Re: Radbruch1929 Merkel plays the Yank bashing card again!
> "...... I'm not concerned with whether Merkel fiddled with physics or chemistry...." But you tried to claim...
I didn't. Radbruch1929 did. And as I said I don't really think it matters much. She might be a fantastic physics/chemistry/etc PhD of the 70s and still have little clue about how the internet works.
> ".....And as for compromised nodes, Germans tend to be thorough...." Er, so what about Merkel's phone then? Didn't you need Snowdope to tell you about that? ...
I mean there is likely to be thoroughness now that they've become aware of the issue. I agree it shows a lack of thoroughness they haven't figured that out for themselves earlier and I do agree that stereotypes are rubbish anyway. I suppose we'll just have to see what will actually be done and how much sense that makes in the end.
".....What she has done is reacted to the vast protests and overwhelming public opinion (which in large parts had been there well before Fukushima)..... Not sure what's wrong with bending to voter's will. Looks almost like a functioning democracy....." You are being simply too obtuse for words.
> Firstly, politicians are not there to just do what the voters want but what is actually best for the country.
Well, Germans are apparently largely of the opinion that it's best for the country not to have nuclear power and I don't agree that their politicians should decide it for them. Mainly because there's - contrary to what you seem to think - no obvious right or wrong here, it's a matter of opinion and preference.
I'm saying this despite my opinion they'll probably come to regret this since the chances of making up the shortfall with non-nuclear energy at reasonable prices are about equal to the chances of getting fusion to work anytime soon - that is to say miniscule.
But I do understand their reservations. Fukushima did actually happen. There's a markedly increased likelihood of children living near the nuclear reactor Kruemmel (now shut down) to suffer from Leukaemia. And of course NIMBY.
> Often the two differ and the measures needed are unpopular with voters, but they will forgive a politician if they realise they are honestly doing what they think is best (or deselect them if they think they are not).
This is a topic people feel strongly about in Germany and so there's a pretty good chance Merkel would have been deselected with no one waiting to see how her grand plan played out...
> Merkel did not decide on de-nucleurisation because she thought it was the best thing for Germany, her decision was based on trying to stop a surge in support for the (even more loony) Greens.
... and the red+green(+perhaps yellow) coalition to follow them would have got rid of nuclear all the same, so what's the point?
> Secondly, if the policy of de-nucleurisation had been overwhelmingly popular and popular democracy was the only correct gauge of rightness then the nuke power stations would never have been built in the first place.
Is it at all possible that perceptions change over time?
> Instead, they were built due to NECESSITY. Dance around it all you like, but the fact remains that Merkel has made a mistake that will push up German electricity bills and saddle your kids with the same problem a few years down the road when she has retired, when the cheap coal and gas runs out and the only option is to go BACK to nucleur energy.
As I said, I'm neither a big fan of Merkel nor the nuclear exit and I largely agree. But there are arguments supporting their views and I welcome the fact it's for them to decide. Perhaps they'll just pay up and live with it.