This idea of trying to MAGA by going back in time is dangerous for our growth and our economic future.
This idea of trying to MAGA by going back in time is dangerous for our growth and our economic future.
"Going back in time" is not dangerous if the older idea still works. On the contrary, "going hard" and spending lots of money on something that has made no progress in over 50 years is ACTUALLY potentially harmful to our growth and economic future.
Coal works now. Fusion does not.
Coal worked before. Fusion did not.
Coal will work in the future. Fusion may or may not.
hgjgugiub wrote:
"Going back in time" is not dangerous if the older idea still works. On the contrary, "going hard" and spending lots of money on something that has made no progress in over 50 years is ACTUALLY potentially harmful to our growth and economic future.
Coal works now. Fusion does not.
Coal worked before. Fusion did not.
Coal will work in the future. Fusion may or may not.
I agree and disagree. There is nothing wrong with using coal in the here and now. And there is nothing wrong with researching future technology.
Is Germany going to be successful? Unlikely. Are they going to bankrupt themselves on it? Unlikely.
However, the OP is a moron for suggesting the US is wrong to burn coal.
Right now Germany is the one bringing back coal, because they are trying to phase out nuclear for some reason (probably an environmentalist's idea).
fusion wrote:
This idea of trying to MAGA by going back in time is dangerous for our growth and our economic future.
It may be news to you, but after closing down all their nuclear power plants after the Fukushima disaster, Germany set about building coal powered plants as fast as they could build them, some using the dirtiest lignite coal.
OP, you have to understand: "Make America Great Again" is code for "Take America Back Again"--back to a time when some people imagine things were better in the US.
This is why Trump et al. were never able to put together actual policy proposals during the campaign (beyond The Wall--lol!), and why they *didn't need to*--the whole point and appeal of Trumpism was the notion of rolling things back, and you don't need a detailed policy for that. (Well, actually you do...but you don't need a detailed policy for the *promise* of doing that.)
Of course that is, as you say, "dangerous for our growth and our economic future," but I personally don't think the Trump Slump (rising unemployment, inflation, etc.) will show up for a good while. Though a few effects may appear almost immediately, I think the really bad times won't come any earlier than 2018...and probably too late for a "throw the bums out" turnover in that year's elections.
Hold on to your hats, kids.
Oh, and maybe think about diversifying your portfolio beyond the markets, which at some point are likely to tank.
If the USA went straight coal for energy, we would have enough coal for a 100 years +. We also have the technology to make that coal near 100% clear - far cleaner than oil. Unfortunately Germany holds a patent to make said clean coal possible. They are unwilling to release patent. If the lawsuit can get settled in a favorable (to all) way, coal is the way to go.
hgjgugiub wrote:
"Going back in time" is not dangerous if the older idea still works. On the contrary, "going hard" and spending lots of money on something that has made no progress in over 50 years is ACTUALLY potentially harmful to our growth and economic future.
Coal works now. Fusion does not.
Coal worked before. Fusion did not.
Coal will work in the future. Fusion may or may not.
I agree that going back to an idea that still works is not bad, but the idea that coal "works" is nonsense and economics say otherwise. Other than prolonging the life of terminal miner jobs by a few years, there is nothing good can come of trying to bring coal back. Coal is a sinking ship.
HardLoper wrote:
Right now Germany is the one bringing back coal, because they are trying to phase out nuclear for some reason (probably an environmentalist's idea).
Germany's Wendelstein 7-X is the most advanced and most successful nuclear fusion reactor on the planet. It is not be phased out.
off base wrote:
I agree that going back to an idea that still works is not bad, but the idea that coal "works" is nonsense and economics say otherwise. Other than prolonging the life of terminal miner jobs by a few years, there is nothing good can come of trying to bring coal back. Coal is a sinking ship.
No, YOUR idea is actually nonsense not mine. Coal is infinitely more working than fusion is. The economics support this. Trying to bring coal back will do several good things (along with some bad things). Your entire post is offbase.
Ruru wrote:
OP, you have to understand: "Make America Great Again" is code for "Take America Back Again"--back to a time when some people imagine things were better in the US.
This is why Trump et al. were never able to put together actual policy proposals during the campaign (beyond The Wall--lol!), and why they *didn't need to*--the whole point and appeal of Trumpism was the notion of rolling things back, and you don't need a detailed policy for that. (Well, actually you do...but you don't need a detailed policy for the *promise* of doing that.)
It is not imaginary. There was certainly a time when things were better.
Trump made plenty of policy proposals during his campaign. He had a whole website about them just like every other candidate did. Don't lie.
nothintooffer wrote:
If the USA went straight coal for energy, we would have enough coal for a 100 years +. We also have the technology to make that coal near 100% clear - far cleaner than oil. Unfortunately Germany holds a patent to make said clean coal possible. They are unwilling to release patent. If the lawsuit can get settled in a favorable (to all) way, coal is the way to go.
Link or you're lying.
nothintooffer wrote:
If the USA went straight coal for energy, we would have enough coal for a 100 years +. We also have the technology to make that coal near 100% clear - far cleaner than oil. Unfortunately Germany holds a patent to make said clean coal possible. They are unwilling to release patent. If the lawsuit can get settled in a favorable (to all) way, coal is the way to go.
Germany holds a patent on clean coal? What nuts-for-brains source did you find that? A different country can't file a patent in the US and block our government or companies from using it.
nothintooffer wrote:
If the USA went straight coal for energy, we would have enough coal for a 100 years +. We also have the technology to make that coal near 100% clear - far cleaner than oil. Unfortunately Germany holds a patent to make said clean coal possible. They are unwilling to release patent. If the lawsuit can get settled in a favorable (to all) way, coal is the way to go.
Clean coal is a myth. It is just an industry buzz word. The technology does not exist. Germany has scrapped over half their planned plants. They have started plans to phase out coal and be on 80% renewables by 2050.
hgjgugiub wrote:
off base wrote:I agree that going back to an idea that still works is not bad, but the idea that coal "works" is nonsense and economics say otherwise. Other than prolonging the life of terminal miner jobs by a few years, there is nothing good can come of trying to bring coal back. Coal is a sinking ship.
No, YOUR idea is actually nonsense not mine. Coal is infinitely more working than fusion is. The economics support this. Trying to bring coal back will do several good things (along with some bad things). Your entire post is offbase.
I never said fusion works. The economics do not support coal growth and coal that is why coal is dying. This has been well documented. I'm curious though as to what you think the "several good things" that will come of brining back coal are.
hgjgugiub wrote:
It is not imaginary. There was certainly a time when things were better.
Please tell us what that time was, and why you think it was better.
Use both sides, if necessary.
No, seriously: when do you think things were better? (One datum to bear in mind: the peak of American industrial output was 2016.)
Ruru wrote:
(One datum to bear in mind: the peak of American industrial output was 2016.)
In dollars maybe, but not in jobs per capita.
"Take America Back Again" means return the US to the Republican ideal, which is the 1950s. Fusion has no place in the 50s.
Just abused environment, abused and repressed women, disease, cars that will kill you, toys that will kill you, just about everything that will kill you, People Who Are Not White abused, and creation of yet another Boogeyman - this time anyone who doesn't want to live like it's 1950. Heil Trump!
econometrics wrote:
Ruru wrote:(One datum to bear in mind: the peak of American industrial output was 2016.)
In dollars maybe, but not in jobs per capita.
You are right. I would wager that far more americans have lost jobs to automation than to mexicans.
Germany has also plastered there whole country with solar panels that are already obsolete.
Megan Keith (14:43) DESTROYS Parker Valby's 5000 PB in Shanghai
Official Suzhou Diamond League Discussion Thread (7-9 am ET+ Instant Reaction show at 9:05 am ET)
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday
2024 Boston marathon - The first non-carbon assisted finisher ran..... 2:34
16-year-old Quincy Wilson splits 44.37 in 4x400 prelims at Penn after teammate fell on earlier leg
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year