Thread: Decision 2016
View Single Post
  #253  
Old September 23rd, 2016, 03:54 PM
Nukatha's Avatar
Nukatha Nukatha is offline
Most Effort : Least Points
 
Join Date: August 24, 2007
Location: Scans cannot detect User Location...
Posts: 3,611
Images: 58
Nukatha is inducted into the Halls of Valhalla Nukatha is inducted into the Halls of Valhalla Nukatha is inducted into the Halls of Valhalla Nukatha is inducted into the Halls of Valhalla Nukatha is inducted into the Halls of Valhalla Nukatha is inducted into the Halls of Valhalla Nukatha is inducted into the Halls of Valhalla Nukatha is inducted into the Halls of Valhalla
Re: Decision 2016

I REALLY recommend reading the responses from each candidate in that document from sciencedebate. They really give great insight into the candidate's actual positions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Johnson
Most public health laws and programs are appropriately
under the jurisdiction of the states, given that state and local governments are
closer to the specific needs and challenges of their populations and regions.
However, we have made clear our belief that, when a public health threat
spreads beyond state lines or is clearly beyond the capacity of individual states
to handle, there is a role for the federal government to step in, consistent with
the federal responsibility to protect citizens from harm.
That same guiding principle will dictate our response to such challenges as
“superbugs”, possible epidemics, and other threats that extend across the
entire nation.
With regard to public health, it is very simple: If a State can handle it, there's no reason for the Federal government to get involved beyond basic oversight. At the national level, with regard to large-scale epidemic prevention, the federal government can and ought to get involved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Johnson
Our basic priorities will bend towards funding for
basic science and limiting funding for applied science to that which has clear
public benefit, but isn’t feasible in the private sector. The Johnson-Weld
administration defines basic science as research that works towards
understanding of fundamental issues at the core of scientific disciplines. We
believe that in the case where applied science can produce a profit, the best
thing that government can do is get out of the way, while providing safety
regulations that cannot be covered by the investigating organizations’
Institutional Review Boards, Ethical Review Boards, or Research Ethics
Boards. We believe that science is best regulated by scientists, not regulators.
Gary addressed your concern directly there as well. If a science has direct private sector applications that can be used for profit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Johnson
The Johnson Weld administration supports nuclear
power precisely because it produces energy without greenhouse gases.
Other nations have used nuclear power safely for generations. However,
we recognize that a failure or security breach at a nuclear facility can have
catastrophic results.
The Johnson Weld administration would maintain strict nuclear safety
standards, but also investigate newer and safer lower yield reactors like
breeder reactors or thorium reactors, which produce less or even reduce
nuclear waste. The challenge of nuclear waste storage is, of course, a
serious one. However, we believe solutions exist, and can be implemented,
if decisions can be based on science and honest risk assessment, rather
than the politics of pitting one state or community against another.
And he advocates for nuclear power as a clean alternative to fossil fuel plants, specifically mentioning that his administration would provide for research into new reactor technologies, with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Contrast that with Jill Stein's fear-mongering response:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill Stein
Nuclear fission technology is unsafe, expensive, and dirty
from the mining of uranium to the disposal of spent fuel. As such we will end
subsidies to the nuclear industry immediately and phase out nuclear power
over a 10 year timeline. Existing nuclear waste will be handled with onsite dry
cask storage of high-level waste into perpetuity. No transport of nuclear waste
EDIT: So Ted Cruz just announced that he's voting for Trump. I honestly thought he still had integrity. I guess not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie.

Last edited by Nukatha; September 23rd, 2016 at 04:10 PM.
Reply With Quote