste harms no one.
Or we could reprocess it into more fuel.
Any Green plan or goals that do not treat nuclear as a clean fuel and granted the same status as other clean fuels is a bad plan.
by Imperializt Russia » Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:15 am
Esternial wrote:Novus America wrote:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... lanet/amp/
All power sources produce waste, but nuclear produces only a tiny amount compared to the power produced. Production of solar panels creates far more toxic waste.
Barreling up nuclear waste harms no one.
Or we could reprocess it into more fuel.
Any Green plan or goals that do not treat nuclear as a clean fuel and granted the same status as other clean fuels is a bad plan.
Indeed, newer generations of nuclear power plants can use radioactive waste from older variants as fuel.
Improving the technology behind nuclear fission reactors to increase overall efficiency is a green and worthwhile investment.
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Abserdia, Atrito, Hidrandia, Idzequitch, Ifreann, Kannap, Maximum Imperium Rex, Ravemath, Statesburg, Valentine Z
Advertisement