Market Ticker Forums
Detailed market commentary at The Market Ticker and Ticker Classics (The Year 2012 In Review)
Donations accepted; we offer GOLD ACCESS for enhanced privileges. T-Shirts, caps, coffee mugs? Click here.
BlogTalkRadio - Mondays at 3:30 Central - Yes, TickerGuy has a radio show (kinda)
Rss Icon RSS available You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
Sponsored Advertising
To remove advertising from your display upgrade to Gold Donor status
MarketTicker Forums Single Post Display (Show in context)
User: Not logged on
Top Login Control Panel FAQ Register Logout
User Info ROFL! China Tells IBs: Stuff It!; entered at 2009-09-03 02:15:24
Reverseengineer
Posts: 290
Registered: 2009-08-19 Alaska
Quote:
Get real dude - life is RISKY!


I made plenty of money doing Risk Analysis in da bad old days. Quantifying risk is part of the equation here, and as the tag line goes over on Zero Hedge, "on a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone goes to Zero".

The issue you have here is that the more risk you drop into the system, the shorter the timeline gets here. Vastly multiplying the number of Nukes we run vastly multiplies the risk inherent in the system, and its about as stupid to put Nukes in FL or in AK as it is to build a massive infrastructure for refining Oil in the Houston Ship Channel. Its going to go down, its not a matter of if, just when.

You cannot keep adding risk into the system without it LITERALLY blowing up on you at some point. In terms of the kind of risks I feel are worthwhile to take, this one does not make a whole lot of sense because though individually the risks are small of failure, any one failure is FANTASTICALLY expensive and blows the books. You cannot charge high enough premiums to cover against such Black Swans, and in this case its sufficient to take down an entire civilization, as we see with the kind of poor risk management associated with most financial institutions these days.

I'm more willing to take the smaller risk of powering my cabin with a few solar panels, which generate just about enough electricity to run my laptop and a few lights. I can heat the cabin either with the copious amount of firewood around here, or with some coal from the mine up in Healy. I certainly see no need for an $8.5B dollar Nuke Plant, which will cost me right up front a good $13,000 of my tax money. Crap, for $13,000, I can buy enough solar panels to light up my cabin like a ****ing Christmas Tree!

I do not need a Nuke Plant, and I sure don't need to take the risk that one day we get a big enough tremor to crack the cooling towers. Its lain stupid.

RE
2009-09-03 02:15:24