But why would more than half of Americans be financially free? Are more than half of all Americans already over 65 where they need to be financially free? If not, then it would be very odd that more than half would be close to financial freedom. It’s an odd statement that makes you feel bad, but if you think about it, it would make no sense if it were true.
That's a patriarchal "justice" system for you - always concerned about the future of the men doing all the raping, never about the futures of their victims.
Edit I agree that there are lots of problems with the American judicial system. There are many cases that show the courts are biased towards men and women depending on the issue. However, getting butthurt and immediately blocking rather than discussing the issue like an adult only hurts your cause. There’s not just one bogeyman causing all of the problems in the world. There are lots of them.
Don't even give them that wriggle room, it is up to ALL men to fight the patriarchy, even the biggest feminism allies benefit from the system, I'm so sick of this denial.
Please feel free to shove your outlier up your ass and go look up some statistics.
If you genuinely cared about men, you would be fighting for them, like feminism does (hint: the patriarchy oppresses men too, and even if you didn't give a shit about women, you might care that men are mostly killed, and raped, by other men), but you've not even put the mask on today and have made it clear that you don't actually care about men at all, you just want to continue benefitting from a system that oppresses women.
And thus - you've demonstrated the patriarchy at work.
Slow clap.
Block.
Sign me the fuck up for nuclear, especially sodium reactors. I want it in my backyard, especially if it means I get a fucking excellent deal on a house. I hate the smoke every summer and the extreme weather and the lack of snow for our glaciers.
We do need more nuclear, but the nuclear industry has always been its own worst enemy.
Awful image. We’ve seen what can happen in Japan and Russia and even here in the US when corners are cut. It isn’t really a problem with the technology. It’s a problem that is inherent when corporations try to cut corners to maximize profits and people make stupid mistakes. If some other power plant has major structural issues, the plant is closed down and demoed. If a nuclear power plant has major structural issues, you could turn a 10 or 20 mile radius uninhabitable for literally thousands of years. That’s about 1/8th the land area of the entire state of Rhode Island just gone from being used.
Add to that the ridiculous fact that we have so much land here in the US that is totally empty but we can’t figure out where to put the waste.
I’m not anti nuclear at all, i think we legitimately need a diversified energy generation plan, but I just don’t think we have much of a future with building out more nuclear plants simply because the image is just so incredibly tarnished. The money and effort would probably be better spent elsewhere.
I feel ya and think it’s strange that everyone is OK burning coal an methane while the planet literally burns. Yes, a nuke could make a 200 sq mile area uninhabitable. Isn’t what we’re doing instead demonstrably worse?
You may be interested in knowing that Georgia just brought a new one online a few months ago. Wyoming is building one. TX and SC have put money aside to study nuclear development in each state.
That’s great. Again, if these plants can pass the NIMBY groups then fantastic, but I’m guessing many of these plants are far and away from population centers. Now obviously we don’t want a nuclear plant in Central Park in NYC but we do need power generation closer to where it’s actually being used. TX and WY have lots and lots of room.
There’s plenty of diversity available without flooding yet another native town with uranium tailings from a mine you refuse to clean up in order to support a technology that can provide at most a 5% contribution to the total.
Wind, PV, solar-thermal, tidal, wave, hydro, agricultural waste based biofuel, waste methane, even orange hydrogen are all options that are less harmful and have fewer externalities.
Russia was reusing a government reactor that wasn’t designed for the it. The US has had one major incident out of over a 100 plants in operations for decades. Japan faced an earthquake that was an order of magnitude higher than anyone planned for and still managed it very well given how badly it could have gone.
I have gotten to work on a few small projects in the nuclear sector they make the government and pharm look efficient and risk adverse. Just a tiny taste of it: all tape used on wires had to be a specific brand of tape and not only no splicing no terminal blocks either. Wires had to be run fully point to point. We are talking football fields of distance a single set of cables had to be run.
I see we’re back to pretending santa susanna didn’t exist again.
We’re also pretending rules like the specific brand of tape aren’t there to prevent hundred million to billion dollar cleanups like when someone used the wrong brand of cat litter at WIPP
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.