Both regimes killed how many scores of people doing it? Also, both ended up being more oligarchies than communist utopias.

Well, despite being a self-described libertarian I've always felt that anarchists were loony. This 'Libertarian Socialism' reads, to me, like plain old Communism, which is also loony, and trying to combine it with libertarian ideals squares the loonacy. To be fair I'll admit to calling my own party looney, and that I probably haven't read far enough in spot any subtle differences, but like I said, the wiki article made my head hurt. I'd actually be tempted to go in and delete it, as the whole 'libertarian' tie seems to be mostly from half a dozen articles published under the title in the 1970's that got the publishers kicked out of their own organization.

Who the heck wrote that? I'm used to certain anarchists attempting to label themselves as libertarians. Sometimes it's them seeing anarchy as a poisoned term, sometimes they're just confused, but what the heck is up with this 'libertarian socialism'?

Reading the site, it seems to have as much in common as the Roman Church does with Buddhism. Heck, just my 15 minute review made my brain hurt, and that doesn't happen often.

My response to such would be to burn down that forest while publicly announcing that we're clear-cutting this section of old grown forest(the spiked ones were likely farm trees) as replacement.

But then, I tend to be vengefully petty.

I'd say 'rounds to zero', but not actually zero. There ARE a few ways to get HIV other than sex; the blood supply SHOULD be clean(but vanishingly rare accidents do happen, there's yea old 'sharing needles', and the occasional cracked person (such as that dentist) trying to spread the infection.

There's a few other diseases that are 'mostly' spread sexually, but not always, as well.

1. Bad management decisions made during the first generation of nuclear plant building; My entire argument is basically 'We've learned!'

2. A single meltdown is too much? By what standard of measurement? Coal power kills millions. Nuclear power kills hundreds. Natural gas might poison people(see fracking and burning tap water).

The human race isn't compatible with the human race. Given that we're far better off with power than without it, the question becomes 'What are our best choices'. Nuclear is actually pretty good from a safety and expense standpoint. I wouldn't go 100% nuclear, but 40% wouldn't be bad. BTW, this is ~double the current percentage.

Note the context of my construction - we start building nuclear plants, shutting down the dirtiest coal plants first; this saves us LOTS of pollution and the resulting doctors visits, medicines, sick days, and even cases of fatal lung cancer. Then we shut down the worst/oldest nuclear plants with ones designed to be even more safe than the old ones.

Except they do exist; heck, they used to bus them in to protest at construction projects.

Strawman? It happened. Lots of coal plants were built even as protests happened at nuclear plant construction sites. You get more BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything) types going after coal today, but there's still more opposition to nuclear.

I forgot to specify distance though - the figure I remember from the study is 'half the increased risk that a smoker has to get lung cancer within 5 miles of the plant'. Still, Coal costs a LOT of lives and medical expenses for things like Asthma.

I don't think I'm a crazy nuke supporter, my 'plan' is pretty simple. For a carbon neutral electric grid(leaving carbon production to other industries and transportation, which is still pretty hefty), my mix is 40% nuclear(2X today, a bit less than the 44% that is produced by coal today), 20% solar(~100X current), 20% wind(~10X), and 20% other. Other consists of Hydro 6%(pretty much maxed), Biomass, Geothermal, Tidal, etc... It could as easily be 40% nuclear, 40% wind, 10% solar, 10% other though.

In doing this, you shut down the coal plants first, then the older(less safe) nuclear plants, then start drawing back on things like natural gas. Save coal for making Iron/Steel, and NG for chemical production, heating homes, and fueling vehicles.

And that protects against insurgents digging chips out of themselves and swapping in chips pulled from dead bodies how?

Not to mention set up such a racket about running a nuclear plant while ignoring the coal plant down the road that's giving everybody a chance at lung cancer halfway towards being a smoker.