Post a New Topic
Original post made
on Jan 26, 2011
I am sure that Eshoo has a very non-partisan view of the meaning of Obama's speech.
Regarding what it means, and the validity of any of points made it would be a good idea to listen to the whole speech yourself and to read a variety of commentaries on its content. After all, this is a politician making a speech on national TV. And not under oath.
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online due to only linking to another website.]
Until President Obama comes out in favor of nuclear power, and leads the way, he is just blowing coal smoke! There is only ONE way forward, to provide "clean energy", as a base load provider, and it is NOT solar and wind! Nuclear is also a major economic growth promoter, as well as a national security defense.
Obama never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
Eshoo, is behind the curve of history
Nuclear is antithesis of free market solutions. Name one nuke insured by a private company or consortium. All government backed because no free marketer wants the risk.
Look at what Germany has done instead of building their last couple nuke plants: they've put over a million homes under solar panels, alleviating the need for a couple super expensive nukes. Local generation produced at the point of need, reducing the 10-20% loss in long distance transmission.
They employed folks making and installing panels. They have no storage of waste or manufacturing issues involving nukes.
Apparently, when you take an east-west train in Germany, and look north, you see lots of panels. And that's in "sunny" Germany. Why are the Euro's leading the way instead of us? Where is the America First spirit identified by the President?
re: SOTUS - the President nailed it, reclaimed the center. 90% approval. Now let's see if the republicans will remain the party of no, or offer solutions other than tax cuts for the ultra wealthy. They voted to take away the health care benefits, but never unveiled their "secret" plan to fix health care.
Ryan's response? Read his Roadmap where he plans on removing Medicare for coupons/vouchers. And eliminating Social Security. Complete non-starters for anyone over 50, ie.. voters.
They chose him to do the response?!? (where is the republican bench?!?)
Better off with Bachman. And I'd take Anna Eshoo over either Ryan or crazy Michelle.
People don't like nuclear, and having the government shove it down their throats only makes the resistance worse. They do not like nuclear for good reasons as well. The history of nuclear plants has been scary in terms of spills, but the biggest unknown is the behavior, opaqueness of the plants, and what is negligent behavior of the companies.
I am pro-nuclear, but I am anti-nuclear corporation. I'd like to see nuclear move forward, but a nuclear "deep water horizon" is unacceptable, and much as I see nuclear as the large scale solution for the future, how can we possible have nuclear run in the slipshod dangerous way is has been run in the past.
So my first thought is to have the government run the first new generation nuclear plants with safeguards. Have NASA design and build 10 or 20 plants, and keep them open and responsive to the public. Buy or subsidize geiger counters for the people in 5 miles of the plant and give them a hotline to call if the background radiation goes past a certain number. Track the health of these populations, make it clear that this is not just run by a big corporation that does not care about the people in the area or its workers. Maybe subsidize the power from nuclear so people who try it out first get a break on their energy bills.
It's critical to turn the perception of nuclear, the government and corporations around at least for this one issue. Nuclear is carbon free, and very clean. It is very unlikely since Three Mile Island and Chernobyl that there will be a large scale meltdown, but people do not trust what they have been told, and they are right not to, we have been lied to constantly by corporations and government both.
As far as Obama's speech ... I think it was just words, happy words, nice pretty talk, but I am sick of the guy. I am sick of hearing him utter the words clean coal, and every time he does it I know everything he says no matter how pretty it sounds has hard economic interests behind it that do not care about Americans or the environment. I am sick of having the government go backwards, and I am sick of Obama NOT saying that social security and medicare are not going anywhere.
No mention of the environment. Nothing really new or innovative, and the whole having everyone sit together in the House was just more marketing. Americans know marketing is lies these days. So we mark time with this ineffective, incompetent guy in the White House that has not lived up to a single thing he said he wanted to do or would do, and has lots of pretty talk always as to why and wait to see how they try to fool us again next time to maintain the status quo.
Voting for candidates that are bought and sold to us is not going to fix America's problems.
More spending, more wasting money, more taxes, more of the same, which is why the last election tipped to anti liberal folks. When the government taxes 25% of the pie vs. the normal 20% there is less money for innovation and for the high tech companies. Reduce the size and spending of the US government and there will be more money for education and for companies to invest. Eshoo is the perfect example of why taxes are so high in California and why we are broke. Give us a decent senatorial opponent and will be voted out of office.
From the article - "But we must have an educated society."
I agree but look at Foothill DeAnza, the California State Universities and Universities of California - they are all facing significant cuts in funding. They respond by raising fees and cutting admissions.
Private schools are a fine alternative if you can afford them but at $30k + a year that leaves out many folks.
"So my first thought is to have the government run the first new generation nuclear plants with safeguards. Have NASA design and build 10 or 20 plants"
There is a ton of misplaced hysteria about nuclear energy. I won't go through it again, on this thread. The bottom line is that nuclear is safer than coal. It is cleaner than natural gas. It is baseload, not temporal (like wind/solar).
Instead of a large government program, we need smaller units, sometimes referred to as "nuclear batteries". Do a Google search on "Hyperion", and you will get an example glimpse of the future. These very small units are decentalized (both a good and a bad thing, in terms of efficiency), but they provide a way for people to become comfortable with nuclear.
It would be a shame to wait until the irrational fear of nuclear, caused by a bunch of paranoids (e.g. "China Syndrome"), abates, meanwhile our economy and national security continue to deteriorate.
Obama could have told the truth, and led the way...but he refused, because he is in the hip pocket of the solar/wind/efficiency crowd.
Does anyone remember it takes 13 years to build a Nuclear Power Plant? The millions of dollars, possibly billions by the time several are finished? The waste it generates? The mountain of contaminated waste that is seeping out of the containers in the hidden caverns in the State of Nevada? The area around will become less valued and people and animals potential ill in the long run, affecting generations of families; mutants!
I agree "clean coal" is a joke so what about designing multi use solar panels, such as the roof tops in sunny parts of the continent; barren wastelands - ie. Nevada, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, parts of the South; organize jobs and trade with Mexico; open parking lots!
Has anyone forgotten that President Obama and the Democratic Party were elected to make changes and "Clean Up" the Millions of Messes that were created by the previous President, Vice President, Political Party and Financial Industry? And the "Tea Party" members sound like a bunch of whiners instead of inventors and positive, constructive humans.
Amnesia is prevalent in our society; turning a blind eye to quick fixes instead of seeing that WE have been on the destructive track for a very long time and the "select people" who really run things are Corporations, Financiers, Big Oil, Big Aluminum, Big Steel, Big Plastic, heck all the biggies. That's why the Germans and other industrial growing countries are ahead of the USA; their resource companies are run by their Government's laws and regulations; so to speak a win-win situation in some regards.
The USA worker bees whine, stamp our feet and expect that we shouldn't have to work hard to make changes, that progress comes from communicating constantly and pushing paper around, making laws/rules and hiring people to enforce the laws/rules in the board room, congress, senate; while the Big Kahunas make their deals and play golf/ski/sail/scuba dive/hunt/etc. Enjoy the fruits of life, feed their families, educate their families about how to work and what you get if you work.
So, will going solar, nuclear help the oil, steel, aluminum, water, etc. corporate/financial moguls prosper and maintain their life style? Probably not!!!!! Welcome to Earth - How can change take place to improve all inhabitants lives, maintain sustainability, and keep a balanced ecosystem to keep the planet inhabitable?
"Eshoo is the perfect example of why taxes are so high in California..."
What?!? First, Eshoo doesn't set California's tax rate. Second, after President Obama's two tax cuts (one in the stimulus, $390 Billion for 90% of working families, the other just signed in December,) federal taxes are at their lowest point in recent history. Both supported by Anna.
Eisenhower - 90+%
Kennedy - 60+%
Reagan - ~50%, tho he had the largest middle class tax hike (doubled payroll taxes!)
Geez, man, if yer looking for that Libertarian Paradise, with "limited" government - try SOMALIA! Please, go and check out what "limited" government looks like.
Good luck there. The rest of us want a responsible government, in fact, polls show Real Americans love their government:
Gallup: Strong opposition to cutting government - Jan 26 2011
Americans-Oppose-Cuts-Education-Social-Security-Defense . aspx
re: nuclear - why not build one on the fault up by Crystal Springs? Lots of water to cool the towers. Or maybe closer, by the PA airport?
"re: nuclear - why not build one on the fault up by Crystal Springs? Lots of water to cool the towers. Or maybe closer, by the PA airport?"
That is an excellent idea! Just put in three, refrigerator-sized nuclear batteries, next to a Palo Alto substation, in a small footprint buried in a cement vault, and all of our city's electrical needs will be taken care of for the forseeable future! We could (and should) reduce our demands on our wild rivers (hydroelectic)...let the salmon live!, not to metion our indirect use of coal, as well as the despoilment of our wild areas and our wild raptors due to wind turbines and solar farms. No cooling water required, either, for nuclear batteries.
Obama knows this, but he won't say it. It would take real leadership.
"Just put in three, refrigerator-sized nuclear batteries, next to a Palo Alto substation..."
Even better! Or how about, we put one next to your house? Then you can double as their fan AND the security force!
When they actually exist, that is...
Great story teller!
Too bad it is fiction!
No story telling necessary. Regrigerator-sized nuclear batteries are very capable of powering our cities. Do your homework!
We have wandered far from the original thread, which was a silly statement by Eshoo, into the realm of what works and what doesn't work.
Anonymous...do you REALLY believe that there have been any tax CUTS to any of the 52% of us who actually pay any Federal Taxes?
If you pay any taxes, did you pay less the last year or two? Do you know any actual taxpayer who paid LESS in taxes in the last year or two? ( if they are still earning the same amount..if they are earning less or unemployed, then of course they paid less, but that is not a tax cut, that is a PAY cut..)
A tax cut can only happen if you actually pay taxes. Unlike in democrat-land, where if someone who pays nothing gets a one time check from the government and it is called a "tax-cut". Language is important..just like "investment" when said by a Democrat really doesn't mean "investment", it means take our money and decide where to spend it, choosing winners and losers and pitting government subsidized companies against legitimate private businesses.
Somalia?? A limited constitutional government with a representative republic is not anarchy, silly goose. But you have posted this before, and we always say the same thing.
Well, a young conservative has no heart, an old liberal has no brain. Eventually smart people figure out the best way to help everyone gain the best chance to pull themselves out of poverty is to not let government choose who are business friends and who are business enemies, not let government steal money from producers to give to non producers and promote what the French call a "moral hazard" of ever growing dependence, not let government stifle creativity and innovation and competition.
I used to be a socialist, until travelling through the great socialist nations in Europe taught me that our poorest are better off than their poorest, and our middle class was better off than their middle class and I started learning why.
Ah well...if anyone is interested in a first glimpse into reality, try starting with Thomas Sowell's "Economic Myths and Fallacies", or with Basic Economics by Sowell.
"..do you REALLY believe that there have been any tax CUTS to any of the 52% of us who actually pay any Federal Taxes?"
- are you denying the reality of the tax cuts signed by the President in December? (was in all the papers, lol)
- are you denying over half the stimulus was for working family tax cuts?
From the 2010 SOTUS: "We cut taxes. We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. We cut taxes for small businesses," Obama said. "We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college."
Democrats applauded, while Republicans were silent for the most part. In one of the unscripted moments of the night, Obama looked at the Republican side of the room, smiled and said, "I thought I'd get some applause on that one."
Funny that, eh? (See politiFact, PA online is disallowing too many links)
If you insist on living in your Beckian/rush fantasy, please provide links.
Why are you using Bill O'Reilly's false 52% talking point? The number is considerably higher Web Link
Yet you shill for corporations as the great saviors of unregulated capitalism, as they sit on trillions in cash and will not hire in this terrible dep/recession. And you conveniently neglect to point out they also don't pay taxes. General Electric (owns NBC and MSNBC, etc..) didn't pay ANY taxes in 2009, on ten BILLION in pre-tax income.
Exxon didn't either. Web Link
In fact, the GAO reported in February 2004 that 61 percent of U.S. corporations paid no corporate income taxes between 1996 and 2000. Web Link or a more palatable news report Web Link
As for your absurd statement "our poorest poor..." - really? Want to go preach that to some of our homeless camps, where the folks (unlike most social democracy Western European countries,) can't get access to medical or dental or what many may really require - mental healthcare, except through emergency rooms?
I also note you neglected this point:
Gallup: Strong opposition to cutting government - Jan 26 2011
Americans-Oppose-Cuts-Education-Social-Security-Defense . see link above, again PAO limits links, apparently
And from today's paper, revenue, the missing half of this economic disaster:
"Tax revenues are projected to drop to their lowest levels since 1950, when measured against the size of the economy." Web Link
Also: "The latest deficit figures are up from previous estimates because of bipartisan legislation passed in December that extended George W. Bush-era tax cuts and unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless and provided a 2 percentage point Social Security payroll tax cut this year.
That measure added almost $400 billion to this year's deficit, CBO says."
Our centrist President, borrowing from China, Saudi, Japan, Iran and others for tax cuts. And with little serious objection. Where was Rand Paul, and the rest of the tea-baggers, on this deficit busting disaster?
Whenever I find myself wondering how we got our crazy governments in California on state and local levels, I eventually read various opinions in the papers or the Weekly postings and see comments like those made by Annon. Then I understand again the ideologues that vote these politicians and policies in. The remainder of the votes for them must be from those who don't ask or understand but just do as they are told to vote.
Nuclear power (13 years to build?) is an 'investment'. High speed rail could possibly be an investment, but probably like Enron-a negative return in the future based on ridership projections and fares versus competition. The costs and resulting revenues do not appear to work.
Eshoo and Obama have a very different view of investment than the kind most people make. Politicians 'investments' are intended to return them votes personally from special interest groups, not deliver benefits for society at large.
Sorry, the 13 year comment was made by another.
I was the one who asked: if nukes are so safe, why hasn't the free market rushed in to offer insurance for the projects?
As I understand it, they are such a risk, that only the government will insure them.
The big, bad, "crazy governments" that you mentioned. Investments, indeed.
"I was the one who asked: if nukes are so safe, why hasn't the free market rushed in to offer insurance for the projects?"
The private insurance market covers 100% of required (by the U.S. government) coverage. In fact it is a highly competitive market, due to the fact that the engineering and track record is so good. The Price-Anderson Act provides coverage beyond the requirements (of the government). This is how it should be, given that the paranoids will certainly demand billions of dollars for each and every cluster of deaths near a nuclear power plant, despite the fact that death clusters happen all over the place, usually to random chance.
The main point is that Obama knows all this, yet he refuses to use a major stage to promote that which is absolutely required for this nation's security and economic posperity. One cannot talk about "competitiveness" without invoking nuclear power.
You toss around the phrase "each and every cluster of deaths near a nuclear power plant" rather cavalierly.
"The Act establishes a no fault insurance-type system in which the first $10 billion is industry-funded as described in the Act (any claims above the $10 billion would be covered by the federal government)."
Or this one?
"Price Anderson Act - The Billion Dollar Taxpayer Subsidy for Nuclear Power
The Price Anderson Act is anti-consumer because it asks taxpayers to assume most of the liability of nuclear accidents. If the nuclear industry cannot have enough faith in its own technology to guarantee full responsibility for their own mishaps, then nuclear energy does not deserve these continued taxpayer subsidies. When Congress first created Price Anderson 44 years ago, they made it clear the Act was temporary legislation. After so many decades and billions in subsidies later, it is time to retire this boondoggle."
Rather smells of corporate welfare to me. What happened to the invisible hand of the free market?
Am curious why the tea-baggers aren't up in arms about corporate welfare. Oh yeah, they've been co-opted by Dick Armey's freedomworks and other corporate lobbyists.
"The Price Anderson Act is anti-consumer because it asks taxpayers to assume most of the liability of nuclear accidents."
Not really. About 20% of U.S. electrcity comes from nuclear power. If one were to eliminate the nuclear power corporations, in this country, the taxpayers would be in for $Ts, not $Bs, via higher prices and increased costs of national security...thus a huge tax on the American consumer. Price-Anderson is a reasonable cap on the paranoids, and it saves the taxpayers tons of money.
The way to get the American people comfortable with nuclear power, in certain areas (e.g. the Bay Area), is to introduce modular nuclear units (aka nuclear "batteries"), as I have discussed.
Again, Obama knows all this. Eshoo knows it, too, but she is too scared of her own paranoid base to lead us into a better society.
The current instability in the Middle East (Tunisia, Egypt, etc.) is a harbinger of hugely increased oil costs. This will not lead to some miracle of alternative energy. It, instead, will lead to U.S. economic depression...something that well could have been avoided, if we had gone nuclear well before this point. It is too late to avoid the pain, but we can mitigate it, if we have a national leadership that will embrace nuclear power.
"if we have a national leadership that will embrace nuclear power. "
You are dreaming, especially with "The way to get the American people comfortable with nuclear power..."
Much the way I dream of reclaiming our Democracy from the corporations and their virtually unlimited funds.
But keep on trucking...
Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
Post a comment
Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online.
Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information
We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.
Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?
- Barron Park
- Charleston Gardens
- Charleston Meadows
- College Terrace
- Community Center
- Crescent Park
- Downtown North
- Duveneck/St. Francis
- Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
- Esther Clark Park
- Evergreen Park
- Greater Miranda
- Green Acres
- Greendell/Walnut Grove
- Leland Manor/Garland Drive
- Meadow Park
- Monroe Park
- Old Palo Alto
- Palo Alto Hills
- Palo Alto Orchards
- Palo Verde
- South of Midtown
- St. Claire Gardens
- The Greenhouse
- Triple El
- University South
- Woodland Ave. area (East Palo Alto)
- Addison School
- Barron Park School
- Duveneck School
- Egan Middle School (Los Altos)
- El Carmelo School
- Escondido School
- Fairmeadow School
- Gunn High School
- Hoover School
- JLS Middle School
- Jordan Middle School
- Juana Briones School
- Nixon School
- Ohlone School
- Palo Alto High School
- Palo Verde School
- Santa Rita (Los Altos)
- Terman Middle School
- Walter Hays School
- another community
- Another Palo Alto neighborhood
- East Palo Alto
- Los Altos
- Los Altos Hills
- Menlo Park
- Mountain View
- Portola Valley
Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.
Draeger’s Los Altos eyes upgrades, expansion
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 2,966 views
Housing is for People
By Steve Levy | 26 comments | 1,969 views
College Visit: Lehigh and Lafayette
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 4 comments | 1,343 views
Is Coffee a Date?
By Laura Stec | 12 comments | 796 views
A quiet moment
By Sally Torbey | 8 comments | 567 views
Home & Real Estate
Shop Palo Alto
Send News Tips
Circulation & Delivery
Mountain View Voice
© 2015 Palo Alto Online
All rights reserved.