6 ms·

Maybe we realize now going to the moon from a financial standpoint is purely political. If there was a efficient way and industrial need for plenty of resources

Maybe we realize now going to the moon from a financial standpoint is purely political. If there was a efficient way and industrial need for plenty of resources from the moon maybe they'd make it possible. But right now grandiose measures of showing off your countries genitals kind of creates a narrative of wasted resources to me right now. I've heard the argument that spending on stuff like this creates jobs and economy and I'm sure it does. But work a soup kitchen for a day and you'd realize we have economies of wealth built on the back of despair and hopelessness. Our society needs to change to be a space faring one. Maybe I'm stupid and a traveling to space would initiate the change we need. I just can't see how.

Endy 9y ago
Well, could it be possible to send currently homeless people to colonize the Moon?
- ChristianBundy 9y ago
  Rethink this comment.
- StavrosK 9y ago
  (edited) Would these homeless people be sent to the moon mandatorily or voluntarily? If voluntarily, why only send homeless people? Why not send everyone who wanted to go?
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the Moon was a penal colony. In that book, a form of harsh natural selection took place, and everyone who wasn't smart enough to survive in the demanding technical environment (and smart enough to foresee the disasters caused by those who weren't smart enough) quickly died gruesome deaths, leaving a population which was quite intelligent and valued learning.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - dsr_ 9y ago
      ... in other words, a work of fiction about setting up a disaster, and then partially avoiding it. Please take that as a warning not to set up disasters.
      - DennisP 9y ago
        Especially since it didn't work out too well for people back on Earth.
      - classicsnoot 9y ago
        Australia worked out pretty well.
  - Endy 9y ago
    I'd only suggest voluntarily, but I think that solving the housing problem and the question of colonization in one fell swoop seems like a nice solution.
downrightmike 9y ago
It isn't just that we develop tech that is useful in space, but that it also pushes the current tech to the next level: http://www.cnn.com/2007/LIVING/worklife/10/04/nasa.everyday/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2007/LIVING/worklife/10/04/nasa.everyday/...
Banthum 9y ago
Our economies of wealth are not built "on the back" of the people in the soup kitchens. Those few people who are going to soup kitchens are typically so crippled by their own internal issues (e.g. mental illness, impulsive criminality, addiction, total inability to manage money) that their productivity is extremely low or negative. Nobody's taking anything from them because there's nothing to take. In fact it's the opposite of what you said. It's the people in the soup kitchens who are living (e.g. eating soup) on the back of the healthy, productive people running the economy. Just ask: Which group would suffer more if the other group disappeared? And before those full of moral rage jump in here, no, I'm not saying they deserve to suffer, etc. They don't. But nor is the underclass a productive group being forced to hold up the wealthy. It's not the medieval era any more; in a modern economy those with zero or negative human capital are nothing but a liability.
- danaliv 9y ago
  > in a modern economy those with zero or negative human capital are nothing but a liability They're also, you know, human. I blew several hundred dollars on air travel this weekend, for fun. People in soup kitchens are not living on my back. They're maybe living on my pinky nail. Mental illness and addiction, btw, are illnesses. They're no more "crippling internal issues" than, say, diabetes.
  - classicsnoot 9y ago
    I think he was using the term "liability" in a purely economic sense (liability v. asset) and in that sense he is absolutely correct. It is an ugly truth, but no less true for its ugliness. >air travel for fun i too enjoy living in an economy that has certain segments that are wildly productive. >mental illness == diabetes a comment like this must stem from a complete lack of contact with the homeless. i am not virtue shaming you at all. the homeless, as a crowd, can be very off putting. This does not negate their humanity, but it definitely dictates which segments of humanity they regularly interact with. . my time amongst the homeless was a painful and informative experience. if you move around their world, you start to realize just how many of the street fam are where they are by choice. incompatibility with family or community, perplexing and unsettling addictions, habits, and proclivities (i thought people shooting up was going to be bad, but the eating of trash, hair, and feces was far more disturbing), and deep seeded mental trauma make many of the homeless community unreachable by the vast majority of society. the point is, there is no simple solution for outliers when we believe in the primacy of all human life. our society is an inevitable hierarchy, but our values preclude us from instituting a codified caste system. The homeless i encountered, lived with, and eventually fled from see no place for themselves in society in a general sense. specifically, i had conversations with erudite winos and brilliant heroine addicts, their cognitive assets hampered by their chemical addictions. i also got assaulted and chased by 20somethings with wealthy and compassionate family members who would wire them money and beg them to return. then there is of course the individuals who cannot speak coherently, which is a surprisingly huge barrier to community interaction. mental illness and addiction are illnesses, but MRSA and poison ivy rash are both "just" integument afflictions. Calamine lotion (handing out spare change, deifying the retched at snooty parties) will not help a staph infection.
walkingolof 9y ago
Whats spent here is peanuts compared to whats spent on the military, the US (and the world) could easily sustain a moon/mars/ganymedes base and feed its poor if it prioritized its people instead of the defense complex.
chrisatumd 9y ago
This letter gets posted time to time. Definitely one of my favorites for explaining the rationale on spending money pushing boundaries when there are plenty of things that money can do to help people in need now. http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/08/why-explore-space.html http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/08/why-explore-space.html
- kraig911 9y ago
  Investing in space exploration is necessary and all I don't disagree. But saying it adds to the economy as much as investing in people who need investment I can't necessarily equate. There's millions of children's not getting an adequate education, and there's millions of people hungry and starved. In our current society; investment only happens when there's a vacuum of opportunity that could be filled. Only governments seem to invest in people right now. In a space faring society education is necessary. We don't have enough highly trained workers as is without space ships. We need investment and radical change in education.
reaperducer 9y ago
> But right now grandiose measures of showing off your countries genitals kind of creates a narrative of wasted resources to me right now Countries spend all kinds of money showing off their genitals in much worse ways. Think North Korea's nuclear weapons, or any of the Western nations' colonization follies. How much has been spent on Olympic games in the last couple of decades? Would that be enough to get us to the moon?
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  > How much has been spent on Olympic games in the last couple of decades? Would that be enough to get us to the moon? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games Given the double-digit billions in operating budgets per game, we could probably get a Mars program going for the cost of two or three of those games.
  - nine_k 9y ago
    If only we could attract as many spectators, and command the ad budgets ti match.
- nine_k 9y ago
  North Korea nukes is more like showing venomous teeth than genitals. The same way, launching the first Sputnik was a demonstration of military prowess: see, that thing flying over your head could be carrying a spy telescope, or a nuke. None of this applied to the Moon landings.

Endy 9y ago

Well, could it be possible to send currently homeless people to colonize the Moon?

ChristianBundy 9y ago
Rethink this comment.
StavrosK 9y ago
(edited) Would these homeless people be sent to the moon mandatorily or voluntarily? If voluntarily, why only send homeless people? Why not send everyone who wanted to go?
- stcredzero 9y ago
  In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the Moon was a penal colony. In that book, a form of harsh natural selection took place, and everyone who wasn't smart enough to survive in the demanding technical environment (and smart enough to foresee the disasters caused by those who weren't smart enough) quickly died gruesome deaths, leaving a population which was quite intelligent and valued learning.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - dsr_ 9y ago
    ... in other words, a work of fiction about setting up a disaster, and then partially avoiding it. Please take that as a warning not to set up disasters.
    - DennisP 9y ago
      Especially since it didn't work out too well for people back on Earth.
    - classicsnoot 9y ago
      Australia worked out pretty well.
- Endy 9y ago
  I'd only suggest voluntarily, but I think that solving the housing problem and the question of colonization in one fell swoop seems like a nice solution.

downrightmike 9y ago

It isn't just that we develop tech that is useful in space, but that it also pushes the current tech to the next level: http://www.cnn.com/2007/LIVING/worklife/10/04/nasa.everyday/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2007/LIVING/worklife/10/04/nasa.everyday/...

Banthum 9y ago

Our economies of wealth are not built "on the back" of the people in the soup kitchens. Those few people who are going to soup kitchens are typically so crippled by their own internal issues (e.g. mental illness, impulsive criminality, addiction, total inability to manage money) that their productivity is extremely low or negative. Nobody's taking anything from them because there's nothing to take. In fact it's the opposite of what you said. It's the people in the soup kitchens who are living (e.g. eating soup) on the back of the healthy, productive people running the economy. Just ask: Which group would suffer more if the other group disappeared? And before those full of moral rage jump in here, no, I'm not saying they deserve to suffer, etc. They don't. But nor is the underclass a productive group being forced to hold up the wealthy. It's not the medieval era any more; in a modern economy those with zero or negative human capital are nothing but a liability.

danaliv 9y ago
> in a modern economy those with zero or negative human capital are nothing but a liability They're also, you know, human. I blew several hundred dollars on air travel this weekend, for fun. People in soup kitchens are not living on my back. They're maybe living on my pinky nail. Mental illness and addiction, btw, are illnesses. They're no more "crippling internal issues" than, say, diabetes.
- classicsnoot 9y ago
  I think he was using the term "liability" in a purely economic sense (liability v. asset) and in that sense he is absolutely correct. It is an ugly truth, but no less true for its ugliness. >air travel for fun i too enjoy living in an economy that has certain segments that are wildly productive. >mental illness == diabetes a comment like this must stem from a complete lack of contact with the homeless. i am not virtue shaming you at all. the homeless, as a crowd, can be very off putting. This does not negate their humanity, but it definitely dictates which segments of humanity they regularly interact with. . my time amongst the homeless was a painful and informative experience. if you move around their world, you start to realize just how many of the street fam are where they are by choice. incompatibility with family or community, perplexing and unsettling addictions, habits, and proclivities (i thought people shooting up was going to be bad, but the eating of trash, hair, and feces was far more disturbing), and deep seeded mental trauma make many of the homeless community unreachable by the vast majority of society. the point is, there is no simple solution for outliers when we believe in the primacy of all human life. our society is an inevitable hierarchy, but our values preclude us from instituting a codified caste system. The homeless i encountered, lived with, and eventually fled from see no place for themselves in society in a general sense. specifically, i had conversations with erudite winos and brilliant heroine addicts, their cognitive assets hampered by their chemical addictions. i also got assaulted and chased by 20somethings with wealthy and compassionate family members who would wire them money and beg them to return. then there is of course the individuals who cannot speak coherently, which is a surprisingly huge barrier to community interaction. mental illness and addiction are illnesses, but MRSA and poison ivy rash are both "just" integument afflictions. Calamine lotion (handing out spare change, deifying the retched at snooty parties) will not help a staph infection.

walkingolof 9y ago

Whats spent here is peanuts compared to whats spent on the military, the US (and the world) could easily sustain a moon/mars/ganymedes base and feed its poor if it prioritized its people instead of the defense complex.

chrisatumd 9y ago

This letter gets posted time to time. Definitely one of my favorites for explaining the rationale on spending money pushing boundaries when there are plenty of things that money can do to help people in need now. http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/08/why-explore-space.html http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/08/why-explore-space.html

kraig911 9y ago
Investing in space exploration is necessary and all I don't disagree. But saying it adds to the economy as much as investing in people who need investment I can't necessarily equate. There's millions of children's not getting an adequate education, and there's millions of people hungry and starved. In our current society; investment only happens when there's a vacuum of opportunity that could be filled. Only governments seem to invest in people right now. In a space faring society education is necessary. We don't have enough highly trained workers as is without space ships. We need investment and radical change in education.

reaperducer 9y ago

> But right now grandiose measures of showing off your countries genitals kind of creates a narrative of wasted resources to me right now Countries spend all kinds of money showing off their genitals in much worse ways. Think North Korea's nuclear weapons, or any of the Western nations' colonization follies. How much has been spent on Olympic games in the last couple of decades? Would that be enough to get us to the moon?

TeMPOraL 9y ago
> How much has been spent on Olympic games in the last couple of decades? Would that be enough to get us to the moon? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games Given the double-digit billions in operating budgets per game, we could probably get a Mars program going for the cost of two or three of those games.
- nine_k 9y ago
  If only we could attract as many spectators, and command the ad budgets ti match.
nine_k 9y ago
North Korea nukes is more like showing venomous teeth than genitals. The same way, launching the first Sputnik was a demonstration of military prowess: see, that thing flying over your head could be carrying a spy telescope, or a nuke. None of this applied to the Moon landings.