Well nuclear missiles can be used on military targets, or targeted on infrastructure or to strategically poison areas with radiation. I think what you object to is MAD.
As terrible as it is, it does likely prevent wars from happening in the first place. Even if the world is stable now, it may not always be so and it wasn't in the past.
There is more per-capita wealth today then there was 1000 years ago. This is despite there being far more people today than there was 1000 years ago. Therefore it is possible to increase the total wealth in the world.
Depends how you define "wealth". If by "wealth" you mean "money", then more money can be printed (not that you'd want to do this). If by "wealth" you mean goods or services, more of those can be produced. I'm not really sure there's any definition of "wealth" that's zero-sum, except maybe "land".
so? good for him.
I think it's an inescapable reality of the human condition:
we suffer an irresolvable emptiness. we make different choices about how to fill the unfillable hole. I think his choice to fill his by spreading hard-won wisdom and describing a path to honour is a smart solution to a problem we all face.
Gaining wisdom by way of being paid massive amounts of money is an odd definition of "hard-won". Many people find out that their career is largely unsatisfying without stockpiling a safety net that could last a lifetime in the process.
It's one rung up the ladder from the guys who make their money in ethically grey ways, find religion, preach their conversion, but keep the money. (But it's still a rung up, mind you, and that's a good thing.)
Good for him that he earned so much, and that he seems to have found meaning in things besides money, but the story is pretty clichéd.
And I'm not sure "irresolvable emptiness" and an "unfillable hole" is quite so universal as you seem to indicate, nor do I think all attempts at filling voids are of equal value. (I'm not saying you do, either, just trying to be clear.)
here in australia, decades of research and policy development have hit upon a world-class solution to the nuclear waste challenge.
We're building a road in a semi-arid remote location, on the traditional lands of a small, disemowered, remote indigenous community. At the end of the road, we plan to build a shed with a barbed wire fence. In return for this inconvenience, the local community will see employment opportunities (2 security guards) and compensation (scholarships for their children).
this standard of excellence is possible when you have a society that tolerates institutionalised inequity and cultural genocide, and apartheid style laws that target particular races. None of this should surprise, as this is the same spirit in which a large portion of the world's uranium is mined on traditional lands in Australia.
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2013/12/08/calls-ranger-u...
This is just garbage. It doesn't matter where you want to put our nuclear waste disposal facility, some group will invent a story about how they're being exploited to have what they'll paint as "landfill" being put on their land.
Clearly a much better solution is what we do now, where we store all our low and medium grade nuclear waste in random sheds and basements at universities and hospitals all over the country!
not an invention: the people whose land is scheduled to store nuclear waste in australia are subject to laws that target them by race, and deny them basic social services (roads, health, housing, community safety) that others take for granted. the people on whose land uranium is mined (or was until this week's accident!) are subject to a specific federal law that compels them to abide the presence of this dirty industry on land they own.
it must be nice for you to live in this imaginary world where institutionalised racism, racialist legislation and the exploitation of indigenous land owners is 'garbage', but unfortunately for the rest of us, its your story that is mere invention.
(pete- throw away acct cos I'm away from my creds)
In France, they simply used low activity nuclear waste for road beds in the countryside, as supposedly nobody stays long enough on these roads to get any harm from it.
Therefore in the center of France, many, many roads are significantly radioactive. Is it dangerous? Is radioactive matter washed away? What happens to workers doing road repairs? What happens to the rivers, crops and cattle downhill from these roads? Nobody knows and (mostly) nobody cares.
some 30 years ago, land rights in that region were made conditional on the nuclear ambitions of the time. which is why the locals have had to bear the indignity of a uranium operation on the world heritage listed lands they own.
it's called radioactive racism.
http://bit.ly/1d73XYz
Yes, and while we are at it, let's compare the effects of pharmaceutical methamphetamine and pharmaceutical opiates. The unregulated production process surrounding black market drugs causes quite a lot of damage, and that damage could be eliminated by legalization and regulation.
There are some drugs that practically can't be used recreationally without major damage to the user. Mostly these are highly addictive and lead to self-neglect and self-destructive behavior, very unlike nicotine and even alcohol.
Legalization can't change this. What it might change is a shift towards less dangerous drugs to mob up the recreational drug market. SR however is not even slightly going in this direction, so the whole objection to the criminal nature of silk road is baseless.
