The consequences of abandonment of nuclear power? What, like having enough uranium left for travel to the stars? Nuclear is the only real and practical (eg. NASA's 1960's project Orion) way we have for getting ANYTHING to another solar system, and I'd be happy to live long enough to see THAT become a reality. Or... we could burn this very finite resource so we can run more beer fridges and large screen TVs. We've only got enough for 200 years AT CURRENT CONSUMPTION LEVELS - add exponential growth and we've only got decades, and then what? Something ELSE for our kids to be pissed about?

...but if new players in the economy aren't getting jobs, then you get to use those multiplication skills to see how quickly things get much much uglier. I suggest you speak to new college graduates about the job market. Also, if you're sacking all these government employees (and that's what "spending cuts" often translate into) you'd better do it slowly and carefully because otherwise the private sector will be too shocked by flow-on effects (ie. less govt spending, fewer employees spending money etc...) to absorb all those out-of-work govt employees you'd like them to. That's how it's possible to find yourself in a much deeper hole even if you savagely cut government spending - this is a large part of why many third world countries went backwards implementing these very measures ie. cutting govt spending and low tax rates, forced onto them by the IMF (International Monetary Fund) in the last few decades.

One would have hoped the US wouldn't put blood and treasure on the line on the strength of such a shaky "theory". The Bush administration put its trust in someone the CIA knew was a conman, and other Iraqi expats with axes to grind. There was also some pretty inconclusive intelligence - it really stank of half baked justification, This is why there were mass demonstrations around the world. I attended one, and I'm certainly no anti-war hippie. Lying to your own populous to justify war in a DEMOCRACY is wrong wrong wrong.

For anyone who hasn't seen it, check out this old mathematician (Albert Bartlett) talking about energy and exponential growth. He makes it so obviously clear why we'll be running out of oil shortly even given the most optimistic projections of future growth. It's clear enough for Joe Sixpack to understand - as Einstein would say "as simple as possible, but no simpler".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY

There seems to be a big overlap between techies and trekkies. Do you have much of an interest in technical matters yourself, and do you see Star Trek (and sci-fi more generally) as a valuable guide for imagination/innovation, or perhaps a box people should think outside of?

BSDers are hard to understand - they're like neighbours who complain of the obligation that borrowing tools and/or asking for help will place upon them. It might seem strange, but if you use peoples resources to build a patio they'll probably expect to be invited over for a barbecue (yes, even if that toolbox was "doing nothing" before you used it). What seems like an imposition to you makes others feel part of a community.

They may even feel more annoyed if your patio blocks their afternoon sun so everyone visits you instead. Oh yeah... but it's not THEIR afternoon sun - you just captured it better.