[WastingMyTime89]

> It matters because every dollar put into nuclear is dollar away from something else.

That’s not how things work. It’s tempting to view money in such simple term but also very wrong. In effect, the state has a lot of leeway in how it decides to invest and a lot of conservative positions are taken to preserve the overall status quo when it comes to who has power and who hasn’t.

[Zigurd]

This is exactly how capital works. You don't buy the machine that takes 10X as long to deliver, costs more, has unending waste storage liabilities, and is uninsurable.

[WastingMyTime89]

No, it’s clearly not how it works.

National scale investment like the power grid are not subject to the same kind of rules that classical investment because the state can and do print money. For all the bad things I have to say about the Inflation Reduction Act for exemple, it will result in significant investment in renewable with money which for all intent and purpose appeared out of thin air (with all the impact this will have on the overall equilibrium of the economy).

You could have at the same time have a comprehensive investment plan for nuclear and renewable without one significantly impacting the funding of the other. The US would be labour and knowledge limited long before it is capital starved.

[rcxdude]

The money represents real resources. Printing more of it doesn't make more resources, it just moves some power over the allocation of those resources to the government printing it.

[zerodensity]

Money has not been backed by resources since the 1970s.

[rcxdude]

I know there's no defined relationship to any specific resource, but that doesn't change the fact that money is an abstraction.