miak

Just make sure to wash the toner off after.

Sure, but when you need it I bet you’re damn sure glad you have it. It’s never a good feeling to be caught without your jellyfish launcher - don’t let that be you.

Cyrus The Virus. What a great 90s villain. Upvote for the Con Air reference.

War on Terror 2: Mariachi Madness

Can’t wait to buy a pizza on layaway!

The Fashion of The Fuhrer sounds like a great musical.

Right, how have their incentives changed and would you trust them regardless of the administration in power? I’m open to them being more trustworthy, but I don’t trust them easily.

And just for the record, I’m not against nuclear power. I think it’s great and I would love to see more use of clean energy to move away from coal, so your pitchfork is not really necessary. Being skeptical of the organization charged with your safety is not the same thing as being against the technology they look over.

Boy, you are just really bothered by this. Why does it being 50years ago matter. Can you explain why we should trust them more today than we should have then?

I just thought it was worth recognizing that there were victims as my point in my original post was regarding the trustworthiness of those that are supposed to be looking out for the people. And I guess I’m not sure where I’ve pushed coal, but you do you, I guess.

Peace and love to you, Zombies

There have been studies that suggested increased cancer rates around TMI. I don’t pretend to follow TMI closely enough to know for sure, maybe those studies have been completely debunked. The trouble with cancer is there can be a number of different factors leading to it and isolating one incident as the main driver for cancer years down the line is difficult.

There was also the issue with the way the surrounding communities were being “kept informed” and the fact that a whistle blower and to come forward to halt irresponsible clean up plans that could have caused a catastrophic event.

I don’t disagree about the harm of coal and I am absolutely hoping fusion works out in the long run. All for clean energy!

With respect, you are the one that seems outraged. I’m not outraged, just pointing out that government can be just as untrustworthy as corporations and in the case of the NRC, there is some history to justify that.
Government agencies generally should be looked at with critical eyes, as should anyone claiming power over your life.

Also, you claimed there were no victims. The fact that no one died in the immediate aftermath of TMI does not mean there were no victims. The surrounding communities were victimized by poor business decisions and poor oversight.

Except it took a whistle blower to point out the reckless behavior during the clean-up to prevent a potential catastrophic event when the NRC was all for signing off on the reckless plan. That, plus the poor communication with the surrounding communities did not help the people there feel confident that their safety was being looked after

It’s not been uncontested through out history, and I won’t pretend that I follow the updates closely, but there have been studies suggesting increased cancer rates in the surrounding communities.

If you want to reach someone, the best way to do it is to be prepared to view things the way they do. If you can’t set aside your prejudice assumptions on the why/how they have come to their viewpoints and really empathize with them, you’re not likely to get far.

There have been studies that show otherwise. It’s been a very long time since I read about them, but was able to find this on a quick search: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/02/why-nonviolent-resistance-beats-violent-force-in-effecting-social-political-change/

From what I recall of Three Mile Island, I don’t know that I’d put a lot of trust in the NRC.

I would have to disagree. States are just groups of people. They can hold all the rights that people hold, but cannot hold any rights people don’t hold (since those people cannot grant a right they themselves do not have).
I struggle to see how it can be deemed acceptable to tell a state they can’t leave because it may have a negative effect on the rest of the union. This is saying that once you join the union, you are a hostage of the union. Any negative effect this has on the rest of the union is not the responsibility of that state. If the union would benefit from continued use of infrastructure in the departing state, they can try to work out an agreement around that, or the union can figure out a way to fill the gaps left in infrastructure, but it makes no sense to hold the state hostage for the sake of saving the union from the hardship.

Right, so you can only leave if we say you can leave mentality, which is a kind of gang mentality. To say that a state that feels it’s membership in the union no longer aligns with its values (whether you agree with their reasoning or not) cannot choose on its own to leave in no way aligns with the values of freedom and autonomy.
If you want to advocate for such a system, fine, but it would be dishonest to then turn around and say that this system is one that values freedom.

At it’s most basic, freedom is the ability to say no and to disassociate with those you no longer wish to associate with.

Also, this Texas Monthly article from late 2022 is an excellent read on the subject. It can never happen, because a post-Civil War law from 1869 makes a state’s unilateral secession from the union illegal. There can be no secession, nor even a referendum. No wonder these drama kings are so confident.

Which is pretty whack. I don’t in any way endorse what the Texas government is doing with the border, just to get that out of the way. The idea that a state isn’t free to seceed is completely ridiculous. One can not rightfully claim the U.S. is a free country if the states are not free to leave the union. This idea that once you’re a part of the union, you’re apart of the union forever is a gang mentality that has no place in a free society.

It can be both though. It’s ok to appreciate and find hope in witnessing common people voluntarily coming to the aid of a fellow person in need while also acknowledging the failures of a system that help create the need for those goodwill actions by common people.