Comments by "jeppen" (@jesan733) on "Zeihan on Geopolitics" channel.

  1.  @gov2260  it's not channel moderators doing it, it's youtube automoderation.
    3
  2. No, we don't, because that's not accurate description.
    3
  3. Mearsheimer is subtle, but Donbass Doug is just ridiculously pro-Russian. Max Blumenthal seems preoccupied with Palestine at this time, so I'm not sure he has the bandwidth to support Putin at the same time.
    3
  4.  @maxpower3990  it's not about minimum cost to the weaponry. The US would have to supply less if Ukraine had the freedom to use the weaponry more effectively.
    3
  5.  @Niko_Ly  Israel support is part of the current foreign aid bill that speaker Johnson is blocking.
    3
  6. It's not going to hurt significantly. The US debt to GDP ratio isn't that high. Even if the US borrows all the money required to finance the interest (500-1000 billion per year) but otherwise balances the budget, the debt to gdp ratio falls quickly.
    3
  7.  @TankEnMate  exactly. So something sounding "scary" doesn't mean we don't need the institution. I think we need to curb disinfo, so, in a sense, we need an arbiter of truth.
    3
  8. So how do you understand Tucker Carlson?
    3
  9. Trump calls his opponents "Birdbrain", "Ron DeSanctimonious" and "Sloppy Chris". Do you know which people he calls "Horseface" and "Evita"? What makes you want to vote for that behavior?
    3
  10. Being accidentally wrong is not really the problem. The problem is the conscious disinfo campaigns. Nothing points to irregulaties deciding the last four years.
    3
  11.  @Knightfall21  for me as a non-american, he's pretty obviously right at least in this vid.
    3
  12.  @AlphonseNouveau  so you're saying taxes on the poor can be balanced by the removal of taxes for the rich?
    3
  13.  @knpstrr  it's not fact, it's fact resistant. If you have a diesel or gasoline generator and plug the electricity into an EV, that EV will go about as far as an ICE using the same fuel. Is that really so hard to understand or acknowledge?
    3
  14.  @AWAVAVA  look, I bought my third EV in 2019, and I live in a country with $7/gallon gas and $0.1/kWh nighttime electricity. You can bet the farm that I'm aware that electricity is cheaper! But I'm also an engineer and have difficulties letting misperceptions about physics stand, and you seemed to perpetuate the myth that EVs actually save energy through higher efficiency. They don't, they just provide the flexibility to not use oil. That's all I'm saying.
    3
  15.  @Crumbsoftotailtariansim  the first one who mentions wef in a debate has revealed himself to be a conspiracy nut.
    3
  16. What actually happened? Russia made an angry gesture. So nothing.
    3
  17. Does any rational man?
    3
  18. Do you like Tucker Carlson? If so, why?
    3
  19.  @84Actionjack  Tulsi was recently a democrat, but then she saw limited opportunities and suddenly started taking on Republican stances, going on Fox, working with Tucker Carlson and trying to become Trump's VP pick. Doesn't give any confidence that anything she says is true. If you have something damning to say about Harris, say it yourself and provide some decent basis for it other than that a post-truther said it.
    3
  20.  @84Actionjack  I think you give Tulsi far too much credit for "ending her whole career", especially now that she's poised to become president. I remember seeing a clip of Tulsi making this attack, but I don't remember the particulars. I remember the impression I got, that the attack was pretty vague, unsubstantiated/unreasonable and gish-galloppy. And anyone who knows anything about debates know that it's often impossible to defend against a gish gallop attack. I don't feel a need to refute Gabbard's remarks. If someone tries to present actual evidence and not just random smears by a post-truther, I'll look into it and acknowledge or refute.
    3
  21.  @rkramer5629  yeah, I call this very common fallacy "Appeal to Capacity".
    3
  22. What is he wrong about then, in this segment?
    3
  23.  @darthkek1953  "the permanent veto is why the UN could not stop the illegal and genocidal US/UK attack on Iraq" It was merely illegal, not genocidal. The Russian war against Ukraine is genocidal, though.
    3
  24.  @MrToubrouk  I don't agree. I think Russia plans quite a bit and is actually quite careful even as it makes bad decisions that sometimes seem reckless. It takes time for Putin to make decisions, like e.g. mobilization, or blowing up that dam.
    3
  25.  @davidpnewton  measurable fallout spreads pretty much everywhere, but of course Ireland didn't get significant fallout from Chernobyl. A 45 kt weapon set on ground burst according to nukemap gives a fallout contour for 1 rads per hr: Maximum downwind fallout distance: 159 km. So that's not so much. OTOH, there will be panic regardless how little that reaches the west. We love nuclear panic.
    3
  26.  @paulatreides2509  is it the Russian allegience you like, or the conspiracy theories?
    3
  27. They're not very brittle or easily sabotaged constructions, so arguably the physical security requirements are moderate. Also many of them will be placed close to each other.
    3
  28. Check an interview with Trump from 8 years ago. It's night and day. The decline is apparent and continuing.
    2
  29.  @Dehmigaahd  Harris is in much better cognitive shape than Trump. Much better.
    2
  30. It's a 2 year supply plus on average slightly under a year's worth loaded in operational reactors. Military HEU designs have longer refueling intervals.
    2
  31.  @AngelEconomics  that was wrong, the internet is a viable source of information. However we have to stamp out the systematic disinfo efforts.
    2
  32.  @GotGracexxxxx  I know a lot about operation Ajax already, but thanks. Maybe you should go and read more broadly on the full context and what happened during the reign of the shah, and not just some one-sided account designed to say "western powers bad, mmmkay"?
    2
  33. There are people saying this for lots of tech, including nuclear: "Let's wait for a silver bullet." But scale really does help. It helps making the market bigger for alternatives, it helps gradual improvements, it helps reduce costs, it helps increase supply chain capacities and so forth. Also, fortunately, tax dollars aren't really needed for EVs anymore. They'll take market shares anyway until reaching 80%+ sales in the EU in the 2030-ies and the US in the 2040-ies.
    2
  34. I guess enough of the republican party was swept up in ru disinfo campaigns that JDV felt he had to pander to those voters?
    2
  35.  @pelinoregeryon6593  EV electricity needs are pretty minor compared to overall electricity consumption, so no, cost of electricity will not skyrocket.
    2
  36.  @glynnec2008  no, not worried about EV fires. Are you worried about having a full tank of gasoline in your garage? No? Why not?
    2
  37.  @dantech1  US plug-in sales in 2022 was 7.7%. China 29%, Germany 31% and Norway 88%. I don't think you understand the momentum and cost curves involved. Sure the US sales may still be dominated by ICE in 2035, but most of the world will have plug-in dominance.
    2
  38.  @patrickweaver1105  end of life costs are negligible in an LCOE calculation. The costs and delays in building the things are what matters. SMRs give other economies of scale. If the cost reduction from industrial learning effects is 20% per doubling of produced items, SMRs offer 2-3 additional doublings and could thus halve the cost that way.
    2
  39. Why do you think he was a walking war crime? He was a truly horrible human being, but not a war crime. Him being in poor health and dying from pneumonia after Russia had bombed so many health facilities and electricity power plants may be a result of Russian war crimes though. You're right about that.
    2
  40.  @Sebdes23  if you compare Trump now and Trump 2016, the cognitive decline is super obvious.
    2
  41.  @LTVoyager  "He is a leftist at heart." It's easy to confuse knowledge and education with leftism in the US.
    2
  42.  @Halbared  his cognitive ability isn't impressive. He seems to have difficulties with abstract ideas and is easily triggered.
    2
  43. I'm a Swede. We had a nuclear program, but we don't now, obviously. I don't think we have it in us to start going for a nuclear weapons program under almost any conceivable circumstances before a full-scale WW3. And even if we do go for it and let go of all regulatory hurdles, I really doubt a month is enough. Perhaps I'm wrong and it's much easier nowadays with 3D printing and whatnot, but just the plutonium manufacturing should take considerable time. I guess we can do it in our LWRs but I understand it's a rather inefficient process. Then we need to be able to deliver it to the Kremlin as well.
    2
  44.  @KevinLyda  Australia's is a bit different, I think its light vehicle fleet consumption is less than a third of its liquid hydrocarbon consumption, with e.g. lots of aviation, shipping, mining and heavy transport making up the rest.
    2
  45.  @antman7673  yes, it's both this multiplying effect and the kindof "pyramid" reduction in feed amount when enriching a fixed amount of feed. So if we start with 1 ton of natural U and get it up to reactor grade by enriching it 5x, then the feed to the next "multiplication" step is just ~200 kg, so you can get that feed from 4% to 20% for 1/5 of the energy cost of the first step, and then the last step to almost 100% is 1/25 of the first step. Thus when someone wants "breakout capacity", e.g. the ability to quickly create weapons grade uranium, enriching the reactor grade base feed is around 2/3 of the total work.
    2
  46.  @michaelmaroney1660  the US has managed the global inflation spike faster and better than other countries. Good jobs growth. How about that?
    2
  47. It will.
    2
  48. He says his vids will be released here for free still, just with a week's delay. So you don't need to unsubscribe if you're ok with that.
    2
  49.  @MrExplicitblack  no, he's not. It's an immature joke of putinists, and it might have been funny for a week or two, more than a year ago. Now it's just cringe.
    2
  50.  @leko4420  as I said, cringe.
    2