Poll: Mods, one last poll before tomorrow?

[Nix]

So, how, without actively going and checking every single person's citizenship, do we facilitate a mass-exodus of unwanted migrants? What do you plan on doing? Dump them on a boat and see where the tide takes them?

Fiscally, it will cost the country far, far more than you can imagine to do such a thing, and this in time where we need to cut our deficit drastically within the next 10 years or end up as a struggling state ourselves?

Pull your head out of sand. This way they'll be paying into the system which will help keep the country strong and likewise allow us to develop better systems. There's no point closing the stable door after the horse has bolted, is there? Let's accept the status quo, and move on pragmatically for the actual benefit rather than detriment of the nation-state.

 

[Luseac]

I agree we do need Carriers - how old is the Ark Royal now? It must be on it's last legs.

Our carriers do suck balls compared to the Nimitz class though

Nearly 30 years old The invicible class have been alright, and at least we got 3 of them.

I don't know why we have to design everything ourselves, surely the U.S would sell a couple of new-ish Nimitz's on the cheap as they roll out their new Gerald Ford Class.

 

[The Mad Rapper]

All the people who have already lived near one. Anyone with half a brain and not brainwashed by scaremongers.

So I Have only half a brain? Nice...

 

[The Mad Rapper]

Nearly 30 years old The invicible class have been alright, and at least we got 3 of them.

I don't know why we have to design everything ourselves, surely the U.S would sell a couple of new-ish Nimitz's on the cheap as they roll out their new Gerald Ford Class.

We don't want their old hand-me-downs though. They should just sell us a couple of their Gerald Ford Class. I know they wouldn't, but it'd be nice if they did

 

[Nix]

Full in the sense the level of population impinges on quality of life and puts a huge burden on public services and infrastructure. For proof of that, go outside or read a newspaper.

I don't see a full country, dirtydog. I see areas of the country where population density has become uncomfortable, sure. Yet, many other parts of the country are practically barren.

Which paper? The Daily Fail or The Sun? I'd rather read the back of a shampoo bottle.

Illegal immigrants are responsible for the burden are they? Not the over-inflated public-sector, or poor budget of old, or the ridiclious levels of red-tape inherent from our past (something which by your tradition-worship, we should keep!)? Not from the multitude of white 'working'-class benefit cheats?

It's easy to point the finger dd. Time to stop blaming others and instead work to fix what's broken, yeah? How does costing the country far more in bigotted logistical exercise help to make the country a better place aside from getting rid of that darky down the road? What is it, for aesthetic reasons?

 

[bam0]

I don't see a full country, dirtydog. I see areas of the country where population density has become uncomfortable, sure. Yet, many other parts of the country are practically barren.

Which paper? The Daily Fail or The Sun? I'd rather read the back of a shampoo bottle.

Illegal immigrants are responsible for the burden are they? Not the over-inflated public-sector, or poor budget of old, or the ridiclious levels of red-tape inherent from our past (something which by your tradition-worship, we should keep!)? Not from the multitude of white 'working'-class benefit cheats?

And dont forget the european migrants that nothing can be done about.

 

[robgmun]

Really? Each to their own I suppose. I grew up near a coal fired power station as a child, it never bothered us in the slightest.

Well the coals going to run out in our lifetime anyway so we need alternatives. Wind and sun arn't simply going to cut it in a country of 70million and we can't recklessly keep pumping out Co2. If we don't go nuclear and not be half hearted about it then were going to be suffering brownouts within 10 years. I remember the power cuts of the early 80's, i'd like to think we've moved on since then.

I'd also like to pump money into a joint euro/usa research into fusion reactors, which will solve all our power needs for the next few hundred years.

 

[Mr Jack]

With respect, you're making a lot of assumptions. I wouldn't want a nuclear power station next to me regardless of where I lived. I am sure many others feel the same.

On what rational grounds?

I mean, sure, plenty of people don't want Nuclear Power nearby, just like lots of people don't like mobile phone masts or power lines But I have yet to meet any rational grounds for such an objection.

 

[The Mad Rapper]

Well the coals going to run out in our lifetime anyway so we need alternatives. Wind and sun arn't simply going to cut it in a country of 70million and we can't recklessly keep pumping out Co2. If we don't go nuclear and not be half hearted about it then were going to be suffering brownouts within 10 years. I remember the power cuts of the early 80's, i'd like to think we've on since then.

I understand that. My concern with nuclear, safety aside, is that is there enough uranium to make it worthwhile? If the whole planet moves to nuclear power, how long is it going to last?

 

[The Mad Rapper]

On what rational grounds?

I mean, sure, plenty of people don't want Nuclear Power nearby, just like lots of people don't like mobile phone masts or power lines But I have yet to meet any rational grounds for such an objection.

On the basis that accidents do and have happened, and will doubtless happen again. I do not want a nuclear reactor melting down a mile from my house, thank you very much.

 

[Nix]

I presume that you’re qualified to reach such a conclusion.

Absolutely, I'm sovereign.

 

[Luseac]

We don't want their old hand-me-downs though. They should just sell us a couple of their Gerald Ford Class. I know they wouldn't, but it'd be nice if they did

Couple of Nimitz's would be better than nothing though!

 

[bam0]

I understand that. My concern with nuclear, safety aside, is that is there enough uranium to make it worthwhile? If the whole planet moves to nuclear power, how long is it going to last?

With reprocessing breeder reactors could sustain current power output for about 30,000 years, and that's before you look at other fissile materials like thorium, 3x as abundant as uranium, easier to mine and huge amounts in politically stable areas (Australia and India have the biggest deposits). Nuclear fission still has a lot to give, and with modern reactors there are very few safety concerns nearly everything that could go wrong would just end up with the nuclear pile going out and power being lost.

 

[robgmun]

I understand that. My concern with nuclear, safety aside, is that is there enough uranium to make it worthwhile? If the whole planet moves to nuclear power, how long is it going to last?

You make uranium, so there isn't a finate supply, these are called uranium enrichment factories (you might have heard on the news about Iran trying to build them)

 

[The Mad Rapper]

You make uranium, so there isn't a finate supply, these are called uranium enrichment factories (you might have heard on the news about Iran trying to build them)

I am not sure that's right. According to Wikipedia:

Uranium is a naturally occurring element that can be found in low levels within all rock, soil, and water.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium

The enrichment factories are needed because weapons grade material has to be more fissile.

 

[bam0]

You make uranium, so there isn't a finate supply, these are called uranium enrichment factories (you might have heard on the news about Iran trying to build them)

Not quite, you mine it and refine it to make it into what you need for a nuclear reactor, it is most definitely a finite resource.

 

[The Mad Rapper]

Couple of Nimitz's would be better than nothing though!

Yes! They aren't going to run out of fuel either. Just out of curiosity, do we have any surface ships that are nuclear powered?

 

[robgmun]

Ah sorry, i stand corrected then

But yes the amount of uranium is not a concern

Still, I'd like to see advancements in Fusion, they've been talking about it since i was a kid but not much progress!

 

[Nix]

Wouldn't - in theory - fusion, be more possible/likely if most of the large multi-national companies were investing in nuclear technology instead of oil and gas?

 

[bam0]

Still, I'd like to see advancements in Fusion, they've been talking about it since i was a kid but not much progress!

Who wouldn't but Fusion has always been X years away, and X doesn't seem to be getting any smaller, I certainly wouldn't hang any future power production plans on fusion suddenly being cracked.