Actually Nuclear power is safe.... a lot safer then people think.
The effects of Nuclear radiation have been greatly exaggerated.
You'd be surprised what the research on Chernobyl and Japan show.
Chernoybl for example was expected to kill hundreds of thousands.
Actual deatholl so far.... 54.
Total expected.... 4,000... and even that could be overestimated.
| Kasz216 said: Actually Nuclear power is safe.... a lot safer then people think. The effects of Nuclear radiation have been greatly exaggerated. You'd be surprised what the research on Chernobyl and Japan show. |
okay, im listening, please elaborate on this?
SciFiBoy said:
most people are...try and learn more...then vote for whoever you agree with most |
I dont really have any views, i dont pay too much attention to all the politics stuff to understand or know different parties policies.
All i do know is, i wont be voting Labour.
Carl2291 said:
I dont really have any views, i dont pay too much attention to all the politics stuff to understand or know different parties policies. All i do know is, i wont be voting Labour. |
oh, okay, well, you must have an opinion on stuff at least?
here, take the test on this site, and let us know your results: http://www.politicalcompass.org/test
SciFiBoy said:
okay, im listening, please elaborate on this? |
Chernoybl for example was expected to kill hundreds of thousands.
Actual deatholl so far.... 54.
Total expected.... 4,000... and even that could be overestimated.... since the people in the area didn't exactly have the best medical treatment and high cancer detection rates... and it's assuming every case of cancer is caused by the radiation.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article685386.ece
In general the Nuclear attacks in Japan don't really show significant effects on the granchildren and in most cases the children of those effected.
Plus, this is with the old reactors... new reactors are so ridiculiously safe... they have so many failsafes it's ridiculious.
If you look what leads to nuclear breakdowns... it takes like 6 or 7 catastrophic mistakes to blow something up.
| Kasz216 said: Actually Nuclear power is safe.... a lot safer then people think.
Actual deatholl so far.... 54. Total expected.... 4,000... and even that could be overestimated. |
Nuclear power is the best source of energy in my opinion. Especially if we eventually manage to support a fusion infrastructure as opposed to fission. That didn't come out right did it? Well you know what I mean.
Interestingly enough you can now get a permit to visit Pripyat (the town near Chernobyl that was evacuated), I would love to go and see a city frozen in time like that, it would be really interesting.
Ah I was able to find online exactly what i was looking for Nuclear meltdown wise.
http://www.whatsbestnext.com/2009/06/why-nuclear-meltdowns-happen/
Outliers is a GREAT book by the way.
But as you can see by that... it just takes a lot of people not doing their job right for a nuclear accident to happen.
| kowenicki said: TAX: Dont believe the hype scifi. This government is whining about tax loopholes for the super rich (and all the while taxing the fuck of out mr and mrs average). Just the tax rape of pension funds alone was an absolute scandal. This governemt is the most left wing tax taking governement of all time. Taxing the super rich on their wealth elsewhere wouldnt make a bit of differewnce, its politics of envy, it would make bugger all difference to the tax take of the lower earners. So we have just endured the highest total tax take ever and are our services better... are they fuck. People think 20% and 40% bullshit... NI anyone? its more like 30% and 50% and now 60% plus VAT plus fuel tax plus stamp duty plus capital gains tax plus council tax plus etc etc etc Here is an example for you, the government just introduced a tax on pension contribution for the high earners (150kplus) guess what the effect of that is... to reduce the tax take of the state by £3bn... so everyone LOSES. Fucking idiots. |
that last part if true sounds stupid, like ive said, I cant stand Labour either
okay, what would you change about the tax system then? you seem to know more about it than I do?
also, how would you improve how the public services are funded?
Kasz216 said:
Chernoybl for example was expected to kill hundreds of thousands. Actual deatholl so far.... 54. Total expected.... 4,000... and even that could be overestimated.... since the people in the area didn't exactly have the best medical treatment and high cancer detection rates... and it's assuming every case of cancer is caused by the radiation.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article685386.ece
In general the Nuclear attacks in Japan don't really show significant effects on the granchildren and in most cases the children of those effected.
Plus, this is with the old reactors... new reactors are so ridiculiously safe... they have so many failsafes it's ridiculious.
If you look what leads to nuclear breakdowns... it takes like 6 or 7 catastrophic mistakes to blow something up. |
oh I see, well, if that is true then it might be worth looking into then, the next question would be viability in the UK, do you have any stuff on that?
I'll vote for the Liberal Democrats.
Labour have lost my vote by keeping innocent peoples DNA on record.
I believe the Liberal Democrats are the most likely to get rid of tuition fees, or at least the most unlikely to increase tuition fees.
Nuclear Energy is the only viable renewable energy source at the moment.
I hope something goes really wrong for the conservatives. I couldn't stand it if the Bullingdon Club was running the country.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
