Science magazine article

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

ndelta
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:14 pm

Postby ndelta » Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:22 am

I lurk on this site quite often. It is sometimes hard for me to grasp the numbers that fly around in these types of discussions. I usually use this poster to help me keep everything straight. I will just leave this here in case it helps someone else.
http://www.deathandtaxesposter.com/
That is all.

Skipjack
Posts: 6045
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Postby Skipjack » Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:52 am

I guess that makes you politically racist. Is that allowed in Austria?

On a serious note, I just saw in the news today that Mom & Pop Hitler lost their gravesite. To many folks trying to go and make it a worship site or something. Really sad.

Ohhh, come on, you can do better than that! Really lame, man, really lame...

skippy

Oh, you are so funny ;)

Clearly the democrats are far better at socialism than the republicans as measured by the relative sizes of the entitlement budgets versus the defense budget, so no, it's not fair to say otherwise.

As I said, they are about the same. It really just depends on what lobbies and interest groups you want to support. And as I also said, I am actually siding with some tea party people on these issues. The past few months have shown very clearly that the republicans like their socialism just as much as the democrats do. They are just less obvious about it. The whole security nonsense lately is nothing but one big entitlement programme, e.g. Just look at the whole standardized test thing, where billions went to a certain company and so on. It is socialism alright.

Our legal system is one reason.


Ah yes, lots of amercians suing their doctors in order to avoid going broke over their medical bills. Our courtrooms rarely deal with malpractice lawsuits. This is also a reason why the US has to few medical doctors. A lot of people are affraid of the risk of getting sued.
Another reason is the high cost of the education. First thing can be fixed by a health care system that actually cares about the patients. The other can be fixed by making education cheaper (but that would be regarded as socialism too, by your kind).

Subsidizing medical technology for the rest of the world, e.g. Europe, by actually having a free market for pharmaceuticals and not price controls contributes to costs.

Yeah, there is a lot of medical research in the US, mainly because it a very large continuous market, whereas Europe still does not have a central system for approval and most treatments still have to be approved for each country individually, which raises costs. The daunting and flawed FDA- approval process has been costing your researchers lately, though. So we will see how that goes in the long term. I see some moving on to China, bigger market and less regulation.

Care to lift those controls and stop being a free rider?


Oh yes the old "Free Rider" argument. Oh how the republicans love to pull that one out of their behinds when you corner them. It is a bold statement with little to back it up. The cost of pharmaceuticals only makes about 20% of the health care cost in the US. So even if we assume that we are severely free riding, it will only make a small contribution towards explaining the overall cost of the US healthcare system.

Cheaper food leading to higher rates of diabetes and heart disease is yet another.

Talking to a citizen of a country where people eat more pork than pretty much anywhere else... Our healthcare system just encourages prevention instead of treatment later (which is also very good here in regards to outcome).

Futile yet generous care at end-of-life as opposed to an arguably more rational yet crueler standard in Europe.

Cant talk about other European countries, but people here enjoy excellent care at the end of their lives. Not sure where you get that idea from. Saw it on Fox news, eh?

I think we can safely assume that you're paying more for healthcare even in inflation adjusted terms than you were 3 decades ago.

True, but your cost for healthcare was rising even faster than ours!

Shorter waiting times for diagnostic procedures, treatments, and minor surgeries as a result of a larger capital investment is yet another contributor.

Waiting times in Austria are very short. Great network of settled doctors and clinics everywhere makes sure of that. Important surgery and procedures have no waiting times at all. Minor surgeries and procedures have some waiting times, but they are very short.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Sat Mar 31, 2012 1:32 pm

Folks,
The simple explanation for this "discussion" you all are having stems from the facts that Europeans in general are content to be "subjects" while Americans demand to be sovereign individuals.

There are those in America that wish to subjugate Americans but many of us decline the "offer" as loudly as we can.

I fear it may not be too long before the statements declining the "honor" of being subjects may be made with something more leaden than ballots.

"The problem with strong drink is that it may make you shoot at the tax collector... and miss!" R.A.H. :D

Skipjack
Posts: 6045
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Postby Skipjack » Sat Mar 31, 2012 2:34 pm

The simple explanation for this "discussion" you all are having stems from the facts that Europeans in general are content to be "subjects" while Americans demand to be sovereign individuals.

I would rather say that we Europeans prefer paying less for the same healthcare that the Americans get ;)
Look, I am not saying that our system is perfect. It really is not and I am actually very critical of it and generally voting for a party here that is very critical of it. There is a lot that can be improved. But I just dont really see how you can seriously defend a system that costs twice as much as ours without being twice as good. You have to admit that this is lacking in logic.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Sat Mar 31, 2012 2:41 pm

I guess that makes you politically racist. Is that allowed in Austria?

This was a joke.

On a serious note, I just saw in the news today that Mom & Pop Hitler lost their gravesite. To many folks trying to go and make it a worship site or something. Really sad.

This was serious, but off topic. I just thought it was really sad on two counts: 1) Parents of a famous child get dragged into 'his' topic well after death and lose their gravesite over it, and 2) Why can't these idiots move on? (Rhetorical that one).

Ohhh, come on, you can do better than that! Really lame, man, really lame...


See above.


skippy

Oh, you are so funny


That was not me. But, I do think that he/she has a fair theme-line in the constructed argument.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Sat Mar 31, 2012 2:56 pm

ndelta wrote:I lurk on this site quite often. It is sometimes hard for me to grasp the numbers that fly around in these types of discussions. I usually use this poster to help me keep everything straight. I will just leave this here in case it helps someone else.
http://www.deathandtaxesposter.com/
That is all.


I have seen that before. Please note the most important aspect is that it ONLY covers discretionary. It does not cover entitlement, and in some cases has chosen to mix in mandatory where it suits him (but hides it under the overall - 'discretionary' heading, which it is not.

And, also in doing that, the maker provides some arbitrary linkage across departments/offices claiming defense/security related. He does this for example through subtleties like choice of picture or topic grouping in the listings, not to mention placement strategy on the entire graphic. There is much more to his claimed simple methodology the he claims, and may even be blinded to it by his bias.

Ironically, the US Government's primary purpose is to provide security for the nation as a federal construct in the international arena. This is a point lost on many left wing folks (like the poster creator).

All in all, pretty graphic to drive his agenda.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

bk78
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 11:53 am

Postby bk78 » Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:11 pm

ladajo wrote:As far as military cost, and consideration about, "the good old days" of the cold war. I maintain it was easier.

You like the cold war so much because it provided a clear and simple distinction between your side, the good, and the enemy, which you could hate and blame for everything evil. The irony, that the other side claimed the exact same thing, with the roles of good and evil swapped, is already too complex to grasp for the typical american republican.

ladajo wrote: Later, when the "Testosterone Belt" hoard of twenty somethings come swarming north out of the +/- 20 degrees latitude belt and destroy you, your tree, and your misguided way of life, because they are disaffected, angry, and have nothing better to do, do not call on America to save your ass (again, for the fourth or whatever time). You can call on your national health care system, I am sure they will make it all better.

We have a saying "The one who is pointing a finger towards someone should not forget, that at the same time, three fingers point to himself".

If you want a peaceful world, then improve the living standard in the middle east, make them have something to lose instead of standing with the back to the wall. What would you think, if you simply want to live, are not particularly interested in politics, and suddenly someone is bombing your country, destroys your infrastructure, kills your son, makes your newborn die of illnesses because of some embargo, after a decade repeats the bombing and leaves your country, once one of the most advanced in the area and open for western culture, in anarchy, where you have no job, are struggling to survive and fear to be shot or bombed by your neighbor. You created the perfect hotbed for terrorism iraq. AT the same time, you perceive yourselfes as "liberators". So much for the disconnected media agenda.
The disaffected and angry american military, that had nothing to do after cold war, thus invaded another country, has a much higher death toll than any terrorist attack. And de facto, by your actions, you even support those. 95% of all people, be it in middle east or elsewhere, are fine, peace loving people who simply want to live their lives. The rest, the 5% that want to persuade you that killing the enemy is necessary and inevitable, those are the problem. And in fact, they NEED their counterparts within the enemy. It makes the persuasion work easier for them. See above. From someone like you, i need not be lectured about a misguided way of life.

ladajo wrote: On a serious note, I just saw in the news today that Mom & Pop Hitler lost their gravesite. To many folks trying to go and make it a worship site or something. Really sad.


It's a bit stupid to call someone a tree huger in one comment, and in the next suggest he is a nazi. Maybe a problem with your testosterone...

Ideals of america as perceived by the rest of the world 50 years ago:
Freedom, human rights, sex, drugs and rock'n'roll...
Behaviour of america as perceived by the rest of the world now:
ignorant, arrogant and self-centered, disrespectful of other peoples culture, disrespectful of human life in general
At this rate, ladajo, you are making enemys faster than you can kill them.
This century will likely be a chinese one, and if you want to have some allies, you'd better rethink your position.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:21 pm

bk78,
It would seem useful to you that 'we' provide you such a "Great Satan" to rally against.

My fundamental point is two fold, and I have stuck to it for a number of years: One must prepare for defense against the other with nothing better to do. One must also seek ways to give the other something better to do.

I guess you don't get that.

So where do you live anyway?
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Postby Roger » Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:25 pm

ladajo wrote:Roger,
I am not sure what you mean.
The numbers I am using are straight from CBO and include OCO.

I interjected because I feel that there is a need to agree on what numbers to use, CBO? Iraq & Afghanistan on budget or off.

SO yes, CBO is good, on budget and probably current, certainly no older than 2010. Ladajo you picked up on my intent perfectly.

This may not be from CBO forgive me in advance.
Wiki says 2010 was 683 billion and in 2010 Iraq & Afghanistan were included. IF GDP was 14 trillion, 4.9%=686 billion, close.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_b ... ted_States

Ladajo I would like to continue this conversation, but I have to go offline for today. Lets keep it going. Thanks.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

Skipjack
Posts: 6045
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Postby Skipjack » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:33 pm

Ironically, the US Government's primary purpose is to provide security for the nation

The question is what is killing more Americans? The lack of proper health care, especially preventative medicine that can elongate the life, but is often not covered or affordable to American citizens. Or some virtual enemy that is painted on the wall as the big evil boogie man all the time?
IMHO it is the former and preventing that is a type of security too.
Social stability also increases security.
But then again, the lobbies (usually) favored by the republicans dont benefit from these types of security, so they are against it. They prefer spending on other things. America already has more than double the spending of anybody else in the world and nobody would be foolish enough to attack you, because the US has proven in the past that it would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons. So nobody would be stupid enough to attack you openly. And the rest of what you have should be more than capable of dealing with a few sandal wearing shepherds.
Instead you are building new air craft carriers (with the old ones already being better and more numerous than anybody elses) and other expensive vehicles all the time. And if that was not enough, you are subsidizing weapons manufacturers with billions in earmarks through non military programs. And that has gone waaay out of hand lately (and caused my anger) with the demand of certain congress people to cut NASAs budgets (to make up for the increase in military spending) and then on top of that with their absolutely irrational and counter productive insistence on spending billions on a heavy lifter with no mission that nobody needs simply to earmark money to an important defense contractor. It is socialism at its best!

Skipjack
Posts: 6045
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Postby Skipjack » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:34 pm

This was serious, but off topic.

yawn ;)

Skipjack
Posts: 6045
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Postby Skipjack » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:40 pm

I also want to point out that the US is in a recession. In times like that you want to give your people releave and not additional spending to cary. The government social security and medical security gives people releave and allows them to keep consuming, which is an important motor of the economy. The military spending is sunk cost that only fills up warehouses, harbors and hangars somewhere or is burned somewhere else. It does not really help the economy in any way. The american people right now need financial security and stability more than they need military security and stability. So that they will go out again and spend money and so money gets invested again in american companies, which will mean more jobs and again economic growth. Wars dont do any of that, especially if they are dragging along for a decade or more. Heck WW2 was over quicker...

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Sun Apr 01, 2012 12:25 am

Skipjack wrote:
This was serious, but off topic.

yawn ;)


Yup.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Sun Apr 01, 2012 1:01 am

ladajo wrote:Ironically, the US Government's primary purpose is to provide security for the nation

skipjack wrote:The question is what is killing more Americans? The lack of proper health care, especially preventative medicine that can elongate the life, but is often not covered or affordable to American citizens.


Everyone dies eventually. And you need to define what you mean by preventative medicine.

Or some virtual enemy that is painted on the wall as the big evil boogie man all the time?


The "enemy" is certainly not virtual. If he was, the the deaths would be virtual as well. Maybe you should go ask an Iraqi about his "virtual" enemy. They, with a little help from Iran and Saudi, are killing each other off every day in a fanatical way. In case you didn't notice, the US left.
They were killing each other (and taking shots at whoever else was there) while the mission was going, and they are still killing each other off since everyone has left. They do not have anything better to do. Eventually, someone will kill off enough of the other guys, and then start in on killing neighbors. Which way do you think they will go?

IMHO it is the former and preventing that is a type of security too.
Social stability also increases security.


Yup. An din the long run, creating a "free-stuff" social structure does not a stable social structure or nation make. I thought you Europeans finally figured that out. Maybe not. If you have any doubt, ask the Haitians about how it works.

But then again, the lobbies (usually) favored by the republicans dont benefit from these types of security, so they are against it. They prefer spending on other things.


You do not understand republicans. I am guessing you also do not understand democrats. Maybe you should look into the history of both parties, it may surprise you.

Fundamentally, the US is in the same struggle it has been in since birth. Big government mothering all, or small government leveling the field betweens states, and taking care of external business. The big government types figured out that buying votes is easy, especially when you do it with the productive taxpayer's money.

America already has more than double the spending of anybody else in the world and nobody would be foolish enough to attack you,


It would seem a few folks didn't get the memo. BTW, for the record, the US also has the largest economy. So spending more should not be a surprise. And thank god it is the US that has the lead, things might be a little painfully different if it was someone else. Gosh, you might not even being enjoying your free(ish) speach on the global internet.

because the US has proven in the past that it would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons. So nobody would be stupid enough to attack you openly.


Really, we do not hesitate ever? I guess I should make a count of smoking craters dotting the landscape of our enemies. Oh, I can't even count two. The two we used almost seventy years ago are now well decorated parks in the land of one of our closest and most dependable allies. And the use of the two is still debated today at all levels of government and public. I guess that makes us un-hesitant. Maybe we shold have tossed around a few more during the cold war, and especially these last few years in your measure. IMO, that would be irresponsible, and we well know it. The sad part is that you fail to see that the US restraint and responsibility has kept much less responsible nuclear armed folks from tossing them around. I would even argue that it has encouraged a few to give them up.

And the rest of what you have should be more than capable of dealing with a few sandal wearing shepherds.


Yes you are correct. If we went to war with full capability we would literally anihilate any opponent. And more than likely without the need for nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, as a nation, we have been burdened with this thing called morality and fairplay. It helpd us give birth to ideas like just war, and ROE. But, I understand as a European, these things are still a little foreign to you, and certainly, you struggle with them occasionally with pretty widespread impact.

Instead you are building new air craft carriers (with the old ones already being better and more numerous than anybody elses) and other expensive vehicles all the time.


Oh yes, the count of our aircraft carriers has been climbing steadily. Not.
BTW, it is very normal to replace ships that are 50 years old, and more than 10 years past design lifetime. I guess if Austria had a navy you would know that.

And if that was not enough, you are subsidizing weapons manufacturers with billions in earmarks through non military programs.


Like...??? and how much again...??? Please feel free to elaborate and cite references.

And that has gone waaay out of hand lately (and caused my anger) with the demand of certain congress people to cut NASAs budgets


I am also not happy about NASA's woes. But I would also argue that NASA has to some measure brought it on themselves with incredibly stupid management practices.

(to make up for the increase in military spending)


Really??? Last I checked the military budget was going down.

and then on top of that with their absolutely irrational and counter productive insistence on spending billions on a heavy lifter with no mission that nobody needs simply to earmark money to an important defense contractor.


Really? Not that I have made up my mind about the need or not for SLS, but here is a consideration for you. One of the dilemmas in having a large industrial base with specific skill sets is the ability to maintain it. This is a dilemma that results in hard decisinos and policies. One result of this is that the US no longer has the ability to build armored warships. Some would argue that it was a good call to lose that skill and knowhow. Some would argue that it was really stupid to let it go.

It is socialism at its best!


Well, no, not really. There is no such thing as good socialism.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Sun Apr 01, 2012 1:10 am

Skipjack wrote:I also want to point out that the US is in a recession. In times like that you want to give your people releave and not additional spending to cary. The government social security and medical security gives people releave and allows them to keep consuming, which is an important motor of the economy. The military spending is sunk cost that only fills up warehouses, harbors and hangars somewhere or is burned somewhere else. It does not really help the economy in any way. The american people right now need financial security and stability more than they need military security and stability. So that they will go out again and spend money and so money gets invested again in american companies, which will mean more jobs and again economic growth. Wars dont do any of that, especially if they are dragging along for a decade or more. Heck WW2 was over quicker...


Really, I thought WWII took from about 1910 until 1950 to sort out more or less. Although it would seem that some parts still haven't been sorted.

When will you learn that giving out free-stuff eventually breeds expectations of somethign for nothing. No society can survive that in the long run. You of all should know that. It surrounds you in all directions.

I also agree that war is not helpful. But it is even less so to allow someone to attack with impunity. Because they will. And, they will keep doing it. Again, you of all people should know that. You should know well that security is not free, it costs treasure.

There are two opposing ideologies in man, those who think they should earn, and those who think they should take. If you are an earner, how do you mitigate the risks you face from the takers?
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 13 guests