9421
General Discussion / Re: Doc Helgoland's Asylum for the Politically American
« on: October 16, 2016, 03:02:45 pm »
I could see trump unironically naming this hypothetical construct just that.
May 9, 2024: The May '24 Report is up.
News: April 23, 2024: Dwarf Fortress 50.13 has been released.
News: February 4, 2021: Dwarf Fortress Talk #28 has been posted.
News: November 21, 2018: A new Threetoe story has been posted.
Forum Guidelines
Idea: Solar Wall along the Mexico/US border. Doesn't need to block passage. That can be done by the electric fence that it powers, to keep the desperate immigrants from leaving the depravation, poverty and strife of Trumpland...No, no. Not a solar wall. Or at least not just a solar wall. What we do is bicycles. On some sort of track that keeps em slow while putting a lot of the effort to use making energy. A miles long corridor with leg turned power generation. So they can come in as they please, but they've gotta' put out a good handful of Kw first.
Because the UK isn't as bad off as Scotland will be if it leaves the Union. Scotland will lose some combination of it's free healthcare, free welfare or free tertiary education. Nevermind the fact they'll have to start paying for their own armed services (which will cost them a small fortune).... and? Pretty sure the scots side of thing is that they're willing to take an economic hit if it means getting the rest of UK's grip off their short hairs. More willing after the UK referendum, anyway. Maybe they've got more to lose economically, but they've got more to gain in regards to sovereignty and self-determination and whatnot, too. I'd personally say the economic argument is a strong one, sure, but, well. As mentioned, UK folk apparently don't consider that as important as you'd think, so it'd be hard to blame scotland for doing the same. Well, any more than you already blame the UK, ha.
It always gets me wondering: what will it take?Well, it takes people caring about it, and enough it starts impacting their voting (/political influence and whatnot, in areas that aren't democratic) and consuming patterns. Then the politicians and businesses (well, the ones that aren't/weren't aware and concerned enough to be changing behaviors already) will start reacting, and the path gets walked.
Do we need to have a dramatic change to lobbying and challenge what many consider to be a form of free speech? Does the process of extracting fossil fuel need to be ass-maddeningly difficult (but by then we're too far, aren't we)?
What would be a real change is permanently transferring a few billion from the coal and oil subsidies budget to the renewable subsidies budget. You wanna talk about cost effectiveness? Fossil fuels get 100 billion dollars in subsidies every year. Renewables get, at my last check, about 7 billion.That. You're having a laugh, right?
That's right. The "impractical solar panels" are about ten times as actually practical as fossil fuels. Don't even get me started on the others. If we didn't have the state propping it up even the reddest most ornery sweaty Texan would be demanding renewable expansions.