sure! There was $6.82 trillion in government spending in the US last year(defense was just over 10%). You could just redirect 1% and fully finance 10 new nuclear plants a year. But it is easier than that, the government could simply guarantee loans for any state or power company that wants to build. Make a model plant design that can be reproduced to reduce costs.
The main point is, if you aren't taking nuclear power seriously, you really aren't taking climate change seriously. Subsidizing Teslas for rich Californians is metaphorically rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
I don't argue against any of that. Fusion does not have a path to "stop climate change". We have much faster acting options we can and should pursue.
The point I take exception with is diverting funding away from fusion. Fusion has a great many benefits. I argue these benefits are existential to our society in the 100-200 year timeframe.
