Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: Nuclear power debate: yes or no?
So ask people in "cote d'ivoire" what they think of areva. And ask you why is there always a civil war there.
1) do we want a diffused production, in the hand of anyone
or do we prefer a concentrated production that gives someone the power to make prices (or to turn off our cities!!!
Free market. Supply and demand find each other to make prices.
2) do we want an energy cost that is comprensive of ANY cost of production and pollution
or we prefer to pay only the lower price is possible (who care about other country people, or about the planet we will leave our sons?)
I want a fair price: the price should contain all costs, except for the ones that are big mistakes made by individual companies, in which case the individual company will be 'punished' by a large increase of costs; the company has to pay for its own disasters it caused.
3) do we want to make an economic war of supply and demand for energy between nations, that can end in real war in many cases
or do we think about ONE net (not one market, one net) for every CITIZEN in the world
First of all, supply and demand isn't a war, it's competition. Secondly, economic 'battles' almost never cause a real war, at least not in civilized countries. And yes, I'll go for the free market.
4) do we think about energy as a RIGHT or as a good to buy and sell?
Energy is a good. Why should it be a right? For me, things you can buy and that are materialistic aren't rights, they're goods.
or do we prefer a concentrated production that gives someone the power to make prices (or to turn off our cities!!!
Free market. Supply and demand find each other to make prices.
2) do we want an energy cost that is comprensive of ANY cost of production and pollution
or we prefer to pay only the lower price is possible (who care about other country people, or about the planet we will leave our sons?)
I want a fair price: the price should contain all costs, except for the ones that are big mistakes made by individual companies, in which case the individual company will be 'punished' by a large increase of costs; the company has to pay for its own disasters it caused.
3) do we want to make an economic war of supply and demand for energy between nations, that can end in real war in many cases
or do we think about ONE net (not one market, one net) for every CITIZEN in the world
First of all, supply and demand isn't a war, it's competition. Secondly, economic 'battles' almost never cause a real war, at least not in civilized countries. And yes, I'll go for the free market.
4) do we think about energy as a RIGHT or as a good to buy and sell?
Energy is a good. Why should it be a right? For me, things you can buy and that are materialistic aren't rights, they're goods.
I disagree with all you answer, and I am very sad thinking that someone still believe in "tha market" as a solution, not as a problem in 2011!!!
As long as I don't see reasons for state interventions, I don't see why free market wouldn't be a solution for a problem that really isn't there (price isn't a problem).
Secondly, economic 'battles' almost never cause a real war, at least not in civilized countries.
How many wars did the 'civilized' USA fight for oil access?
How many wars did the 'civilized' USA fight for oil access?
free market :) hm.... it is very hard to eliminate corruption/oligarchy deals and others ills which are in free market, especially in limited market area as EU full of state restrictions is :(.
free market can not solve problems about clean energy, free market is based on individual profit and most of people give low value to polution according to their profit...
free market can not solve problems about clean energy, free market is based on individual profit and most of people give low value to polution according to their profit...
As long as I don't see reasons for state interventions, I don't see why free market wouldn't be a solution for a problem that really isn't there (price isn't a problem).
LOL is not a problem for you.. in the world how many people can spend as muche as you can?
I think that in 2011 without access to:
information, energy, instruction, medical cure, water, air... and so on
you are NOT a citizen!!!
for example:
how will I vote with knowledge without having the possibility to open internet?
and for this I need energy..
this RIGHT is now only for people that can PAY..
so is not a right..
LOL is not a problem for you.. in the world how many people can spend as muche as you can?
I think that in 2011 without access to:
information, energy, instruction, medical cure, water, air... and so on
you are NOT a citizen!!!
for example:
how will I vote with knowledge without having the possibility to open internet?
and for this I need energy..
this RIGHT is now only for people that can PAY..
so is not a right..
It was about energy in general, not clean energy. Of course the state should stimulate the development of alternative energy.
LOL is not a problem for you.. in the world how many people can spend as muche as you can?
Might sound a bit rude, but so what?
I think that in 2011 without access to:
information, energy, instruction, medical cure, water, air... and so on
you are NOT a citizen!!!
for example:
how will I vote with knowledge without having the possibility to open internet?
and for this I need energy..
Nope, being a citizen is dependent on place. Being a citizen in Belgium and being a citizen in Africa is a totally different story. And it's not that because that are your requirements for being a citizens, those are all rights. How exactly will you ensure the African citizens of information and energy? And that's by the way the task of the country they live in, not ours.
this RIGHT is now only for people that can PAY..
so is not a right..
Like I said before, I don't see energy as a right, for me it's a consumer good.
Might sound a bit rude, but so what?
I think that in 2011 without access to:
information, energy, instruction, medical cure, water, air... and so on
you are NOT a citizen!!!
for example:
how will I vote with knowledge without having the possibility to open internet?
and for this I need energy..
Nope, being a citizen is dependent on place. Being a citizen in Belgium and being a citizen in Africa is a totally different story. And it's not that because that are your requirements for being a citizens, those are all rights. How exactly will you ensure the African citizens of information and energy? And that's by the way the task of the country they live in, not ours.
this RIGHT is now only for people that can PAY..
so is not a right..
Like I said before, I don't see energy as a right, for me it's a consumer good.
And that's by the way the task of the country they live in, not ours.
:(
that's the way! (until you are between the richest part of the planet, but times are changing..)
I don't see energy as a right, for me it's a consumer good.
a good you can't live without..
:(
that's the way! (until you are between the richest part of the planet, but times are changing..)
I don't see energy as a right, for me it's a consumer good.
a good you can't live without..
No free market is not allways right. It caused the financial worldcrisis, because greed is allways iternal.
until you are between the richest part of the planet, but times are changing..
Indeed, times are changing, but nobody can say where to. Irrelevant.
a good you can't live without..
So?
Indeed, times are changing, but nobody can say where to. Irrelevant.
a good you can't live without..
So?
Free market didn't cause financial crisis. Lack of regulation did. I never said in a free market there shouldn't be regulation. Okay, capitalism has some major problems, but it is by far the best system you can think of.
OMG, capitalism!!!
We're still with the head in the 80's..
We're still with the head in the 80's..
Free market is only free without regulation. ;-)