Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Safe Landing
Comments
-
Reins in the right, phone in the left.creepycoug said:
I thought you were playing polo!GrundleStiltzkin said:
* fealty.creepycoug said:
I can see that. A private military would be akin to the popular Roman general who lives most of his life outside the gates of Rome with his army ... to whom does that army really pay fielty when the shit hits the fan? The general or the Emperor/Senate?UW_Doog_Bot said:
There's this concept of negative externality, a negative consequence born out by society at large rather than simply the economic actors themselves.creepycoug said:
This. And, it would be more elite because the social program wing of the military wouldn't exist, freeing up capital for even more bad-ass automated weaponry, which you know full fucking well that Elon can make. I've never understood the Yuge intellectual exception in their collective views on government that conservatives make for the military. It's downright emotional. I mean, how can any self-respecting right winger and lover of liberty possibly uphold anything related to the draft?Swaye said:
I doubt Elon could make the military more effective at its core job, which is projecting power, influencing geopolitics, and killing Americas enemies, but I guarantee you he could do it more efficiently (cheaper). Even when the government is elite in performance, it is horribly inefficient. We, as taxpayers, should expect both. Jobs done to high level at the least expense. You never get that with the government. Usually you get shitty performance at shitty cost. Every once in awhile you get lucky and get one of the two, like our military. ROI is always terrible with the government.HHusky said:
Maybe Elon will build us a military.Swaye said:The government sucks at everything it touches.
Trump is right: get the fuck OUT of every fucking little dog fight we're in, anywhere, and shrink that motherfucker down and, when that's done, don't re-allocate the budget and give me a fucking tax break.
If there is a large enough negative externality this is precisely where you DO have a role for government to play. To either mitigate that negative externality to society at large or to impose the costs back on the original economic actors.
In the case of the military private security would present a rather large negative externality of whoever is paying for the security would have an out-size amount of power over society among many other obvious negatives.
Hence, we have a rather large net positive outcome despite all of the inefficiency, waste, and corruption of a government run military. This is literally, "This is a terrible system but we don't have any better option."
But chinned for the good try, good effort. It's a great word.
You know I'm ESL damnit!! -
It would take discipline and common sense. Take the money and give it to the homeless? Nope. Ban internal combustion engines and subsidize electric cars? Nope. Ban fracking and build solar? Nope. My infrastructure would be nukes, LNG export facilities and more roads and bridges. Balance the budget. We are closer to door number one than door number two.creepycoug said:
During tims of plenty, I'd like to see us use that tax money/capital to reinvest in American infrastructure/education/other domestic issues.GrundleStiltzkin said:
That's the external manifestation of the paradox of prosperity. When weº barely have a pot to piss in, we don't care and can't care about some internecine conflict 10,000 miles away. More wealth, more capability, we have more capacity and chinclination to fix problems of increasingly smaller proportion. It takes structural limitations and discerning leadership to avoid that.creepycoug said:
Trump is right: get the fuck OUT of every fucking little dog fight we're in, anywhere, and shrink that motherfucker down and, when that's done, don't re-allocate the budget and give me a fucking tax break.
Takes discipline. -
I'd be on board with that generally. I'd invest in continued alt-energy exploration. Look how far solar has come. Why not develop it as complimentary to other sources? Roads/bridges and fund education, including alternatives to full-public education like charter, which I support. Balance the budget. Shrink and reform the fuck out of the welfare state, fund SS because at the end of the day there is a larger % than any of us would like to admit who would be fucked without it, fund Medicare because we haven't quite figured out how to make that number work in most retiree budgets.WestlinnDuck said:
It would take discipline and common sense. Take the money and give it to the homeless? Nope. Ban internal combustion engines and subsidize electric cars? Nope. Ban fracking and build solar? Nope. My infrastructure would be nukes, LNG export facilities and more roads and bridges. Balance the budget. We are closer to door number one than door number two.creepycoug said:
During tims of plenty, I'd like to see us use that tax money/capital to reinvest in American infrastructure/education/other domestic issues.GrundleStiltzkin said:
That's the external manifestation of the paradox of prosperity. When weº barely have a pot to piss in, we don't care and can't care about some internecine conflict 10,000 miles away. More wealth, more capability, we have more capacity and chinclination to fix problems of increasingly smaller proportion. It takes structural limitations and discerning leadership to avoid that.creepycoug said:
Trump is right: get the fuck OUT of every fucking little dog fight we're in, anywhere, and shrink that motherfucker down and, when that's done, don't re-allocate the budget and give me a fucking tax break.
Takes discipline.
Basically take the military surplus and reinvest it wisely domestically, or give it the fuck back to tax payers. I'd take either one. -
I'm good with energy research. But solar has come a long way and as it approaches the theoretical physical limitation, those easy gains are history. The truth is that solar is dirty (lots of rare earths) and expensive and still inefficient. What does work now is nuclear fission. Research and develop a standard fission reactor, open up Yucca Mountain and have a reliable base load carbon free electrical source and don't build it in a earthquake zone next to the ocean. Unlike Japan, the US has lots or real estate that would qualify.
-
And even if you do build it an tsunami zone don’t put the generator in the basement.WestlinnDuck said:I'm good with energy research. But solar has come a long way and as it approaches the theoretical physical limitation, those easy gains are history. The truth is that solar is dirty (lots of rare earths) and expensive and still inefficient. What does work now is nuclear fission. Research and develop a standard fission reactor, open up Yucca Mountain and have a reliable base load carbon free electrical source and don't build it in a earthquake zone next to the ocean. Unlike Japan, the US has lots or real estate that would qualify.
-
Agreed. I think where solar and, to a lesser degree, wind, can work is if it can be developed to the point of affordability to the individual home owner such that there is in the aggregate a lot less pull on the grid from all of us. I have neighbors who ponied up the $$ a while back to get solar on their roofs, and while they will always have lower E bills than I they'll be dead before they can break even. Change that to something more economically affordable and you might have something.WestlinnDuck said:I'm good with energy research. But solar has come a long way and as it approaches the theoretical physical limitation, those easy gains are history. The truth is that solar is dirty (lots of rare earths) and expensive and still inefficient. What does work now is nuclear fission. Research and develop a standard fission reactor, open up Yucca Mountain and have a reliable base load carbon free electrical source and don't build it in a earthquake zone next to the ocean. Unlike Japan, the US has lots or real estate that would qualify.
The place we're building in Chelan will have the potential to push energy back to the grid. I did it for the entertainment value, but solar over there 7 or 8 months out of the year is productive, and wind is pretty much 12 months a year with uplake winds making their way down. The architect angled the house for maximized sun exposure throughout the day and built a pad for a future blade that I can raise up and down. Need to work through the cost for the equipment and any permitting ... I don't want to get into the ESA shit for killing some protected bird ... but it's chintresting because the wind blows there all the time. -
Verticle wind turbine would or should be easy to add for home use. I saw a program about how effect it is and bird safe. Main thing they are not as ugly as the propellors
Edit: of course does not work on calm days too well -
Lots of energy superiority guys here.
This is how I would do acollege football playoffUS energy policy. -
Disagree.Swaye said:The government sucks at everything it touches.
They just require private partnership to keep things honest. It’s different when your money is on the table.
See: 1960/70s NASA and the Manhattan Project. -
Private enterprise could never have built the bomb in 3 yrs, nor put a man on the moon in the 60s.thechatch said:
Disagree.Swaye said:The government sucks at everything it touches.
They just require private partnership to keep things honest. It’s different when your money is on the table.
See: 1960/70s NASA and the Manhattan Project.
