I tend to see the popularity of tiny houses, off-grid living, and minimal lifestyles as a sort of preliminary trend that must spread through society before some

I tend to see the popularity of tiny houses, off-grid living, and minimal lifestyles as a sort of preliminary trend that must spread through society before something like colonizing Mars is possible. Since there is not currently any economic incentive to establish a base on Mars - it is going to be a very expensive endeavor. Thus, the employees involved must learn to start thinking conservatively to suppress these costs. As for this article - I always welcome a devil's advocate. Colonizing Mars sounds interesting to me, but it should involve more than just my hope and dreaming. Financing these sorts of expeditions is going to come at a cost, but so will fixing outdated or broken systems that threaten our origin planet. Demonizing humanity for its relentless expansion seems to reject survival of the fittest. But I understand where the author is coming from - parasites can rapidly expand in population, but only until they kill their host. On that same token, digestive bacteria inside of humans form more of a symbiotic relationship. The author is suggesting our assessment of current resources and for humanity to exercise some restraint. The common denominator with these two scenarios (spend resources on Mars, or fixing Earth) is that I want my money to go into something bigger than myself. Something that strengthens a future society. Perhaps something like a Mars colony investment has less of a risk of being mismanaged.