My point is nothing occurs from cutting off oil production, someone else will supply the worlds continuously growing energy demand. We simply make ourselves poorer.
The “free money” funds our social safety net, provides jobs, and helps achieve our standard of living. Mass immigration lowers per capita GDP and is a strain on the social safety net, which lowers living standards and mainly hurts the poor, as we have seen the last few years.
Then make the social safety net not dependent on free money. Other countries of social safety nets. Besides that, the free money will run out so it’s best to be proactive and fund the social safety net on something else other than free money.
My point is nothing occurs from cutting off oil production, someone else will supply the worlds continuously growing energy demand.
This point really showcases you do not care about energy production nor emissions nor the environment. You think either I get free money or someone else gets free money. When I get free money it is good, when someone else gets free money it’s bad.
You know what will supply the world’s continuously growing energy demand? It is renewables without a doubt. It could have been nuclear (with our only real competitor being Kazakhstan, a middle power) but noooo, people like you had to stand in the way.
We simply make ourselves poorer.
Again do better than relying on free money. Innovate and productive instead of relying on free money from inside the ground (oil and gas) or on top of it (real estate which takes up almost 20% of the economy).
The “free money” funds our …, provides jobs, and helps achieve our standard of living.
Your solution is to make China poorer by tricking them into buying our oil and gas thereby giving us free money to by Chinese made products. Good job on the economy there bud. Very self sufficient and elbows up indeed.
Mass immigration lowers per capita GDP and is a strain on the social safety net, which lowers living standards and mainly hurts the poor, as we have seen the last few years.
When I get free money it’s good. When someone else (immigrants) get free money it’s bad. You also don’t care about the poor. You just want the free money (found in the ground) to be divided between fewer people that’s all. Division by a smaller number equals more for you.
I’m not against nuclear, it’s usually people like yourself the climate zealots that are. Hence Germany’s green party closing 30gw of nuclear power to instead buy coal produced solar panels from China.
I choose not to thrust ourselves into poverty when there’s a near zero chance nuclear can replace it due to government bureaucracy. Somehow France did it in the 60s but now its one of the most expensive energy sources with the most NIMBY opposition.
There is nothing in the laws of physics (our current understanding of it at least) that prevents solar panels from being produced by other energy sources, including solar power.
Solar panels are themselves just glass, aluminum, and silicon.
If you can find a physics equation that shows you can only build solar panels using coal, you’d win a Noble Prize in Physics. It would be an honour to be the first person in the world to see your work on this absolute truth.
What you actually care about is this:
solar panels from China.
I am glad more countries are giving their money to China being productive as opposed to giving you a free money cheque, while you disingenuously use “the poor” as a shield to gather sympathy domestically and abroad.
If you cannot live your life without a free money cheque, have fun staying poor.
Well they require rare earths, of which China refines most of it due to its energy intensity. Most other countries dont want that amount of smog, whereas China is communist so can generate 60% of its energy from coal. This is why China produces the large majority of solar panels and wind turbines.
You sound like you know nothing about energy generation, but you seem to fancy yourself an expert.
My point is nothing occurs from cutting off oil production, someone else will supply the worlds continuously growing energy demand. We simply make ourselves poorer.
The “free money” funds our social safety net, provides jobs, and helps achieve our standard of living. Mass immigration lowers per capita GDP and is a strain on the social safety net, which lowers living standards and mainly hurts the poor, as we have seen the last few years.
Then make the social safety net not dependent on free money. Other countries of social safety nets. Besides that, the free money will run out so it’s best to be proactive and fund the social safety net on something else other than free money.
This point really showcases you do not care about energy production nor emissions nor the environment. You think either I get free money or someone else gets free money. When I get free money it is good, when someone else gets free money it’s bad.
You do know we have the worlds second largest uranium exporter? (link: https://web.archive.org/web/20181226012424/http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/mining-of-uranium/world-uranium-mining-production.aspx) We created CANDU (Canada can do nuclear power without enriched uranium).
You know what will supply the world’s continuously growing energy demand? It is renewables without a doubt. It could have been nuclear (with our only real competitor being Kazakhstan, a middle power) but noooo, people like you had to stand in the way.
Again do better than relying on free money. Innovate and productive instead of relying on free money from inside the ground (oil and gas) or on top of it (real estate which takes up almost 20% of the economy).
Your solution is to make China poorer by tricking them into buying our oil and gas thereby giving us free money to by Chinese made products. Good job on the economy there bud. Very self sufficient and elbows up indeed.
When I get free money it’s good. When someone else (immigrants) get free money it’s bad. You also don’t care about the poor. You just want the free money (found in the ground) to be divided between fewer people that’s all. Division by a smaller number equals more for you.
I’m not against nuclear, it’s usually people like yourself the climate zealots that are. Hence Germany’s green party closing 30gw of nuclear power to instead buy coal produced solar panels from China.
I choose not to thrust ourselves into poverty when there’s a near zero chance nuclear can replace it due to government bureaucracy. Somehow France did it in the 60s but now its one of the most expensive energy sources with the most NIMBY opposition.
There is nothing in the laws of physics (our current understanding of it at least) that prevents solar panels from being produced by other energy sources, including solar power.
Solar panels are themselves just glass, aluminum, and silicon.
If you can find a physics equation that shows you can only build solar panels using coal, you’d win a Noble Prize in Physics. It would be an honour to be the first person in the world to see your work on this absolute truth.
What you actually care about is this:
I am glad more countries are giving their money to China being productive as opposed to giving you a free money cheque, while you disingenuously use “the poor” as a shield to gather sympathy domestically and abroad.
If you cannot live your life without a free money cheque, have fun staying poor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8JFCJP70rg
Well they require rare earths, of which China refines most of it due to its energy intensity. Most other countries dont want that amount of smog, whereas China is communist so can generate 60% of its energy from coal. This is why China produces the large majority of solar panels and wind turbines.
You sound like you know nothing about energy generation, but you seem to fancy yourself an expert.