How about this for an economic stimulus?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bdewoody

Guest
<p><font size="2">Why not start the manned Mars expedition now.&nbsp; It is said to have a multi-billion dollar price tag and after all the money is used to pay people to do jobs here on earth and not bundled up and sent to the red planet as some would have you believe.&nbsp; We need to keep the engineers and scientists busy and instead of building new weapons we should never use why not build the technology needed to sustain a presence on Mars.&nbsp; That technology could then be used to sustain people living in places here on earth that have a hard time supporting the local population.</font></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>
 
K

kelvinzero

Guest
<p>This is probably more like a space business topic.</p><p>I would certainly agree that a push to sustain a presence on mars would be a worthwhile one if just for the many spinoff environmental technologies. The trick is how to sell it to people who have no interest in space and many misconceptions about it.</p><p>I find the environmental aspect of mastering&nbsp;recycling environments&nbsp;a very attractive one.</p>
 
S

samkent

Guest
<p style="margin:0in0in0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Space hardware requires a lot of money for very few jobs. I would be interested to know how many people derive their living from the shuttle program. Certainly in the thousands but I doubt it would reach the millions. </font></p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></font> <p style="margin:0in0in0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">What about the aftermath? Once the colony is underway and the economy has recovered we would have a severe cash burden to sustain it. Don&rsquo;t forget the social security burden is about to sky rocket as the baby boomers are starting to retire. It will be similar to the auto retirees where there are more people collecting retirement then there are workers to pay the tab.</font></p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></font> <p style="margin:0in0in0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">There are too many starry eyed Star Trek wannabes in the space arena. They want to put humans in too many places where humans can&rsquo;t sustain themselves. This is fine if it is being paid for with private funds. But I for one do not want welfare societies on other celestial bodies.</font></p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></font> <p style="margin:0in0in0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">If you want to pump money where it will spread evenly through out the economy try this.</font></p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:'TimesNewRoman'">Give each adult meal coupons valid at any restaurant.<span>&nbsp; </span>Give each of us grocery coupons. These are the things we will all use and the money will recycle through out the economy.</span>
 
B

bdewoody

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Space hardware requires a lot of money for very few jobs. I would be interested to know how many people derive their living from the shuttle program. Certainly in the thousands but I doubt it would reach the millions. &nbsp; What about the aftermath? Once the colony is underway and the economy has recovered we would have a severe cash burden to sustain it. Don&rsquo;t forget the social security burden is about to sky rocket as the baby boomers are starting to retire. It will be similar to the auto retirees where there are more people collecting retirement then there are workers to pay the tab.&nbsp; There are too many starry eyed Star Trek wannabes in the space arena. They want to put humans in too many places where humans can&rsquo;t sustain themselves. This is fine if it is being paid for with private funds. But I for one do not want welfare societies on other celestial bodies.&nbsp; If you want to pump money where it will spread evenly through out the economy try this.Give each adult meal coupons valid at any restaurant.&nbsp; Give each of us grocery coupons. These are the things we will all use and the money will recycle through out the economy. <br />Posted by samkent</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font size="2">Personally I'd rather pay people to do work than just give it away.&nbsp; The scientists, engineers and technicians at NASA and the aerospace firms all buy houses, cars, furniture, etc. which spreads the money spent throughout the populace. China and Japan already realise that moving groups off world may be a long tem solution to our growing over population problem here on earth.</font></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>
 
S

samkent

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;Personally I'd rather pay people to do work than just give it away.&nbsp; The scientists, engineers and technicians at NASA and the aerospace firms all buy houses, cars, furniture, etc. which spreads the money spent throughout the populace. China and Japan already realise that moving groups off world may be a long tem solution to our growing over population problem here on earth. <br />Posted by bdewoody</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>There is nothing out there that we don't have down here at a far cheaper price. That alone prevents a business based on another world from making a profit. Without profit they cannot be self sustaining. Try adding up the price of launching large numbers of people into LEO, never mind the price of placing them on another body. You will quickly see that no country or groups of countries could ever afford it.</p><p>All of these thoughts of space colonies are just Trekkie dreams.<br /></p>
 
T

tanstaafl76

Guest
<p>Until there is something of extreme value on another planet that we don't have on Earth we're not going to see permanent colonies on other planets. &nbsp;"Because it's there" is not going to be enough justification for the extreme upkeep costs involved.</p><p>But back to the original point, this would not be a particularly effective way of stimulating the economy. &nbsp;The economy is going to benefit from things like business tax cuts that allow small businesses (the main job creators) to succeed, and infrastructure that improves the capability of businesses to be effective in the marketplace. &nbsp;Big space projects that involve a relative handful of people aren't going to have broad impact. &nbsp;And on the other spectrum, handing out a little bit of money to everybody doesn't do much good either because they aren't going to spend it right now (and realistically, they shouldn't, we need to get away from the borrow & spend mentality that got us in this predicament to begin with).</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
B

bdewoody

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Until there is something of extreme value on another planet that we don't have on Earth we're not going to see permanent colonies on other planets. &nbsp;"Because it's there" is not going to be enough justification for the extreme upkeep costs involved.But back to the original point, this would not be a particularly effective way of stimulating the economy. &nbsp;The economy is going to benefit from things like business tax cuts that allow small businesses (the main job creators) to succeed, and infrastructure that improves the capability of businesses to be effective in the marketplace. &nbsp;Big space projects that involve a relative handful of people aren't going to have broad impact. &nbsp;And on the other spectrum, handing out a little bit of money to everybody doesn't do much good either because they aren't going to spend it right now (and realistically, they shouldn't, we need to get away from the borrow & spend mentality that got us in this predicament to begin with).&nbsp; <br />Posted by tanstaafl76</DIV><br /><br /><font size="2">There is something of high value at least on the moon.&nbsp; Helium 3.&nbsp; If fusion power is ever going to work we will need to mine it on the moon to use in the reactors.&nbsp; Mars is probably beyond my life time but I am hoping to see the start of a permanent base on the moon.&nbsp; </font> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>There is something of high value at least on the moon.&nbsp; Helium 3.&nbsp; If fusion power is ever going to work we will need to mine it on the moon to use in the reactors.&nbsp; Mars is probably beyond my life time but I am hoping to see the start of a permanent base on the moon.&nbsp; <br />Posted by bdewoody</DIV><br /><br />You know, that is said very often, but I wonder how true it is. Is anyone aware of the economic value of He-3 and the costs to recover useable amounts? Is there any kind of economic analysis?</p><p>Thanx, MW</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
T

tanstaafl76

Guest
<p>&nbsp;<BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>There is something of high value at least on the moon.&nbsp; Helium 3.&nbsp; If fusion power is ever going to work we will need to mine it on the moon to use in the reactors.&nbsp; Mars is probably beyond my life time but I am hoping to see the start of a permanent base on the moon.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by bdewoody</DIV></p><p>It's not that simple, though.&nbsp; Consider the following:</p><p>1) We are not close to having a functional commercial fusion reactor that has any use for Helium 3.&nbsp; So its value is completely hypothetical at this point. </p><p>2) Some competing fusion reactor designs that do not require Helium 3 may make lunar mining unfeasible.</p><p>3) Helium 3 is much more plentiful on the moon than it is on Earth, but it still will require moving huge amounts of lunar soil to get the Helium 3 out of it.&nbsp; We're talking about a massive mining operation which will have huge start-up and upkeep costs.&nbsp; There's no way we would spend the money to do that unless we were certain that Helium 3 was REALLY worth it.&nbsp; The reality is we may not need Helium 3, either because we find a design that doesn't need it, or because we never get a Helium 3 fusion reactor up and working.</p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>You know, that is said very often, but I wonder how true it is. Is anyone aware of the economic value of He-3 and the costs to recover useable amounts? Is there any kind of economic analysis?Thanx, MW <br /> Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV></p><p>My thoughts as well Wayne.&nbsp; I think the reality is that we just don't know because we aren't close enough to a He-3 reactor.&nbsp; It would probably be a second generation fuel for a reactor that comes after ITER, which won't be operation for quite some time.&nbsp; And a lot of folks aren't sold on the tokamak design to begin with.&nbsp; And we're not just talking about an easy process here on the moon.&nbsp; We're talking about a major industrial mining operation in conditions close to zero G.&nbsp; The amount of development needed to make such an operation possible and ongoing is truly mind-boggling when you start to think about it.&nbsp; All for Helium 3?&nbsp; For that amount of money and development cost, there could be terrestrial methods of manufacturing it that we just aren't aware of yet that would be more feasible than lunar mining. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
T

ThereIWas2

Guest
I think the return from living on Mars will be to the people living there, not anyone on Earth.&nbsp; They will be settlers, explorers, and scientists, not miners.&nbsp; The distance is too great to send back anything besides information until fusion drive works. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><span class="postbody"><span style="font-style:italic"><br /></span></span></p> </div>
 
T

tanstaafl76

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I think the return from living on Mars will be to the people living there, not anyone on Earth.&nbsp; They will be settlers, explorers, and scientists, not miners.&nbsp; The distance is too great to send back anything besides information until fusion drive works. <br /> Posted by ThereIWas2</DIV></p><p>Well Mars is a different scenario than the Moon, but still I disagree, even for purposes of being self-sufficient, they will need miners, because they will have to mine the Martian soil for materials to survive on. &nbsp;Mars is too far away to be dependent upon regular supplies from Earth.</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts