“There is absolutely no reason to expand pit production capacity in light of Russia’s war in Ukraine,” said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association. “That would suggest the United States should have a larger nuclear arsenal than we currently have, and that is a dangerous knee-jerk response.”
Hmm, how does this "suggest" that? Do these people ever look into why we are making pits? My guess this Kimball is not a total idiot in which case he is just lying to make sound like we are "expanding" the arsenal.
Greg Mello never seems to learn his lesson. Over and over again he goes to "labs are bad for New Mexico", besides the small number of NYC divorcees that live in Santa Fe no one in New Mexico buys this. You have families with generation after generation who have worked at the lab, had contracts with lab, or family members at the labs. Whenever he says this it just turns native New Mexicans away. These people have a lot of say with the local government and do not and never have agreed with Mellos assessment that LANL and Sandia economically hurt New Mexico. Yet after all these years he goes with the same set of arguments that ultimately it hurt his cause.
At least Mello is no longer bringing out crazy statements about the economics of New Mexico from Eric Kuershner who has the most backwards view of economics that he comes across like economics version of the flat earth person. It is like he took a first year college book on economics and inverted every single basic notion of economics principles but since he uses the terms that economists use it must be true. It is like when flat earth people that say stuff like inverse square law, equilibrium, pressure, bouncy and density, and mix the
terms up, misinterpret them, and put them together in ways to make no sense but since they used these terms the earth is flat!!
Eric does the same but he uses terms from economics but he clearly has no idea what they actually mean or how they relate to each other. I suspect that he got kicked out of graduate school in economics for rather obvious reasons but since he can claim he studied economics in some capacity it fools the weak minded like Mellow who think he must know something.
7 comments:
In link to the article it says
"in fact, in the past LANL has had a negative economic impact on nearby Santa Fe, Taos and Rio Arriba counties, a 2019 BBER draft report found. Los Alamos County reaps the taxes for workers’ labor and benefits from their spending, doing little to benefit its neighbors."
This is something that Mello has said before. I found the BBER report and read
it https://bber.unm.edu/
The first thing right way is that there are more LANL employees outside of
LA county than it in which alone would refute the statement by LASG study group.
The report says in single year 211 million goes to employees that live in
Rio Arriba, 347 million to Santa Fe, 24 million to Taos, and 56 million to
Sandaval. The actual report also says LANL is of great benefit to the
local counties and state.
I was trying to figure out how on earth they can justify their statement about LANL economically hurts local communities.
https://www.lasg.org/press/2020/RioGrandeSun_26Jun2020.html
I read it a couple of times because I simply could not believe the actual argument they gave, which can be summed up in a single statement in the link:
"So the County is not getting reimbursed as much as it would if all residents who lived in Rio Arriba also worked and shopped in Rio Arriba."
In other words what they are saying is that
if the 2200 LANL workers who live in Rio Arriba
had jobs with the exact same pay as the LANL jobs but the jobs where
in Rio Arriba and not in Los Almaos it would bring in more tax money
to the county than if they had to commute to LA county for the job.
I will leave it as an exercise to for the reader to figure out why using this as a argument that "LANL economically hurts nearby counties"
is way beyond absurd and you will never ever find an actual economist who would use such an argument.
Ok, for those who just want to get to the point, you see having a paying job will bring in more money to your community than not having a job. In other words the tiny flaw in their argument is that there are not 2200 of these equivalent LANL jobs in Rio Arriba, so these people would instead be unemployed and bring in 0 dollars instead of 200 million. I have heard LASG say these people would instead create entirely new jobs in Rio Arriba that would pay just as much and that would bring in more money to the county. No what would happen is that these people would either leave to another county or state or they would not have jobs, which would be rather harmful for community and would also increase unemployment for non-LANL workers in Rio Arriba who have business that get the money from the people who do work at the lab. It would be a huge economic catastrophe.
I have a hard time believing that LASG actually used that as an argument. Are they that dumb of just dishonest? Math is not on the side of LASG as 220 mill > 0
4/10/2022 9:32 PM
Your multiple verbose polls are making you look really insane. Too much time on your hands?
Your multiple verbose polls are making you look really insane. Too much time on your hands?
4/18/2022 5:18 PM
Besides insults do you have anything to counter the points made in the 9:32 PM posting?
Besides insults do you have anything to counter the points made in the 9:32 PM posting?
4/19/2022 12:12 AM
I don't comment on insane rants. Waste of time.
I don't comment on insane rants. Waste of time.
4/19/2022 6:15 PM
What is insane about the 4/10/2022 9:32 PM post? It just uses numbers from a 2019 BBER draft report. From these numbers it logically does not follow what LASG has claimed. You can disagree with the numbers if you want but how earth to you see this as an "insane"? If it is so insane it should be straight forward to show that the arguments are wrong.
I am sorry I simply do not see where the "insane" part is? Are you serious or you simply have no counter argument and can only offer insults?
I always heard the different anti-nuke groups in New Mexico really hate each other. I never realized how much so until the latest round of comments in the Santa Fe New Mexico paper. One group is headed up by Jay Coughlin (Nuclear Watch New Mexico) and the other by Greg Mello (Los Alamos Study Group). From what I can tell neither one has any understating of economics or even simple math and despite hating LANL they seem the hate each other even more. Both groups are going crazy because LANL is supposed to get even more money next year. In any case it is fun to watch them eat other.
Just a couple of comments.
"Jay Coghlan
2 days ago
Greg Mello’s messiah complex has long deluded him into thinking that only he is right. Consequently, he continues his chronic pattern of willfully misrepresenting others, saying “Nuclear Watch has been an important advocate for pit production at LANL since 2003.” "
Jay Coghlan
2 days ago
(continued)Mello’s backwards strategies aid and abet the U.S.’ ~ $1.7 trillion plan for keeping nuclear weapons forever. In practice he is not the nuclear weapons abolitionist he makes himself out to be.
Greg Mello
2 days ago
We agree. I would like to see Nuclear Watch agree also, and take actions accordingly, as Nuclear Watch has been an important advocate for pit production at LANL since 2003 -- important because the permission, active (or passive as is the case for many other so-called "antinuclear" groups), aligns NGO groups with NM Democratic Party goals to rely solely on LANL for pit production.
"Eric does the same but he uses terms from economics but he clearly has no idea what they actually mean or how they relate to each other. I suspect that he got kicked out of graduate school in economics for rather obvious reasons but"
OK, I admit that was just a joke but someone told me this may actually be true. This is beyond hilarious. The guy does seem to know some economics terms but has no idea what they actually mean.
" Erich Kuerschner, Taos activist, was born in WWII Darmstadt, Germany, nine months before the bombing of Darmstadt in September of 1944. He earned a master’s degree in economics from UCLA and taught at Colorado State College while engaging in property rights research, before moving to Taos in 1984 where he worked as a carpenter. A life-long anti-war activist and resource planner, Erich has been involved in the Los Alamos Study Group for more than a decade."
Now places like UCLA generally only gives out PhDs in economics so if you got only a masters degree that is probably a sign that something went wrong. Just from reading his statements on ecomics I can only guess something went way wrong. I have no idea what happened to his teaching gig in Colorado that he left in 1984 to pursue a job as a carpenter but maybe he kept teaching the kids that when supply goes down prices also go down or something.
Post a Comment