bascule

Why? What laws are being broken? This is the only part of your post which is relevant to the subject at hand. The rest of your post is just a gigantic red herring. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged If they were to do that, why does AIG deserve any bailout money at all? So I take it you're entirely for AIG billing Uncle Sam for the bonuses? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedAnd before someone else points it out, the title of this thread should be "Obama tries to block AIG bonuses". Mea culpa (although I think the Times may have changed their story since I linked it) Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/14/AR2009031401394.html This article provides an excellent synopsis of the situation. Pretty crazy to see that the US government now owns 80% of AIG.

CNN just released a new opinion poll which more or less echoes the same sentiments: Obama is polling high with a 64% approval rating, but most Americans are still very concerned about the economy: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/16/obama.poll/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/17/us/politics/17obama.html Overall I must say I'm quite happy with the damage control Obama is providing for the bailout. Clearly there were a multitude of issues with it when it was passed. In my opinion Obama is doing a great job trying to address them.

As I said earlier, I'll wait for non-invasive approaches, unless the benefits truly warrant surgery

Theft is the only real risk, because... ...isn't a practical risk. If the casks can survive , I really doubt any terrorist could create a bomb powerful enough to break them open. It certainly sounds like there is potential for slow leaks in casks over time, which is why a permanent disposal solution is needed.

How exactly is it the casks are vulnerable to "terror attacks"? I can try to dream up a scenario... here it goes. Terrorists find a particular cask shipment is going to go totally unmonitored. They manage to intercept the cask and load it onto a truck with nobody noticing. They bring it back to a secret facility where they spend several hours unwelding/unbolting it. They then take the waste and stick it into the water supply of a major metropolitan area. It's... possible I suppose... but when you're looking at potential terrorism anything is possible. Terrorists could steal an electrical windmill, set it up in the middle of a city, and when the windmill starts rotating particularly fast they could set off an explosion, sending shards of windmill flying in all directions, maiming and killing people.

It looks like BART might be a bit of an exception: And European systems do much better: http://www.sustainability.dpc.wa.gov.au/conferences/refereed%20papers/Kenworthy,J%20-%20paper.pdf There's a lot more to consider, particularly incidence of car wrecks and susceptibility to a total system closure due to avalanches (one of the reasons a monorail was proposed, as it's easily elevated, compared to a highway) An advantage of taking a train is you don't have to drive, particularly in inclement conditions. A friend of mine was involved in a car wreck on a mountain pass (next to the I-70 corridor) which killed a woman and her two children. He wasn't found to be responsible but the incident haunts him to this day.

pitou777: Read about this stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain-computer_interface http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_amplification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity And note that a bidirectional interface between the brain and a computer need not involve getting "chipped". Most brain computer interfaces today are passive and use technologies like EEG. I expect it will stay that way for awhile. I don't think anyone wants to undergo invasive brain surgery

I'll wait for noninvasive means, thanks.

France has also been stockpiling nuclear waste in the hopes it can be reprocessed in the future. Britain tried to reprocess nuclear waste at facilities like Sellafield II, which (certain parts of which) are being shut down after massive protests surrounding nuclear waste released from the facility. It's not that nuclear reprocessing is doomed, but it certainly needs to be done in a better manner than Sellafield II.

What's your evidence drops in the market are related to Obama policy? I can keep pointing this out, but here's your argument: Premise 1: The markets are going down Premise 2: ??? Conclusion: Obama's policies are responsible This is the same specious reasoning by which I can claim THE STIMULUS IS WORKING LIKE A CHARM

Only if you're using a positive void coefficient reactor like Chernobyl Storage of nuclear waste is the primary concern which has not been addressed.

You're missing the point here. The characters have utilitarian value systems (except for Rorschach). They're not doing anything immoral, but their morality is somewhat more complex than the black and white way Rorschach sees things. I think Alan Moore wants you to see Rorschach as something of a douchebag. Would you be willing to kill one person to save ten? The novel asks the same question, only on a far vaster scale. Veidt did what to ensure a nuclear holocaust would not happen.

Actually a survey showed Daily Show viewers were more informed than Fox News viewers. Is it sad people learn more from fake news than from faux news?

You could say the same thing about highway systems

As Jon Stewart likes to point out the show before his is (or was) puppets making crank phone calls.

I watched it last night. It was kind of disappointingly one-sided. It reminded me of Jon Stewart taking on Tucker Carlson... here was Jon Stewart, on point and on fire... and Jim Cramer, not so much, more like a capitulating sycophant. Even Tucker Carlson put up more of a fight. This was the second case I've ever seen of Jon Stewart putting aside his comedy newsman persona and calling out someone from the mainstream media to confront them on the issue of hurting America. I really love it when Jon Stewart does this sort of thing... cable news (be it financial or otherwise) is a barren wasteland which adds noise to the public discourse, particularly a show like Jim Cramer's. Throughout the interview Jim Cramer eventually identified what his role SHOULD HAVE BEEN in an ideal world, someone to call out the bullsh*t but that isn't what he did, at all. The last time this happened CNN axed Crossfire. It will be interesting to see if CNBC axes Mad Money.

Okay, while I've been the voice of the pro-railroad agenda here: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/13/biden.amtrak/index.html $1.3 BILLION bailout for Amtrak? WTF? Yeah, not a fan of Biden, and when he rears his ugly head (to borrow a line from Palin) I can't help but be annoyed. ...expresses my sentiments exactly

Actually the standard method is dry cask storage

Looks like higher-than-expected earnings reports from a number of different companies are boosting the Dow: http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/US-Stocks-Remain-Higher-DJIA/story.aspx It's up another 53 points today. :D THE STIMULUS IS WORKING LIKE A CHARM :D

I think this has been the Democrats' goal in continuing to underfund Yucca Mountain. The only real argument against nuclear power is the issue of waste. By underfunding or otherwise preventing the problem from being solved, other solutions like wind and solar look more attractive. However this belies the fact that there's already a substantial amount of waste in dry cask storage and now there's no permanent solution in sight. The government is paying $500 million a year in fines to facilities temporarily storing the waste because they have failed to open the facility.

I'm still in wait-and-see mode. Obama is little more than halfway through his first 100 days in office. I'm certainly willing to give him until the end of it before casting any kind of judgment. So far (if you can tell from the threads I've posted) I'm mostly happy about what he's been doing, particularly in regard to his usage of the Internet and technology to bring further transparency to government.

I think lowering the deficit is great. Know the best way to do that? Get the economy going again, which will increase tax revenue. More than percentage tax increases and spending cuts under Clinton and Congressional Republicans, the number one thing which brought down the national debt was increased tax revenue due to a soaring economy. If you covered your roommate's rent because he lost his high paying tech job and now works at McDonalds, and he asked you to borrow even more money to buy a suit so he can go interview for a new tech job, would you loan him the money, or would you rather wait for him to pay you back on his McDonalds salary? Well, just with the example of Colorado, we NEED increased transportation capacity along the I-70 corridor. This affects the country as a whole as this is one of the main east/west transportation corridors for the entire country, and it's presently plagued with bumper-to-bumper traffic on trecharous mountain passes. The only reason it's cheaper to expand the existing roadways as opposed to building a monorail or other train system is the immense amount of federal funding available for expanding interstate highways as opposed to building rail systems. Either way it's federal government money. It's really just a matter of how it should be spent.

They need to be high-speed because we are geographically vast. Just to get halfway across the country by train takes several days, at prices which are hardly competitive with airlines. I don't think most Americans would even think of using trains for inter-city travel unless it was a light rail system catering to suburbs. And just for the record, Warren Buffet thinks investing in trains is a good idea: http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/07/pf/sivy_apr.moneymag/

The lack of progress can be attributed to persistent funding cuts. I see. That's quite disheartening from a sunk cost perspective. Are these problems really so intractable that it's worth abandoning the existing $10 billion investment and starting over elsewhere? I'm not against abandoning Yucca Mountain per se, but where's the plan for a new permanent storage site for nuclear waste? If Obama wants to stimulate the economy with public infrastructure projects, this is one that's sorely needed.