4 ms·

You can't set up shop in Antarctica because its forbidden by the antarctic treaty, which is backed by 32 Nations. If you think people wouldn't be conducting bus

You can't set up shop in Antarctica because its forbidden by the antarctic treaty, which is backed by 32 Nations. If you think people wouldn't be conducting business there if given the option, you've somehow managed to overlook every other corner of the world where its not prohibited. Mining businesses. Tourism/adventure companies. Setting up stores, bars, and other entertainment venues to supply tourists and miners with things to do and stuff to buy. These are just a few things I can think of off the top of my head that would be happening in Antarctica if it weren't patently illegal.

tdaltonc 10y ago
> Tourism/adventure companies That is legal in Antartica. It's just really expensive and there aren't a lot of people who want to do it. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-17/white-desert-antarctica-s-jaw-dropping-luxury-hotel http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-17/white-dese... I don't think you need to make martian mining illegal to discourage the industry. At $500 a lb, no raw materials will be coming to earth from Mars and time soon.
- anexprogrammer 10y ago
  > there aren't a lot of people who want to do it. Where do you get that? Tourism is back near pre-bust 40,000, mostly American, a year. The expensive hotel is fully booked 2 of its 4 weeks. With near 40 treaty countries almost no binding changes are agreed, and regular plans to limit numbers remain just that. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30709924 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30709924 https://www.yahoo.com/news/antarctica-concerns-grow-tourism-numbers-rise-053737703.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/antarctica-concerns-grow-tourism-... (2013)
planteen 10y ago
Two countries close to Antarctica, Chile and Argentina, are not signatories to the Antarctic Treaty and have territorial claims. Both of these countries already have a decent amount of natural resource extraction (especially Chile), so one would reason that if it is worth mining, they would be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Antarctica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Antarctica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Antarctic_Territory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Antarctic_Territory One could also look at the interior of Greenland, which is Danish territory. No serious development of any kind occurs there - it's all along the coasts.
- anexprogrammer 10y ago
  Er, Chile and Argentina are original Treaty (1959) signatories, and dispute at least some of Britain and France's claims, and vice versa. The treaty sets aside territorial claims whilst it's in force. All the claims for all countries are still there, just neutered.
  - planteen 10y ago
    You are right. Not sure how I missed that

tdaltonc 10y ago

> Tourism/adventure companies That is legal in Antartica. It's just really expensive and there aren't a lot of people who want to do it. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-17/white-desert-antarctica-s-jaw-dropping-luxury-hotel http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-17/white-dese... I don't think you need to make martian mining illegal to discourage the industry. At $500 a lb, no raw materials will be coming to earth from Mars and time soon.

anexprogrammer 10y ago
> there aren't a lot of people who want to do it. Where do you get that? Tourism is back near pre-bust 40,000, mostly American, a year. The expensive hotel is fully booked 2 of its 4 weeks. With near 40 treaty countries almost no binding changes are agreed, and regular plans to limit numbers remain just that. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30709924 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30709924 https://www.yahoo.com/news/antarctica-concerns-grow-tourism-numbers-rise-053737703.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/antarctica-concerns-grow-tourism-... (2013)

planteen 10y ago

Two countries close to Antarctica, Chile and Argentina, are not signatories to the Antarctic Treaty and have territorial claims. Both of these countries already have a decent amount of natural resource extraction (especially Chile), so one would reason that if it is worth mining, they would be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Antarctica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Antarctica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Antarctic_Territory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Antarctic_Territory One could also look at the interior of Greenland, which is Danish territory. No serious development of any kind occurs there - it's all along the coasts.

anexprogrammer 10y ago
Er, Chile and Argentina are original Treaty (1959) signatories, and dispute at least some of Britain and France's claims, and vice versa. The treaty sets aside territorial claims whilst it's in force. All the claims for all countries are still there, just neutered.
- planteen 10y ago
  You are right. Not sure how I missed that