Grievous Angel
Beast of Burden
HMGovt said:Economics schmeconomics. The state can always make enough money if it wants. And what's economical about spending $87 billion upfront on the Waronterr, plus countless billions in the aftermath, just to secure oil. I don't think the economic models your argument depends on are very wide-ranging or flexible.
You're not in a position to make a judgement since you haven't seen them. However I would have thought that the total failure of nuclear on world stock markets would count for something regardless of whether the state will pay for a means of arming itself.
Nuclear power is not the answer. The change in our lifestyles required to address global warming is fairly minor.