Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Slims · 01-26-2009, 03:22 PM

I agree it is difficult to pin an exact number embedded taxes.

My point is that NOBODY ultimately makes more than they spend.

You could start saving for retirement today, but in thirty years, that money is going to be spent, and taxed, just like every other dollar. If you die before you spend it, then the vast majority of your 'fortune' goes to estate taxes.

Oh, and people pay INCOME taxes on what they make, not what they spend. Thus, rich people are paying income taxes across the board regardless of whether they save that money or not. Even if you consider IRA's and other schemes to defer taxes, they have very low annual contribution limits and the money is taxed eventually.
-----Added 26/1/2009 at 06 : 28 : 11-----
Derwood, I agree that 12 years is a very short timeline. I didn't want to bother trying to figure out the right answer.

I also agree that the cost is very high to build a reactor. However, reactors have a very long lifetime, the fuel cost is rock bottom low (per megawatt/hr), and all that money stays in the national economy rather than going to foreign governments as it is with oil.

Allowing reprocessing would also have the added benefit of further reducing not only fuel but waste storage costs (a substantial part of a plants overall operating budget and the single biggest liability). Reprocessing spent fuel allows the plant to start with material that is already partially enriched and run the same fuel back through the reactor over and over again. It would significantly reduce the quantity and volatility of radioactive waste produced.

01-26-2009, 03:22 PM	#39 (permalink)
Slims Eccentric insomniac Location: North Carolina	I agree it is difficult to pin an exact number embedded taxes. My point is that NOBODY ultimately makes more than they spend. You could start saving for retirement today, but in thirty years, that money is going to be spent, and taxed, just like every other dollar. If you die before you spend it, then the vast majority of your 'fortune' goes to estate taxes. Oh, and people pay INCOME taxes on what they make, not what they spend. Thus, rich people are paying income taxes across the board regardless of whether they save that money or not. Even if you consider IRA's and other schemes to defer taxes, they have very low annual contribution limits and the money is taxed eventually. -----Added 26/1/2009 at 06 : 28 : 11----- Derwood, I agree that 12 years is a very short timeline. I didn't want to bother trying to figure out the right answer. I also agree that the cost is very high to build a reactor. However, reactors have a very long lifetime, the fuel cost is rock bottom low (per megawatt/hr), and all that money stays in the national economy rather than going to foreign governments as it is with oil. Allowing reprocessing would also have the added benefit of further reducing not only fuel but waste storage costs (a substantial part of a plants overall operating budget and the single biggest liability). Reprocessing spent fuel allows the plant to start with material that is already partially enriched and run the same fuel back through the reactor over and over again. It would significantly reduce the quantity and volatility of radioactive waste produced. __________________ "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill "All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act out their dream with open eyes, to make it possible." Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence Last edited by Slims; 01-26-2009 at 03:28 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost