Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (64155)	5/7/2008 3:32:36 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543200

>>Considering all of those points and you get "McCain did not call for 700+ new nuclear plants".<< Tim - I agree with you that to claim that McCain called for 700 new nuclear plants is not factually correct. I think it would only be correct to do so if he had said those words. The rest of your argument, that what he said doesn't indicate that he supports building a bunch of new nuclear plants, seems wrong to me. Clearly, that was the message he was trying to convey. France gets 80% of its energy from nukes, so why can't we? It is also clear that he had no specific plan for building such plants, and apparently no real idea of what getting 80% of our energy from nukes would require. So if one wants to say McCain has no real grasp of the issues involved, or the practical implications of what he suggested as a primary source of our future energy needs, then it would seem reasonable to do so. But you're right. He didn't call for 700 new nuclear plants. - Allen

To: TimF who wrote (64155)	5/7/2008 3:51:14 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543200

Think of people who argue that some other country with "single payer" pays half as much for health care, and uses that to argue for "single payer" here. I would submit that many of the people who use such an argument don't literally and exactly think that we will cut our health care spending in half by the change, only that it will go down. Well, no, not exactly. But they sure don't think it will reduce it by ten percent. Closer to half than ten percent. Same with the nuclear plants. Probably not 700 and 80%, but a whole helluva lot more than we have now. Considering all of those points and you get "McCain did not call for 700+ new nuclear plants". If you're taking exception to someone claiming that McCain actually said that, I take your point. But I don't think you can reasonably argue that he was thinking along the lines of adding a dozen.