3 ms·

I don't think this is accurate. We have a need for clean energy due to global warming, but we don't have as much of a demand for it. We spend more on "lipstick

I don't think this is accurate. We have a need for clean energy due to global warming, but we don't have as much of a demand for it. We spend more on "lipstick and casinos" because there is a true demand for it, and this can be seen because of the money spent on it. Most people could probably get solar panels if they stopped getting fast food and coffee out for a couple years but they don't want to. They have a higher demand / want for the fast food / coffee than clean energy. Similar to why schools spend so much on their football programs, as opposed to their teachers. The demand for football is there and drives income so it gets the funding.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"but we don't have as much of a demand for it." You don't actually know that. I can buy lipstic, and you can measure that in your statistics in X billions. But I have also been "demanding" fusion for 15 years. I am prepared to soend real money on it, buy I can't buy a fusion, and you have no way of measuring my demand for fusion against my demand for lipstick. There is no 'fusion party' I could vote for either. Also, the best way to suport green energy is to get a green energy provider rather than solar panels - its more efficient both in terms of physics and allocation of capital.
- wonderwonder 5y ago
  You personally have a demand for fusion but the market makers don't see enough of a demand or reward vs risk to invest heavily in it. When they see enough of a demand / reward they will invest.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    "the market makers don't see enough of a demand" Again, how do they know how much demand there is? What are they measuring? They don't, and they don't care. Market makers did not invest in GPS, fission, touchscreens or hundreds of other technologies - governments did. 'Market makers' commercialised them.
  - lupire 5y ago
    This is called a market failure, when lack of communication and coordination makes optimal behavior not happen.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago

"but we don't have as much of a demand for it." You don't actually know that. I can buy lipstic, and you can measure that in your statistics in X billions. But I have also been "demanding" fusion for 15 years. I am prepared to soend real money on it, buy I can't buy a fusion, and you have no way of measuring my demand for fusion against my demand for lipstick. There is no 'fusion party' I could vote for either. Also, the best way to suport green energy is to get a green energy provider rather than solar panels - its more efficient both in terms of physics and allocation of capital.

wonderwonder 5y ago
You personally have a demand for fusion but the market makers don't see enough of a demand or reward vs risk to invest heavily in it. When they see enough of a demand / reward they will invest.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  "the market makers don't see enough of a demand" Again, how do they know how much demand there is? What are they measuring? They don't, and they don't care. Market makers did not invest in GPS, fission, touchscreens or hundreds of other technologies - governments did. 'Market makers' commercialised them.
- lupire 5y ago
  This is called a market failure, when lack of communication and coordination makes optimal behavior not happen.