You are not logged in.
Make the Moon into Earth's sister planet.
Just keep crashing objects, till it has the same mass as the Earth.
Wont be able to do it soon, but over the longer term
we could use another nearby planet.I don't think it's a good idea. There's a balance between Earth and the Moon, we don't want to break it. Also, the dust created after such measure will last for eons. Terraform what's terraformable. The Moon can be to a degree - need to create a magnetic field, dump a lot of ice asteroids and see what happens. It may hold to the atmosphere for a significant time - in some people's opinion indefinitely. In the worst case scenario, we can dome Luna.
http://www.sfwa.org/members/Nordley/Gravity.pdf]Low Surface Gravity - Terraforming (read me)
Then we could use an elevator system to get away from lunar shuttles that might crash into those domes.
But, I still favor magnetic field and possibly some kind of bubble technology that you could still fly through, but could be use to argument the lack of gravity on the Moon. Maybe I just been watching too much Science fiction, so never mind.
Larry,
It sound like it will near to impossible to terraform the Moon. Unless we can generate some kind of magnetosphere and/or electromagnetic containment field and/or artificial bubble that we can fly through to hold the Lunar Atmosphere in, then we won't be able to get past building either underground chambers or specially built city's under glass above the lunar surface. There appear to be no apparent way to terraform the Moon.
Larry,
I personally favor tarraforming Mars, Venus, the Earth moon, the four Moons of Jupiter, Saturn Moon Titian, Trenton on Neptune and I may or may not consider any of those asteroid. I would consider hollowing out those asteroid that are hundred miles or so, because you could put hundred million people inside and rotate the asteroid for gravity and have a pretty good habitat. But at some point it became not practical to tarraform some thing when it get too small unless you can create gravity platting like on Star Trek and increase the gravity at ground level and/or put an engine on it and make it like a super cruise liner for tens of thousand of people to travel through the solar system. Then that would change the variable and you might consider some thing smaller, but other wise no.
Larry,
Frankly, I think you could find at least one million people on Earth right now who'd go live on Mars as it is.
I certainly would, and I know I'm not alone.
Terraforming is a pipe dream for Martians to worry about implementing (and paying for), after they've developed large scale industry and possess a sizable tax base. Mars interests me because of its riches and its possibilities as the home of a new civilization.
Frankly, I agree with you. We should be thinking of building a city that can support a large number of people and figure that the Tereforming going to come later. The tereforming part of Mars is going to be a long drawn out process that will take hundred year or even several hundred year get very much progress on the tereforming part of Mars.
Larry,
Could someone answer these terraforming mars related questions for me for a paper I amm writing?
1) How long will the whole process take?
2) What steps must be taken to terraform Mars?
3) What is the ratio of Eath/Mars size?
4) Is it ethical?
Thanks for the help!!
1. unknown, as to how long it will take to therefrom Mars. But, before we can therefrom Mars, we will have to get there in sufficient number with an Agro-Industrial-Mining base and possibly space station to house the tereforming work crew. That by itself could take thirty or forty year before we even start on any serious tereforming operation on Mars.
2. Tereforming Mars, it all depends on what you want to do to Mars and how far down the tereforming tail you intend to go. I personally think we need to build a city on Mars of a hundred thousand or more people just as a starter. With that kind of population and building several more city, tereforming Mars will become of generational project for the Martian people to make Mars more like Earth as new technology come on line to improve the Martian ecological system and make it more Earth like, but Mars will never be totally like Earth though.
3. Earth has ten times the mass of Mars. Mars has 38% percent of the gravity of the Earth. Mars has .01% of the magnetosphere that the Earth has, so it is virtually non existent as compared to the Earth Magnetosphere.
4. I see nothing wrong with developing the ecological system of Mars and making it more Earth like. If there is life on Mars, we would want to know about and if at all possibly we would want to save it as we develop the planet Mars.
Larry,
The constitution will be after Mars seperates from Earth. As the Boston Tea Party is the starting point for the United States; Mars will have a defining point, where they will not tolerate colonial injustice and interference.
But, that the point, we don't want a interplanetary war like the American Revolution between the colonist and Great Britain. The American Revolution basically was Private Banks and/or Private Corporation like the East India and/or Dutch/India trying to control those American colonies through trade barrier, credit/debt system and/or taxation and ultimately they had to use the British Armies in a military occupation of those thirteen American colonies to try and prevent the break away from British Empire. The only way to prevent that from happening is to create a constitution that is in the best interest of that future Mars colony and to deny those interest of letting those New York or London Banker and/or Corporation like CEO like Kenneth Lay of Enron or CEO of Halliburton like Dick Cheney from making there dictatorial claims against the Martian population which they will do for love of money or greed or out and out thievery of wealth and they will commit genocide against those Martians to achieve there goals. The only way to stop that, is to setup the rule for colony Mars, before anybody has a vested interest in that future colony. The reason that I mention that is, the Massachusetts bay Colony where there got a charter from the King to generate there own credit before they even left England to setup the Massachusetts and was able to build themselves up as a colony. But, unfortunately Great Britain went from being a nation state into being an Empire and decided that they needed to retract that Charter, because they didn't want Massachusetts to develop into a nation, but wanted them as resource colony instead. Great Britain went from being a nation owned by the people of England to a country that was owned by Bankers and Corporations and operating like a corporation instead of a National Government. The Martian colony has to start off being and continue being based on Common Wealth of the Martian People from start to finish and based on the "GENERAL WELFARE" concept of Government and never ruled by banker or by corporation.
Larry,
Is suppose to be a sovereign Martian government or one or partially controlled by bankers on Earth?
The intent is for a sovereign government. A federal reserve type system as you mention is flawed in a number of respects, the most glaring I'd argue being the entire premise of fiat currency.
Were it my call I'd make the base unit of Martian currency the Auric, a gold coin of as yet to be determined weight. The coin itself would rarely circulate, instead having Treasury Dept. gold certificates in varying denominations which could be exchanged for coin at any bank. This in turn would allow for all the modern banking practices, credit, wire transfers and the like, but at the end of the day you have something real and tangible, gold coinage.
You used a good choice of words. The present Federal Reserve is owned by Private Bankers, so any government that has such a banking system would not be a sovereign nation. Yes, the money created by the Federal Reserve system if Fiat Money and has no real value. The dollar whether is an American dollar or a Martian dollar need to be a medium of exchange with a set value so you can buy and sale goods and services and should never be any thing other than that. But, having a dollar for dollar to gold per ounce will give you no elasticity in the money system and would stifle growth of the economy. But, you can't completely disengage Gold from the system either, I suggest an FDR Gold Reserve Standard instead of a Gold Standard. The primary differences are that a Gold Reserve Standard will let you generate credit and you can only generate credit up to the limit of the gold you have in a Gold Standard. Also only the Martian Government should have the authority to generate credit and have first use of that credit to build up the infrastructure of Mars to sustain a Martian Civilization. Because if the bankers get first use of that credit generating capability and can charge interest on the generated credit, the Martian Civilization could never a become self-sufficient Civilization because of the debt load. This removal of U.S. regulation on the banking industry in Nixon 1971 floating exchange rate act which removed the Gold Reserve Standard and Brenton Wood Agreement destroyed the continuing NASA Space Mission and made them too expensive to accomplish. I personally favor putting the Federal Reserve system into bankruptcy and reorganize it into either putting it under the Treasury Department or a Third National Banking System which is a corporation of the U.S. Government that is run and operated by the U.S. Government. This would be consistent with the U.S. Constitution of American. I would also go on the premise that the Federal Government of Mars is going to be given the power to generate there own credit like the U.S. Government should have control over there own credit system and so the Martian people can control there own destiny once Mars has developed the own Agro-Industrial-Mining Complexes. Otherwise you either won't be able to build a society on Mars or there will have to be some kind of war to force independence from those bankers that are looting the Martian population like they looted California through Kenneth Lay of Enron.
Larry,
How about several, thousand square kilometer, mirrors pointing at the poles?
Does the low gravity on Mars have anything to do with the reason why it lost much of it's atmosphere?
Mars only has about 38% of the gravity of the Earth, defenetly is one of the reason that Mars only has only 1% of the air pressure or density of air that the Earth has.
I have heard that another contributing factor for is Mars having low density air pressure is that Mars has no Magnetosphere surrounding it like the Earth does. They say that the solar wings blow some of the upper Martian atmosphere away or other wise Mars would have a denser atmosphere. As to where or not that true or not, I don't know.
Larry,
I agree we are going to need some kind of rules when we get to Mars and we don't want to leave it to Corporation to make the decision as to going to happen on Mars. We would have to decide if we want to build an open city for every body or petition Mars and let each country have a section of it or do we go, first come first serve until most of the land has been taken. Or do we want to start off right from the beginning to setup a Sovereign Republic with it own Constitution and who ever can or will go to Mars will become the Martian population and for that government.
However I think the banking system that you picked for Mars "Stinks"! The banking system on Mars has to be a government owned banking system, so the future Martian can finance there own internal development. Otherwise that Martian Colony would and could not take hold and develop and become a thriving society. I mean it just will not happen. You can not have a private banking system like the Federal Reserve or World bank controlling central Banking system of Mars. The Martian colony need a Alexander Hamilton First National type or a Treasury Note system like Abraham Lincoln had. Having private banker generating the credit and loaning it to the government or the Martian will suffocate the Martian colony with unpayable debt that will destroy the Martian Colony.
Larry,
American Economy most likely won't even suvive another 15 years on Earth.
Beside the fact that the Current economic system was not model after the American Economic system, but was model after the British system of free trade, free enterprise Capitalistic economy. And yes, if America keep doing what it doing right now, the United States is finished and so is it economy. That I'm in total agreement with you and you will get no argument from me.
For those of you that don't know what the real American System of Economics is and I'm also thinking about my fellow Americans when I make this statement about American Economic System. But, before I go over the economic system, let have a little history so you don't think I'm making this stuff up and that you might know that I have a valid argument.
This system was first pioneered by the puritans in Massachusetts and later Alexander Hamilton setup the First National Bank and it was a Federal Government Corporation that was owned and operated by the Federal Government. Abraham Lincoln gave the Treasury Department the power to create credit and he was able to fight a civil war, rebuild the South after the civil war and industrialize the North, which made the United States a world power. America go into a depression in the 1930's and FDR give the power to generate credit to the Treasury Department to create the credit to finance America's recovery from the Depression and get the United States ready to fight a World War, rebuild the rest of the world with the Breton Wood Agreement. Most of what the United States has done in space can be traced back to John F. Kennedy and he gave the Treasury the power to create credit though executive order 11110 and made the national mission statement that we are going to the moon in this decade.
So the American Economic system revolves around the Federal Government having the power to creat credit and invest that generated credit to building the physical economy up. You also have to couple that with tariff, duties and government regulations to make the U.S. Economy.
When ever the United States function within the perimeter of what the U.S. Constitution set down along with controlling the money system, credit and promotes the business activities to the best interest of the American, then America does very well as a Nation.
But, when America get away from the principle of what is written in the U.S. Constitution, then America does very poorly. Not only that, but if America continues with the policies of George Bush, America my even cease to exist as a nation. The Federal Reserve is a Private Banking System and is part of the disease that is afflicting America and the world banking system afflicts the rest of the world.
So for the United States to go back to that American System, we would have to put the Federal Reserve System into bankruptcy and tens of trillions of worthless dollars would have to be written off. We would have to do that, just to get back to "O" point on the debt we owe and we would probably have a conference to negotiate with the rest of the world and see what should and should not be paid with the rest of the world.
Now we going to have to restart the U.S. Economy again and our tax base is totally gone, so guess how we would have to do it. We will either give the Treasury Department the right to generate credit or form a Third National Banking system owned and operated by the Federal Government. Instead if putting this paper in the banks or in Wall Street and generating debt, we are going to invest in the physical economy like levitated trains, subway, factories, farms, mining, electric power plants, build new city, build space station, build city in space, etc. If the U.S. did this, the U.S. Economy would rebound, but the first few year would be a little rough, because the infrastructures inside the United States has been looted and is colapsing so it needs to totally rebuild America, it would take about twenty to thirty years to do that. Now the amount of credit that the United State would have to generate "PER YEAR" would be about "ONE TRILLION PER YEAR"! Now without the authority of the American Government to be able to generate that much credit, the U.S. could not rebound and will not economically rebound and nor could the United States possibly rebound economically. But at that rate of generating credit over a fifty year period the United States would have generated fifty trillion dollars of investment capital to rebuild America and to engage in space development projects. Once my country get out of the hole we dug for themselves and return to this "OLD AMERICAN ECONOMIC SYSTEM", we would not be worrying about what things are going cost in United States, in space or any where else for that matter.
Larry,
Is suppose to be a sovereign Martian government or one or partially controlled by bankers on Earth?
If you go with a Federal Reserve System, then it will be controlled by bankers on Earth through the credit system, the Federal Reserve is a private bank with a government charter, so the United States is not totally sovereign, because bankers are making major decision and policies out side the U.S. Government.
But, if you go with a First National Bank of Mars and make like the U.S. First National Bank or give the Treasury Department in the Martian government generate credit, then you will have a sovereign Martian Government.
So is this Martian Government semi sovereign or is it suppose to be totally sovereign?
Larry,
Robert, is this a fire hazard and is fire hazard an issue in the Mars Hab? Is electric heating -- assuming nuclear power -- a better bet or is it too fragile?
This thread is about the analog research stations. The Mars Society has been very successful in that it raised money to build two analog stations, FMARS and MDRS, the European and Australian chapters have each built an additional station. I don't think there is any way we will raise enough money for a nuclear reactor. Propane isn't practical on Mars because there isn't atmospheric oxygen to burn it, but it's fine for Earth. Furthermore, there are strict environmental regulations on Devon Island; they even have to air-lift human waste off the island. I don't think a nuclear reactor would ever be approved.
Has any body thought of using Earth batteries to heat and power the Devon Island station. It revolve around putting two dissimilar plates into the ground and you get an earth magnetic current that can be used like electricity and as a heating system.
Here a link to a sight that goes into more detail on the subject.
http://www.icehouse.net/john1/stubblefi … field.html
Assuming that it works as advertised, we would not need a nuclear power station and we could build something that we could actually use on Mars instead of just settling for propane gas which can only be used on earth. Assuming that these dissimilar plates will also work on Mars, then we would have Mars batteries.
Larry,
*I'm hoping we get there on a domestic basis initially -- and mostly. You?
--Cindy
Actually I would like an agro-industrial-mining-science city on Mars. Until you go big, you won't have any staying power on Mars or ability to replicate building another city on Mars. So I would plan on going big right off the bat or other wise your just going to compromise and any settlement you make on Mars and it will probably be just a temporary settlement. After a few year, people will lose interest in Mars. It will lose it enchantment the way that we went to the moon and it lost it enchantment. Oh, you want to go back to the moon, we already been there. Why go back? A high technology city in excess of a hundred thousand people with a agro-industrial base will have staying on Mars for a long time. We need to sell the vision of a Martian City and that there will be a technological pay back like the NASA Moon Mission did. Or otherwise we will be lucky to get a Glorified Apollo Moon Mission type mission for Mars and then going to Mars will lose it enchantment. Oh, we been there too. Why would you want to go back?
Larry,
Why not plan a one-way colonization mission to Mars?
Take Zubrin's plan to the next step - send a fuel and air factory, but also send a food factory, able to produce simple sugars or starches from scratch. Send along plants and fish grown from eggs in robot tended container farms. (Test a variety of animals at Mars gravity in a spinning orbital lab. ) Send plenty of spare equipment and tools to let colonists make just about anything.
When it's all working well, send humans TO STAY, with a lifetime-financed support staff on Earth to provide them with information and advice. And of course resupply missions can be launched every few years - or if they're doing fine, send more people.
You also might consider Biosphere I and II in Arizona with there test of six people which cost about twenty million dollars and it was not near as aggressive as what your talking about and it basically failed the test of being self-sufficient for only two years.
There is no way to sneak around the issue of developing the technology and building the infrastructure to do a Mars Mission and/or build a colony and/or City on Mars.
Larry,
NORAD already has the technology to track the contraband of illegal drugs or nuclear waist. They may not currently have the technology to shoot it down right now, but that would change once we develop laser weapons. Those weapons would be a point and shoot kind of weapons and you would almost certainty hit what your shooting at.
It maybe able to do it someday but will it be allowed to do it? I mean space is international. For instance Marsians are selling their stuff to Iran. The cargo will never enter US airspace and so the US/NORAD has legaly nothing to say about it.
What make you think some one going to stop the shooting down of smugglers in international space. They will go after smugglers in international space the same way they go after smugglers in international water. Your argument is neither valid nor does it conform to the real world or would it apply to international space either. Some powerful nation like the United States want to put an end to illegal drugs coming into there country, they will just eliminate those smugglers. Besides they don't have say they were the ones that fired that Laser Weapon that kill those smuggler. We could even deny we fired weapon or maybe it was the Russian or the Chinese that fired the Laser Weapon. Oh they got hit by a Laser Weapon? Oh, Gee, that terrible. I don’t know anything about it.
Larry,
Beside being the president that made the commitment to go to the Moon, Kennedy had other problems to deal with like the Federal Reserve System and Wall Street. I mention these other problems, because if Kennedy would have won, we would already have a permanent base on the Moon and we may also have had a permanent base on Mars too. Since Kennedy wanted to go to the Moon and Mars and they did not what to go to either the Moon or Mars, but conceded to let us go the Moon because of the Kennedy speech that we are going to the Moon in this decade. Also Kennedy wanted to Nationalize the Federal Reserve System and through executive order number : 11110 gave the Treasury Department the power to generate credit. Also FDR used the Treasury Department to generate credit to rebuild America, so this is a big deal and wheels some real financial power. You remind those who have forgotten or may never have known, Nixon in 1971 took us off the Gold Reserve Standard with the Brenton Wood Agreement and put us on the floating exchange rate which de-coupled the dollar from the physical economy and not too long after that, the NASA budget on several project got axes out, because we could not afford them, because they suddenly became too expensive.
Go to these web site to find out more about Kennedy. I will see what I can find out about Kennedy and his vision for America and the space program and it will be obvious that he wasn’t just thinking about the cold war, but was thinking of the future and the role that space should play in that future. The U.S. Space Program was not just about how much it going to cost to go into space, but it also about a philosophical war between two groups of people with different goals and with different desires and with contrasting policies as to where they want to go and things they want to do.
http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/]http://w … nnedy.net/
http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/thefedera … eserve.htm
Larry,
Privatising (in England at least) was in large part about removing government control and responsibility for any given organisation. Hence the decisions are made by board members whose key skill is running large organisations, as opposed to a bunch of politicians whose key skill is winning popularity contests. Yes American can be thought of as a 'large organisation' but if it was a company it would have been forced to declare bankruptcy, and if any Records company tried to run itself democratically the distribution-pirates would rip it to pieces.
NASA has little control over it's own budget. They can't make sensible decisions without congressional approval, and congress is rarely sensible. Certian types of privatising would, at least in theory, solve this problem.
ANTIcarrot.
The point is, each one has there advantages and disadvantages to the other one. They each have there place where they work better than the other system and also have a place where they don't work as good as the other system. So you have to pick and choose which one will works best for each individual situation. NASA should never function like a Corporation and we don't want private Corporation trying to act like NASA, it just won't work.
Larry,
They will be able to track the illegal shipment as they fall throught the atmosphere but the smugglers will be able to tell the when and the where the shipment lands. With current tech NORAD may be able to track us(if they can pick us out among all the space junk out there then they are damn good), but will they be able to do anything about it? I know there developing stuff to shoot down satelites now, but will they be able to shoot down a moving target as opposided to a target that they know the orbit of for sure. Is blowing up drug shipments going to be worth the expense when the shipment may not even end up on their country.
NORAD already has the technology to track the contraband of illegal drugs or nuclear waist. They may not currently have the technology to shoot it down right now, but that would change once we develop laser weapons. Those weapons would be a point and shoot kind of weapons and you would almost certainty hit what your shooting at. You along with that ship you’re on ship smuggling those illegal drugs would get blown to pieces. If I were the President of the United States, I would defenetly give the order to shoot it down and end that smuggling once and for all. End of problem! And if I didn’t do it, the Russians or the Chinese might do it.
Larry,
Don't get me wrong I'm interested in Mars too, but without getting control over the U.S. Government or some other major government, what your talking about doing is impossible.
On another forum I was suggesting that we build a city on Mars and do it in a forty to fifty year time frame, but it was based on having a Pro-Space President like Kennedy. It was based on Federalizing the Federal Reserve, re-arranging the tax code, have a government rite off system for private enterprises and massive government built structures and creating a Constitutional Martian Government of self rule. Any body that thinks they can do it without a major government backing them up is sadly mistaken.
Go to the web site below for more information and read it closely. If you really understand what he saying, then you will understand that without a major government backing this up, it not going to happen.
http://www.transhumanist.com/volume4/sp … /space.htm
Your talking about doing something that even the U.S. Government can’t do in it present form. So one of those other people on the forum said to me on that other Space forum, your talking about trillions of dollars to build that Mars City. And I said your right, it is going to cost trillion of dollars, that why only the government can do it.
That why you hear so many people that talk about private enterprise in space and about how good it would be and they have these Grandiose Plans of building hotel, generating power, mining, etc, don’t do any thing, they can’t fund it. That why the U.S. Government through NASA could go to the moon, but thirty years later, private enterprise hasn’t copied it. That why any serious private space venture is either a communication satellite or a NASA Contract that some private business got.
I'm sorry it that way, but it is that way and we can not change the rule to suit you because want to chang the rules.
Larry,
Billions - yes, trillions - no.
If the initiative is given to private enterprises much more can be achieved.
In Robert Zubrin's estimates - a full blown mission to Mars could be made for a minimum of 5 billion dollars. It won't go over 20 billion - if done by NASA may cost half a trillion. $20 billion is a lot of money in the real world.
Building the first Martian city would cost 50 billion maximum if given to private companies. The problem is noone is going to make this offer, even with the latest initiatives announced.
Have you gone to that web link?
I'm also a pro-build a levitated national train system throughout the entire United States. If we started today with a crash program to build that entire levitated train system inside the United States it would take twenty to thirty years to build it and it would by itself cost over one trillion dollars. It would be easier and probably cheaper to do that than build a city on Mars of even ten thousand let alone hundred thousand people.
I have looked Robert Zubrin's estimates of what it would take to get to Mars and even assuming that he is right about the cost, he is only talking about four to six people on Mars, which does not constitute a Martian settlement. They will stay there two year and then leave like the Apollo Mission, but the time frame will be two years instead of three or four days. Then we send another habituate out there with four to six people and it will take between two to four "C" launches to send those people to Mars too. Even after we get a refining station on Mars so we could refuel and send them back to the earth we will still have to launch two "C" shuttle to keep six people on Mars. The more people you put on Mars, the more "C" shuttle you will have to launch to keep them supplied. The only way to get around the problem is have a National Government that controls it own money supply and they make a national mission goal statement like Kennedy did for going to the Moon. You do that and it going to be big and it going to be expensive like building a levitated super train system hear in the United States, but there no other way to do it.
Now don't get me wrong, private enterprise can do of lot great things and there are places where private enterprise would be the best way to go, but there not going to develop space by themselves. Let take Space Island Group and there space station in orbit, it a good idea and I will even agree that that is what we need to do to open up space. But why aren't they doing it? They can't afford it and they figure it going to be twelve billion dollars to build that space station in low earth orbit and not Mars. You can go right down the line of all these private ventures and there all suffering from the same problem, no money and if people did invest in there operation, they could not pay them back, because it not cost effective and they would lose there money if they do invest in it. For over thirty years they have been yelling that private enterprise can do. Yes, they can do it. So stop bragging about being able to do it and "JUST DO"! You can brag latter if you did it, but do it first and then you got bragging privileges.
Most private enterprise operation are generally based around government built infrastructure like roads, air port, water & sewer system, etc. The government generally builds the road and then the private enterprise people populate that stretch of the road with business or houses and not the other way around. It need to be that way in space too and then things will take off as to building space colonies on the Moon, Mars, etc. Even most private space enterprise seek government contracts, because they are the only ones that can afford to buy there services and not people like me. Why isn’t Robert Zubrin building his space ship to Mars, well it going to cost twenty to thirty million dollars and Robert Zubrin doesn’t have the money.
Larry,
Larry,
Martian Republic, I don't even have to read that forum to concur absolutely. Only the state can pull something like this off.
There are not very many people that agree with us. But the government both creates wealth and they promote the creation of wealth in the private sector and without a major government that supports and advances building space colonies, then it is basically dead in the water and we will go nowhere with space colonies. I don’t like it either some times, but that the way it is.
Larry,
I don't like Communism, Socialism or Capitalism for any design of the first colony on Mars. I like the American Economic System based on the General Welfare and government banking system.
You finance building the infrastructure through an FDR type Treasury generated credit that can be tax deferred, you can have O% interest rates or written off the debt because the government owns the debt. It would be a Hamilton type self-extinguishing debt that he used during the First National Banking system.
I would have the central government own the water, air supply the main complex, the subways system, the space port, etc., but I would have family farms, private contractor to do the maintains on the subways system, run the factories, run the stores or hotels or restraints, but it would be under government regulations.
Larry,
I believe Shuttle C could easily lift Zarya and the Hubble repair kits. Rendevouz with Soyuz for crew and perhaps use Soyuz engines to assist in the burns needed to reach Hubble.
After the mission is over, NASA and the Russians sell the Zarya / TransHab combo and it becomes that space hotel I brought up in another thread.
Hubble telescope needs to be put in the bigger picture of what we want to do in space or other wise we will just twist in the wind, first this way and then that way. If we are really going into space and to deal with problem like the Hubble maintains issue, we are going to have to have a second space station in space any way. Preferably space station that rotating for some artificial gravity so we can have people stay for a longer period of time, besides any upgrades to the current International Space Station that need to be done and finish our part of that space station. We could go with your "C" shuttle idea and combine both projects together. There a minimum amount of infrastructure that you have to have in place or other wise you just dancing in space and not getting anywhere as far as the Hubble telescope or any other major project you want to do in space. I realize that it cost more, but there only so much you can do about any problem we might run into in space if you don’t have the equipment at hand.
But, the problem is, with the current budget problems of the United States, we can’t do this and we are left with either doing this or doing that project and leaving something else undone that needs to be done.
So any suggestions?
Larry,
If youre looking for something thats going to make mars profitable you need to do better than heavy water or entertainment or even precious medals. We need something thats really profitable...illegal drugs and weapons grade plutonium and uranium.
So how about it folks?
We want to get away from criminal activities in space and not create a Mafia or crime syndicate. When you dealing with the criminal element like that, you will also have a tendency to develop piracy in space and that kind of activities too. You will also tend to get government black bag operation that will be running through those criminal elements. The best way to stop that from happening, is not even choose to go down that road at all.
Larry,
Ain't the man great? LOL!
Which supposedly would be the reason the US built federal roads, funded and then nationalized the railroads and generally has been one of the most protectionist economies in the world, especially during periods when it was as most renowned for its "evolutionary spirit".
The British on the other hand tried to sticking to the good old invisible hand and they lost an empire in the process.
Well done!<grim wry grin>
Fact remains. Ain't nothing Delta IV can do that Proton/Zenit can't do, at a lower cost.
Lets talk free markets! ???
</grim wry grin>
Originally the rail roads were also owned by the government. As a matter of fact, it was the federal and state government that created the rail roads, before they got privatized or possibly piratized.
However, I do favor some private ventures in space like the tourist business and setting up a manufacturing sector in space, but how that going to happen is still unknown though.
Larry,
George Bush is a great privatizing advocate as President of the United States. He seem to want to privatize every thing from electricity with Enron to Gasoline.
Would you support Privatizing NASA which now seem to be on the chopping block?
What do you think it would do the U.S. space program?
Larry,