Initial Responses

If polywell fusion is developed, in what ways will the world change for better or worse? Discuss.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

ladajo
Posts: 6193
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Thu Jul 08, 2010 9:42 pm

Doesn't the Tesla coup go 200+ miles now?

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Jul 09, 2010 12:36 am

GIThruster wrote:Sorry but you've got your story a bit backward. Mass transit is what gets subsidized. Auto users in the suburbs are who get taxed.

Amtrak hasn't operated in the black since it was nationalized four decades ago.
The folks in the city paid for their infrastructure on their own, then paid a massive proportion of the first suburban ring's infrastructure because their "property" was more valuable and was thus more highly taxed. Which increased the cost (not value but sales cost) of the city while the first ring got some value. The the city paid a massive portion of the infrastructure costs for the next ring, etc. etc. etc.

If the folks in the city were not required to build the massive gazintas and gozoutas with their tax monies which screw up the private market ability to provide good mass transit, we'd have GREAT mass transit. And it wouldn't need to be subsidized since its primary competator wouldn't be subsidized.

Transportation in this country is a mess due to stupid tax supported building projects of many natures.

If people were actually required to pay their OWN way without subsidies, cities would thrive again and suburbia would fade away. JMHO!

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Jul 09, 2010 12:48 am

GIThruster wrote:I'm sorry but you just will need to convince me of your facts since I did a study of this years ago and found no such thing as subsidies to gas companies.
As it was explained to me, the subisies are fairly well hidden. An example I was told (about 30 years ago, so it may no longer be true) was that "unsuccessful wells" could be written off a greater than actual cost. It was an inducement toward exploritory drilling. So it became common practice for companies to drill just short of where they almost KNEW there would be oil, take the write-off, then several years later decide to re-investigate that well and "SHAZAM, what do you know, there was oil here after all. Ain't it lucky we tried again!" If your major cost is underwritten by the government in the form of tax credits, that is a subsidy, even if there is no money flowing from the government to the company.

I was borne and raised in an oil town. This was explained to me by someone with great experience in oil drilling.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Jul 09, 2010 12:56 am

clonan wrote:
GIThruster wrote:Sorry but you've got your story a bit backward. Mass transit is what gets subsidized. Auto users in the suburbs are who get taxed.

Amtrak hasn't operated in the black since it was nationalized four decades ago.
Yes, roughly the time the heavy subsidies for oil companies began which drove down the price of gas. These subsidies include direct payments, reduced leasing costs legal protections and of course military support in dangerous areas.
Suburbia exists for many reasons beyond oil subsidies. Primary among them is tax paid infrastructure subsidies. The newest ring is always subsidized by all the rings inside it, which started with the city proper. Make suburbia pay its own way, and it will fade away, after it sh*ts a brick.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Jul 09, 2010 1:04 am

GIThruster wrote: The Interstate Highway System is not an example of subsidizing auto transport. It is THE example of the world's largest macro-engineering project, designed exclusively as a national defense measure.
And if it had ended where it began in the 50s as a military road system, it would be fine. The subsidies are the huge costs to add ramps, overpasses, more lanes, HOV lanes, even more lanes, beltways, outer beltways... ad NAUSEUM! Each of these tax supported projects is a subsidy to suburbia, and indirectly to the oil companies. It is a subsidy in that big oil is assured a gigantic demand. And it is so inflexible a demand that they can double the price for periods of time and experience barely a drop in consumption and no loss of customers. There are many ways to subsidize.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Jul 09, 2010 1:08 am

clonan wrote: I am suggesting that if we replace oil subsidies with an ecuivalent number of matching subsidies for say solar, wind and polywell than the overal stability of the world will be dramatically improved.
What I am suggesting is that if ALL subsidies were removed, the private market would provide the most efficient mode of transit, and any other service. Oh, and as you may have noticed I have stated before, suburbia, the child of tax subsidies, will fade away.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Jul 09, 2010 1:25 am

GIThruster wrote: This is all so tiring. I can address each of your points which are all in error but I just don't have the time. Lets just take this at face value.

The US Interstate Highway System is complete. There are NO federal tax dollars being spent on it. Using figures from a couple years ago might be convenient for you, but it is also a hoax.
VDOT COMPLETES OBLIGATION OF ALL VIRGINIA HIGHWAY STIMULUS FUNDING
$695 million in projects obligated by state and federal government one week ahead of legislated deadline
I guess 695,000,000.00 = 0.00.

Interesting math.

Please note, I didn't need to quote the entirety of your message to make my point. Please exercise your powers of selection!

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Jul 09, 2010 1:35 am

MSimon wrote:If we are not going to dismantle our highway system when we get off oil then it is not a subsidy. It is a cost of doing business.
I'm not sure what message you are trying to convey here. If the highway system were user-paid, it wouldn't be a subsidy. If it remains tax paid, it will be a subsidy to SOMEONE. If not oil, then whatever replaces it.

And let us pretend that EMC2 is so successful that they develop a machine that can be used in inexpensive flying cars so that the roads need never be used again. Who should pay to have them removed? My thought is the folks that used them the most. And it should perhaps be done by selling said roads and requiring that the new owner develop thru usage charges a fund for removal if needed.

Dream on!

WizWom
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 1:00 pm
Location: St Joseph, MO
Contact:

Postby WizWom » Fri Jul 09, 2010 1:50 am

KitemanSA wrote:
GIThruster wrote: This is all so tiring. I can address each of your points which are all in error but I just don't have the time. Lets just take this at face value.

The US Interstate Highway System is complete. There are NO federal tax dollars being spent on it. Using figures from a couple years ago might be convenient for you, but it is also a hoax.
VDOT COMPLETES OBLIGATION OF ALL VIRGINIA HIGHWAY STIMULUS FUNDING
$695 million in projects obligated by state and federal government one week ahead of legislated deadline
I guess 695,000,000.00 = 0.00.

Interesting math.!


His point was that the National Defense requirements had been met back in the Early 60s, and that the further development was not technically needed for the purpose which the highways were justified using.

The fact that superhighways are useful for commerce when not being used for military response seems to have evaded him. It is right and proper under the constitution to provide commerce routes.
Wandering Kernel of Happiness

MSimon
Posts: 14330
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:31 am

If the folks in the city were not required to build the massive gazintas and gozoutas with their tax monies which screw up the private market ability to provide good mass transit, we'd have GREAT mass transit.


Well yes. If we didn't have so many roads we might actually have good mass transit.

But you know whose big idea suburbs were? Progressives who wanted to separate people from unhealthful manufacturing jobs.

But I'm with you. Bomb the roads. Herd people into cities. All will be well.

Disease of course can fell city dwellers faster than it can suburbans (more contacts). But not to worry. We are past that.

You know what I favor though? Letting people do what they want.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Sun Jul 11, 2010 2:47 pm

MSimon wrote:
If the folks in the city were not required to build the massive gazintas and gozoutas with their tax monies which screw up the private market ability to provide good mass transit, we'd have GREAT mass transit.


Well yes. If we didn't have so many roads we might actually have good mass transit.

You know what I favor though? Letting people do what they want.
If you must choose to misconstrue, I cannot prevent you. But the point I was making was that if city taxpayer subsidized roads that are not needed by cities did not make it impossible to compete, there would be good private mass transit.

I too favor people being able to do what they want. But that isn't possible in the land of the "fee" and the home of "deprived". The tax sysem makes it impossible.

Remove ALL perversions of the free market and it will meet our needs and desires most efficiently.

MSimon
Posts: 14330
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:41 pm

Except for one minor thing: suburban roads are extensions of city roads. And you will be surprised to learn that no city is required to build roads to connect to any other town.

Of course if roads didn't connect what would be the point?

So why do cities do it? Kickbacks from the road contractors? Or possibly they see some other advantage.

The cities aren't being killed by roads or lack of mass transit. They are being killed by corrupt politicians. I can tell you of three for sure: Detroit, Chicago, New York. Others will no doubt want to add to the list.

What do they have in common: all run by Democrats. Bbbbut Bloomberg is a Republican. Well not in any sense that I understand the term. The Republican ticket for him was a flag of convenience. He used to be a Democrat.

Here is what California State Treasurer Bill Lockyer said about Democrats:

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/200 ... eform.html

Short version: Democrats have a hard time with numbers. He puts most of the blame on voters who think they can get something for nothing.

They should listen to Maggie Thatcher:

“The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Sun Jul 11, 2010 11:54 pm

[/quote]
MSimon wrote: Except for one minor thing: suburban roads are extensions of city roads.
All too true. And every time they extend them for another ring of suburbia, the city has to build their own bigger, and bigger and bigger! These huge roads in the city serve only one real purpose, to move folks to and from their subsidied suburban McMansions.

If the folks weren't subsidized to move out to the cheaper suburbs, they would live urban, and use the transit system in the city. I believe that without the subsidized car transit provided to suburbia (and all those other subsidies by the way), private companies would provide good mass transit in the cities.
MSimon wrote: And you will be surprised to learn that no city is required to build roads to connect to any other town.
Very true. Until the petro system came in, towns were usually connected by toll roads, or undeveloped trails thru the contryside. The Pennsylvania Turnpike was a good example of a toll road, IIRC. Indeed, near the turn of the last century, some such toll roads were in the process of being electified. That stopped when the petro-companies bought enough politicians.
MSimon wrote: Of course if roads didn't connect what would be the point?
Nowadays the point is to spread more folks out so that more construction companies / developers can make more money... The only thing most roads connect to these days is subsidized suburbia.

MSimon
Posts: 14330
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:09 am

The city only has to build bigger if it wants the traffic.

And if it wants the traffic there must be some estimation of profit. Or at least constituent desire.

In any case the progressives are now screaming about something they championed. Separating work from living.

You know what I call it? Just deserts.

Quit mucking with the landscape and in time humans will orient themselves to the energy flows.

Oh yeah. Zoning boards (championed as a method for "rational" planning) are the cause of it all. Their power should be reduced or eliminated.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14330
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:17 am

Nowadays the point is to spread more folks out so that more construction companies / developers can make more money... The only thing most roads connect to these days is subsidized suburbia.


Well sure. But how can they sell if no one wants what they are selling? Some people want a few hundred square feet of garden. Others like an acre or two. How do you accommodate that in a high rise?

How do you keep a city compact? Well eliminate the political payoffs that keep prices high would be a start.

Of course Detroit is returning to grassland and ruins thanks to the fine liberals and unions that strangled it to death.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.


Return to “Implications”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests