4 ms·

Part of Flagler's motivation for building the railroad was beach property rights. The government at the time incentived railroad construction by granting land a

Part of Flagler's motivation for building the railroad was beach property rights. The government at the time incentived railroad construction by granting land along the sides of the rails extending several miles. By building the railroad Flagler gained rights to most of Florida's east coast beach property. So in a sense, Miami was a giant public works project. Are we going to be willing to do the same for space exploration?

intrasight 8y ago
There are no "land" grants in space. Perhaps you mean on the moon or on mars?
virmundi 8y ago
I doubt it. NASA and the US government has lost its sense of adventure and conquering spirit. Too many people in the administration (not Trump's, but rather the deep-state) are 1) afraid of deaths, 2) afraid of being seen as colonizers. That's why we don't have moon bases yet. People couldn't figure out a need, so they became timid hamsters with their Shuttle. So our magnificent men in their flying machines just "go up tiddly up up,they go down tiddly down down." [1] 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUTBYI6rcxs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUTBYI6rcxs
- awful 8y ago
  What I saw over decades after Apollo was an unrelenting pounding by Congress, specifically Republicans in regards to cost and commercial payback, and Democrats in regards to why are we spending money out there when it is needed here, instead. Not a "deep state", of which even if it did exist would have then been filled with the unimaginative and risk adverse since because of my previous point.
  - virmundi 8y ago
    Deep-state doesn't just mean conspiratorial "them/they". It means all of the bureaucratic individuals that haunt the halls of government between administrations and Congressional turnover. They drive policy. They are around for years. It's these unimaginative individuals that hold us back. Republicans wanted a payback. That's fine. Every colonial backer wants that. The argument could have been fusion. We'd extract helium on the moon. We'd also have the ability for meta-materials fabrication there given the weaker gravity. All of this could have been wrapped up in the Republican's favorite spending bucket: war readiness. Few argued for that at the time. The Democrats did what you said, tried to keep their plantations populated through bread and circuses. They lacked the ability to see how colonization would provide jobs and reduce crime by allowing people that don't fit well in society an outlet like the US had with its Western frontier. At this point the US is too indebted to support such a program, at least at a governmental level. I think our only hope is private parities establishing their own colonies in order to create meta-materials from mined asteroids.
    - awful 8y ago
      Agreed with all your points; the old term was bureaucrats. The term "deep state", to me, is very loaded, reeking of conspiracy theories, especially in today's politics. Thanks for the response.
    - hfdgiutdryg 8y ago
      Deep-state doesn't just mean conspiratorial "them/they". It means all of the bureaucratic individuals that haunt the halls of government between administrations and Congressional turnover. I have never seen this interpretation expressed by anyone else, ever.
    - jamesmcnalley 8y ago
      > They lacked the ability to see how colonization would provide jobs and reduce crime by allowing people that don't fit well in society an outlet like the US had with its Western frontier. I’m not sure that criminals and other social misfits would be welcome in space exploration / colonization. Space is a harsh environment that requires cooperative behavior just to stay alive. Colonization occurred in places where there was oxygen, food and water. The main skills needed were very basic survival skills, and a willingness to murder the non-European (and sometimes European) locals that got in the way. We are a long way away from the point where we could tolerate a showdown at high noon in space, though that might make for a profitable summer blockbuster.
      - marksbrown 8y ago
        His point to my mind was that life is viewed too sacrosanct given that there are individuals willing to go.
        jamesmcnalley 8y ago
        The prior poster was explicitly talking about reducing crime by exporting criminals. That’s not a cheap way to execute “undesirable” people, and if they aren’t killed on the way up, we end up with people who are not a great fit for the demands of living in space, however willing prisoners may be to go. I hope we can find a more humane way to deal with our troubled fellow humans than to send them on suicide missions.
- rocketpastsix 8y ago
  You lost me when you said "not Trump's, but rather the deep-state".
- bluGill 8y ago
  Even if I gave you free land on the moon, and the one-way trip, you could not live there. Colonizes work because people who manage to get there can live self-sufficiently Do note that many colonies stated not by people living there, but by people going to "get rich" while being supported from home, and they left infrastructure behind that the latter colonists used.
  - virmundi 8y ago
    Space exploration and colonization is, or course, more difficult given the harsh environment. Given land and manufacturing capacity, people could attempt to create a larger colony. We can heavy lift the manufacturing systems to the moon if we use 3D printing and accept risk of death and colonial collapse. It would be spartan and difficult, but I think we could do it. The meager printing would give rise to more advanced machines capable of manufacturing for materials and forms. My present thesis is that the government lacks the vision and fortitude to colonize any celestial body. So they won’t land grant.

intrasight 8y ago

There are no "land" grants in space. Perhaps you mean on the moon or on mars?

virmundi 8y ago

I doubt it. NASA and the US government has lost its sense of adventure and conquering spirit. Too many people in the administration (not Trump's, but rather the deep-state) are 1) afraid of deaths, 2) afraid of being seen as colonizers. That's why we don't have moon bases yet. People couldn't figure out a need, so they became timid hamsters with their Shuttle. So our magnificent men in their flying machines just "go up tiddly up up,they go down tiddly down down." [1] 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUTBYI6rcxs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUTBYI6rcxs

awful 8y ago
What I saw over decades after Apollo was an unrelenting pounding by Congress, specifically Republicans in regards to cost and commercial payback, and Democrats in regards to why are we spending money out there when it is needed here, instead. Not a "deep state", of which even if it did exist would have then been filled with the unimaginative and risk adverse since because of my previous point.
- virmundi 8y ago
  Deep-state doesn't just mean conspiratorial "them/they". It means all of the bureaucratic individuals that haunt the halls of government between administrations and Congressional turnover. They drive policy. They are around for years. It's these unimaginative individuals that hold us back. Republicans wanted a payback. That's fine. Every colonial backer wants that. The argument could have been fusion. We'd extract helium on the moon. We'd also have the ability for meta-materials fabrication there given the weaker gravity. All of this could have been wrapped up in the Republican's favorite spending bucket: war readiness. Few argued for that at the time. The Democrats did what you said, tried to keep their plantations populated through bread and circuses. They lacked the ability to see how colonization would provide jobs and reduce crime by allowing people that don't fit well in society an outlet like the US had with its Western frontier. At this point the US is too indebted to support such a program, at least at a governmental level. I think our only hope is private parities establishing their own colonies in order to create meta-materials from mined asteroids.
  - awful 8y ago
    Agreed with all your points; the old term was bureaucrats. The term "deep state", to me, is very loaded, reeking of conspiracy theories, especially in today's politics. Thanks for the response.
  - hfdgiutdryg 8y ago
    Deep-state doesn't just mean conspiratorial "them/they". It means all of the bureaucratic individuals that haunt the halls of government between administrations and Congressional turnover. I have never seen this interpretation expressed by anyone else, ever.
  - jamesmcnalley 8y ago
    > They lacked the ability to see how colonization would provide jobs and reduce crime by allowing people that don't fit well in society an outlet like the US had with its Western frontier. I’m not sure that criminals and other social misfits would be welcome in space exploration / colonization. Space is a harsh environment that requires cooperative behavior just to stay alive. Colonization occurred in places where there was oxygen, food and water. The main skills needed were very basic survival skills, and a willingness to murder the non-European (and sometimes European) locals that got in the way. We are a long way away from the point where we could tolerate a showdown at high noon in space, though that might make for a profitable summer blockbuster.
    - marksbrown 8y ago
      His point to my mind was that life is viewed too sacrosanct given that there are individuals willing to go.
      - jamesmcnalley 8y ago
        The prior poster was explicitly talking about reducing crime by exporting criminals. That’s not a cheap way to execute “undesirable” people, and if they aren’t killed on the way up, we end up with people who are not a great fit for the demands of living in space, however willing prisoners may be to go. I hope we can find a more humane way to deal with our troubled fellow humans than to send them on suicide missions.
rocketpastsix 8y ago
You lost me when you said "not Trump's, but rather the deep-state".
bluGill 8y ago
Even if I gave you free land on the moon, and the one-way trip, you could not live there. Colonizes work because people who manage to get there can live self-sufficiently Do note that many colonies stated not by people living there, but by people going to "get rich" while being supported from home, and they left infrastructure behind that the latter colonists used.
- virmundi 8y ago
  Space exploration and colonization is, or course, more difficult given the harsh environment. Given land and manufacturing capacity, people could attempt to create a larger colony. We can heavy lift the manufacturing systems to the moon if we use 3D printing and accept risk of death and colonial collapse. It would be spartan and difficult, but I think we could do it. The meager printing would give rise to more advanced machines capable of manufacturing for materials and forms. My present thesis is that the government lacks the vision and fortitude to colonize any celestial body. So they won’t land grant.