u/cley_faye

Planes they already have can't really be grounded immediately without replacements. Buying replacements takes time and money. Negotiating contracts also takes time. Pre existing contracts tying a company to boeing probably exist in some places. There's probably some incentive to not drop a somewhat strategic business on a whim. And maybe some people believe that boeing will start pulling their head out of their ass at some point.

And all that would be a hindrance *assuming* there is a will to stop buying boeing planes, AND move to another, potentially foreign business like Airbus.

The more Ukraine do that, the less *everyone else* have to do it. Good.

I hope she's not sent to a death camp before a court have a chance to say anything, because that's also a thing that can happen.

You only see the PR stunts. And probably only the good ones.

Macron's government to every administration and projects : Keep buying MS Azure, Google Cloud, and AWS, don't look at all the providers in Europe (and France).

And you're just gonna ignore all the shortcomings and hope they evaporate, I suppose. Nice plan you got there.

The whole point is that this *alone* is a risk for the short-medium term that could have been mitigated if not for blind and outdated policies. Look at what a single nuclear power plant could produce continuously, with little variation related to time of day or weather. Saying "we can do without that" today is just foolishness, ignorance, or wilful degradation.

Pikachu O face

You keep seeing these as "alternatives", despite the shortcomings.

I say they are complimentary, and as far as providing power to address these shortcomings, nuclear power is a good solution. How can you look at something that can single-handedly address all power requirements in some area, while providing supports to other, and say "nah", seriously.

Keep looking at things from a money perspective and the solution become obvious : kill everyone and be done with it.

Today, nuclear energy is a reasonably safe, efficient source of energy. Is it the energy of the future ? Probably not. But is it an efficient option for smoothing the grid while planting renewable all around it? It's definitely better than the other alternatives. Does it cost money to develop? Sure. Everything costs money. But there are benefits that won't show up in an accounting book that can't be brushed aside.

Isn't trump the one actually pushing economic harm to the US? Maybe he should look into that.

We were reminded by the last two months or so that it's only a waste of taxpayer money if it doesn't go directly to the pocket of some rich dude.