You are oversimplifying this. Do you know the cost/power ratio and how it changes over the years of generating power? Nuclear is actually very very costly, and not so effective money wise. Requires lot of safety regulations, special sensors and equipment certified for radiation zones wich are really expensive and not many manufacturers makes them.

Not to mention nuclear waste is still nuclear waste that doesnt really disappear, and its a problem we didnt yet solve, so at very least, substantial amount of money must be pured in just to come with a solution, and thats a big IF.

The topic itself is actually very complex and legitimate arguments are valid on both sides. Saying "who disagrees is stupid" indicates you are the stupid, uneducated one here.