You are not logged in.
Oxygen and Hydrogen will remain the first choice for rockets, because of the thrust to weight limitation of chemical rockets. It has the highest thrust with the least amount of weight to that thrust that we can possibly have. It also generates the least amount of pollution that we can possibly generate giving the choices of any other fuel that we could possibly use. So there really is no reason to consider any other fuel source as for rocket taking off from Earth. As to Mars and whether we would have a ready supply of Oxygen and Hydrogen at our disposal would be another question altogether. But, if we could get it on Mars, that is Oxygen and Hydrogen in sufficient quantities, then that would be our first choice there too and for the same reason that we would use it on the Earth as our first choice. If there were no ready supply of both Oxygen and Hydrogen, then we might look for another type of fuel to do that job, but it would be a second choice fuel supply at best. Because, of the lower energy output to weight constraints of those other fuel supplies if they were used as alternate fuels, instead of using Oxygen and Hydrogen fuel which has about the ratio to weight energy output.
So why would we want to use other fuels?
It would also require more fuel to get the same output that we would get using Oxygen and Hydrogen fuel supply.
Larry,
We can initiate fusion, we just can't control it. A modified pusher plate idea could explode Hydrogen bombs instead.
A hydrogen bombs occurs when they use a smaller fission bomb is used to start the change reaction in the hydrogen. So that would add complexity to our nuclear fuel supply that we are trying to use to drive our ship to Mars. So we would have to have a micro fission nuclear bomb to detonate a slightly bigger fusion bomb which would not be practical to do and defeats the whole purpose in going fusion powered rocket. For fusion to be used as the fuel that we are interested in, we need to have a continual chain reaction through out the entire hydrogen on a controlled bases to push our space ship. We would be able to draw of electrons to generate electricity and we would have a powered rocket vs on that has to be sling shot from Earth orbit to Mars orbit taking six to seven months to get there or come back to Earth orbit. A controlled fusion powered rocket, could fly to Mars in say 7 days or so and doesn't have to wait 2 1/2 years for the orbits of the Earth and Mars to line up for that window. Blowing up a fission bomb so we can blow up a fusion bomb doesn't give us that kind of control that we need for the purpose that we intent to use it for.
Larry,
Actually, it is those Oligarchy that is pushing the Malthus theory or view point. The best way to defeat both those Oligarchs and there view point or brainwashing is to go back to the American System of Economics of having a Federally owned and operated central bank like the First and Second National bank were or give the Treasure the power to generate credit with no Federal Reserve Bank around. The second part of this effort would revolve around a full blown colonization program of Mars, the moon as a National space mission goal and any other countries that would want to engage in such an aggressive project. That would finish off those financial oligarchs and tend to put an end to those Malthusian ideas for some time to come. It would also have an almost immediate effect of the mental process of the US population to higher goals and a higher purpose for there existence to the better mean of all mankind vs fighting resource wars like what we are doing in Iraq and such places as that. All Mankind would be better off and not just the United States and there would be enough for everybody, because with the development of new technologies, you also develop the ability to support larger population at a ever higher level of standard of living.
Larry,
Larry,
In the beginning we obviously would not be using a rail system, because of the large investment in the infrastructure to make them work to the number of people that we would have on Mars. So we would probably have other transportation just prior to attempting to build a rail system. That said, here my choice.
My choice of rail system that we should put on Mars. Instead of having to grade the Martian landscape to lay the track on it, I would put it on stilts or a tower every fifty foot or so apart and lay the track on top of that. Use self leveling cones to level the tracks with a third rail to power a levitated train that goes three hundred to four hundred miles an hour. I would have the rails on the top side of the car instead of the bottom side and have the rails fifteen to twenty feet high to avoid the Martian dust storm that might cover the track if it were on the ground. That means that we would have to have a way to step the power up and down along the track to achieve maximum energy efficiency with the minimum of energy loss. I would make the levitated rail line a development corridor between two settlement that might be hundred to two hundred mile apart and/or between two or more mining site to bring the Iron Ore and Nickel to the settlement for processing. Being a levitated rail system, you would not have rail friction, so you would have less ware and tare on those rails. I would also put a communication system along the rails system and maybe lay a pipping system along the rail line with possible dirt roads intersecting them for more versatility to bring things to the settlement and take things out to where there may be people outside of those colonies. Use this as the process of setting up transportation and communication system. You would have communities springing up along those rail system just like they did along the transcontinental rail road after it was built in 1879. Any new colony that built up along the rail system would have immediate access to the resources that they need to survive on Mars. That would be our intended goal to building a levitated rail system on Mars. It would be need to kick off a full blown colonization program on Mars and to move large amounts of resources around and move people.
Larry,
I'm lost as to why inhabiting a planet with nothing but monotonous plains of red dirt and red skies appeals to you. What is so great about living in some super-confining environment on a dusty, featureless planet far from the beauty and freedom you can find on Earth? Would you really want your children to grow up on Mars?
Why Mars appeals to Me!
If it were up to me, I would make it a national mission of the United States to build a city on Mars in say a forty to sixty year time frame. Or a super size Kennedy Moon Mission Goal on steroids.
Why would I want to do that?
1. Create jobs hear at home like the Kennedy Moon Mission created jobs hear on Earth did, but on a much larger scale. It would create a million jobs or more to do that.
2. We would have to develop new technologies to be able to hit our target date, which is fine, because then we would get technological spin off like we got during the Kennedy Moon Mission. The Kennedy Moon Mission returned fourteen dollars for every dollar, that we invested in our mission to go to the moon in new technology that was infusions into new products that entered into the Market place inside the United States. Which was a very good return on our invest for going to the moon.
3. The United States will start doing something productive again, like building infrastructure down here like rail roads, subways system and in space, a city on Mars. I rather see the United States doing like this, instead of declaring war on other countries and attacking them killing large numbers of people blowing there cities away. I much rather see my country building rather than killing and destroying things.
4. I would like to see a city being built on Mars, as a result of our stated goal to build a city Mars. Although I won't see the completion of the transformation of Mars into a planet more like the Earth, I would like to see the beginning of the process of seeing to it that it has started, before I leave this planet.
I have other reason, but these are the main reason that I would like us to go to Mars.
Larry,
Read my first post. What your saying is asumming Mars hasn't been Terraformed. I'm assuming it has by then.
It doesn't matter if it already been high tech terraformed or not, if you go low tech agriculture, it will be too labor intensive to be able to maintain a Mars colony at all. This idea that your going to go low tech in space for any colony that you might setup is pure nuts and it won't work. I have gotten into an argument with someone in the Red Colony forum over nuclear vs solar panels. I took the nuclear rout and he picked the solar panel rout, but he going to generate chemical fuels to generate power when there no sun light. He wants to use burning wood and other bio masses for the night time energy needs. That would be bamboo and not regular wood which he says can be grown in three months or so. He wants to use methane and/or batteries to supplement the energy needs at night time. It requiring hundred of time the area that you need to grow food for the colony population, to grow just the bio mass to supply the energy for you would needs on Mars and because of the man hours that you have to invest to produce it, you will need several time as many people than you have on the whole planet to produce that energy. Some of the other subject that he started was to have a lake o Mars and let the water drain down and power a generator and in the day time pump the water back into the lake so we can power the generator the next night. He going to go through all these labor intensive system so he doesn't have to have a nuclear power plant on mars. Another example would be to compare the farms of the 1870 to the farms of the 2007 in the United States. In 1870 the percentage of the farmers to the rest of the US Population was 50% of three million people. Today we only need 2% to 3% of three hundred million people being farmers or about three million people. This is the difference between low technology of yesterday and high technology of today.
I said all that to say this:
Using a low tech and high labor system of anything that we do on Mars, will reduce the viability of any colony that we have on Mars.
Larry,
We would still engage in a terraformation process, because of who we are as humans and what should be motivating us to go into space in the first place. We would still want to terraform Mars and make it as much like Earth as we can possibly make it. There more to life than just eating food or drinking water or just breathing the air of habitat for minimum living requirements of living in space that we can get. We would want to make space home for us, which would require us to terraform Mars so we could walk through a Martian forest sometime in the next two to three hundred years or so in the future. It is also the quality of life that we are interested in having when we move into space to live and not just the minimum requirement to just get by if we choose to live in space that we are also looking at.
Larry,
Of the fission type rocket engine, I understand that there are two basic types of engines. One that goes with nuclear explosions behind the rocket with a pusher to absorb the shock wave from reaching the passenger compartment and then there is the compartment type of explode a bomb inside a chamber. Then use a jet nozzle to get the thrust. The one that your using a compartment to explode your mini nuclear bomb it, you could use it to generate electricity, you would also have to have some type of containment to keep those nuclear gases from making contact with compartment and the pusher, because of the high temperature involved in the nuclear reaction. Then there the Fission type rocket that would work more like a reactor type, which we could also use to generate electricity too. Of these two basic types, it we choose to build them, we could probably build them in three to five year time frame after the decision was make to build them. There are no major new technologies that we need to develop that we could not over come in that time frame.
Fusion was also mentioned, now that might take twenty years or longer to develop, because the technology to built something like that is still in it infancy and new technologies need to be developed to make it happen. So for the time being this type is on hold for anything that we are planning to do in the next ten to twenty years or so. But, this would be our preferred choice when it should be developed, because of the energy output and the speed that we could get to Mars with if we are caring people.
Larry,
But, High tech was the answer that I wanted to vote for. The reason for going high tech and a high energy economy is that it will generally be a low labor economy as a general rule. But, if we go low tech and low energy economy will generally be a high labor economy. So we would choose to generate very large amounts of energy or electricity vs having a very large number of people having to do that work. If we intend to colonize Mars, we need a very labor efficient system so that we can survive on Mars when we get there.
Larry,
Right, own up, who said I should be in a mental asylum. And please can you explain why it wouldn't work.
Why it won't work:
1. Space Ship One doesn't even achieve orbit, but only touches space, which was your example for making your fight that was to go into those asteroid.
2. To just send the Space Ship One into orbit, you would have to beef up the white knight which carried the Space Ship One up to it release point. You would also have to beef up the Space Ship One and put heavier heat shields on it.
3. If your using chemical rocket technology, then what trying to do is impossible, because of the physical limitation of using chemical for getting into space. That why we have to have multiple buster to send men into space. Space Ship One being carried by the White Knight uses Oxygen in the atmosphere for part of it fuel, but that can only help so much for getting into space.
4. You wanted a one man fighter to go to the asteroids, there is currently no such technology on planet earth or chemical process that can generate the power to build a one piece space craft with that will do that job.
Larry,
Does the shuttle fuel tank actually have to be ejected foff the shuttle, or could it be carried into orbit?
Yes, the space shuttle fuel tank has to be ejected before it reaches orbit. Any attempt to take it into space will virtually eliminate using the cargo bay of the shuttle for caring up supplies to ISS or anything else that you want to take up in the cargo shuttle bay. To take that shuttle tank that last little bit, take a whole more rocket fuel and bring down what you can take up in the rest of the shuttle part of the stack. Then you have another problem when you get those tanks into orbit, what are you going to do with it. We have no way to redeem those tanks once we got them in space, because we have no manufacturing place to work on them or catch any material that might get that might get free when we cut into it. You can't use it to build habitats without sending up other shuttle to bring up resources to encase those tanks with other material so we could use them as habitats. It would be easier to use a Bigelow habitat than redeem a shuttle tank for that purpose. It would not be energy efficient to send those empty tanks to the moon either if we could get them into orbit in the first place. If we just take those tanks into orbit and leave them there until we can use them, they will deteriorate in space and create more space junk that will be orbiting the Earth that will increase the hazard of going into space.
We have already discussed this at great length and these are some of the problems that you run into if you were to try and take those space shuttle tank into orbit. It just not practical to take those tanks all the way into space.
Larry,
An excellent point. Not having to spin up an asteroid would save a lot of energy that could be used on other things instead. It would make a LOT of sense to look for a 300m asteroid that spins at 2RPM, or a larger asteroid that spins more slowly than that. Considering how many asteroids there are, odds are there have to be some that fit the profile.
While I'm here, what are the advantages of colonizing an asteroid as opposed to a comet?
I'm given to understand that comets are much richer in ices and other volatiles, so wouldn't they be more promising locations?
An asteroid has an elongated orbit that we could get to once we develop something like fusion rockets on a timely bases.
Comets go away for a long time like Hallie's Comet does for eighty years or so and doesn't stay in the inner solar system for more than a few months. So you would have to catch it and have resource for eighty years until Hallie's comet come back around. So you would have to change the orbit of those orbits of the comet that you wanted to colonize. Which is not very likely, because it would take too much energy to redirect that comet to the orbit that you want it to go in.
Larry,
I thought this thread was about inter-planetary war.
Oh, it is about planetary war!
But, to stop it. You first have to identify what going to be causing that planetary war and who would be benefiting to having a planetary war. My contention is that we could never develop Mars in the present private central banking system that we currently have here on Earth, because they won't allow us to develop Mars who control that private banking system. If we do an end run around them and were able to develop Mars colony any way, then they would try to destroy Mars so they could maintain there control over Mankind. They will try to destroy Mars by using financial means or control over the credit So I am of the opinion that is we don't do away with this private central banking system, then if we ever do develop Mars, then a planetary war is inevitable and can't be stop, because that what the power that be want. It will be like the Iraq War, where 80% of the US Population don't want that war, but the power that be do want that war. So we are having that war in Iraq. This financial Oligarch controls the US Media and they slant the new to support there idea of invading the planet Mars. They will use same arguments that George Bush used to invade Iraq. There developing weapons of mass destruction and they may invade the Earth or destroy it. They also have a tyrant that rules over them and they don't like the free market system of enterprise and won't pay there debts. Especially the one where we financed the development of Mars so it could be colonized. So I went over history that most people here don't know to validate what I was saying. Yes, it did get off the topic a little bit, but it was to show why there would be two competing faction in a colonization or Mars if we retain a Federal Reserve Bank type system.
There can be no other possible choice, because those financial Oligarchs won't release there control over mankind reason than by being forced to do so, but will choose to destroy mankind with the hope that they can retain control over mankind after the collapse of mankind into a new dark age. That how they think and that how they make decision. So unless your prepared to deal with that mind set of there, the most likely choice is we aren't going to be building a colony on Mars or we are sure to have a planetary war if we build a colony on Mars.
Larry,
The way the Federal Reserve Chairman of the Board is picked, is by those membered banks choosing the man they want and then sending him to the President to be confirmed as the new Federal Reserve Chairman. Now the President can reject there selection for the Chairman, but that doesn't usually happen.
The way the FDR New Deal worked, was by the Federal Government financing major infrastructural deals. You have to remember that over half the American people were unemployed and/or homeless when FDR came into office. He started off with works project of picking trash and then moved to building roads and rail roads. Restarting those factories that had been closed and financing the farmers so they could grow the food that we needed. Then he went to the four river project at the four corners of the United States. The rivers were the Columbia, Colorado, St. Lawrence and the Tennessee rivers. That why there are so many boundaries around the Columbia and Tennessee rivers, because they needed the power that was being generated from those government projects. That where the Hoover Dam came from and the Tennessee Valley Authority came from. It was a series of Dams and Hydro-electric Power plants the the US Government created and owned as a business. It was part of FDR rural electrification projects. When we got closer into where we were going to have to fight World War II, the US Government started even financing building of factories, because we were going to need those factories to build war material to fight Germany, Italy and Japan. This was how the United States was able to build four times as much war material that everybody else combined on either side of this war.
If your going to take people off the street and put them in jobs, like a factory job who don't know how to do that job, then you will have to train them. So FDR setup a job training program so these people could be trained to run those machines in the machine shop and turn out those new products. So FDR took people where ever they were and setup government backed training programs to get them up to speed so they could learn to manufacture those things that were need. It will take two to three years get these new people up to speed to manufacture good quality parts at a fairly low scrap rate. The first three to six months, you will have a high scrap rate and very poor quality parts that there making. But, over time, the scrap rate go down and the quality improve greatly. So the Government has to subsidize this process of training to those new employers that are being hired into his company. This is basically what FDR did in a nut shell and not going into too much detail of what was done.
What I favor in what I would like to see done is basically an FDR policy on steroids. Instead of just giving the Treasury Department the power to generate credit, put the Federal Reserve through a bankruptcy re-organization chapter 11 and have the Federal Government oversee it. Then have the President of the United States cancel those trillions of dollars of gambling debts that are unplayable and never could be paid and write it off the books. Money has two primary uses. To be used as a medium of exchange. And to be used to generate future business activities or growth of the physical economy of that nation and generally creating more wealth for that nation. With the farms and factories inside the United States being shut down, the US Dollars is no longer good for being used as a medium of exchange, because we are losing our farm crops and manufactured good that that money can be exchanged for. Once the rest of the world chooses to go to another money system, the US Dollars will have Zero value for exchanging goods and services. The Federal Reserve isn't generating any new wealth for the United States, but there only generating more debt and worthless gambling debts that will either have to be canceled or it will bring down the economic system in a worldwide depression of even send us into a new dark age that we won't get out of for hundred years or longer.
So we take that old Federal Reserve System which is bankrupt and re-organize it into the Third National Bank of the United States as a starting move to save the United States from economic collapse. The the President under the view of the congress will generate a couple of hundred billion to maybe a trillion dollars of credit to finance a rebuilding of the United States. We would also want to bring over the Social Security system from the old economic system into the new economic system that we are setting to replace it. There about five trillion dollars of I.O.U. in the Social Security System because it been raided by congress to fund other projects and they should not have used that account for that purpose. So we are going to sign into existence real money instead of putting in those I.O.U. into the Social Security System. We are going to do the same thing for Medicaid and Medicare too, which has three trillion dollars in it. That going to be our primary way of paying for your medical bill. Over half the people that go bankrupt, go bankrupt because of medical bill and those devastating diseases that come along. So we will let the government take care of that problem and they will get there money out of that fund to pay those medical bills. We will do away with those health care plans by those private insurance carrier where we Americans can't get adequate health care coverage anyway. The way they do it in Germany. You can still pick the Doctor you want to, but the US Government will pay for it. We would also want to save those private bank accounts of individual who have there money in those account. We also want to save those retirement accounts too that people working in those factories got and other places too and bring that into the new economy.
Now to restart this new economy, we have to do something productive like farming, manufacturing and building infrastructure and use that newly generated credit to finance it, because financial system destroyed the physical economy of the United States. So we are going to reverse this process by denying the speculator access to this new credit and finance the productive sector of the economy. This was exactly oppose to what they were doing.
So we pick farming, subway system, super train system, canal project and river project like FDR did for our target investment for restarting the US Economy. Amtrak needs levitated rail system to carry people from down town to down town of every American city fifty thousand or more. We need to upgrade any city that have old subways system with new subway system and add any city in America that has a population of over hundred thousand people in it. We have maybe 70 city that fall within that population range that we are going to be building subways in. We want those super train to inter-connect with those subway system and with the City Air Ports too. We also intend to extend FDR Dam, Hydro-Electric river project to all the major rivers in the United States.
There are many other such project that we want to do down here, but we also want a space program too. We want our space program to create millions of jobs and to generate new technologies that we can infuse into the US Economy. We want to pick a project just out side our technical capability to get it done, but not too far out side our capability to get it done. We want a project that we have to develop new technologies to get it done or we can't complete that project or hit our goals. So we decided that build a City on Mars of 100,000 people and do it in a time frame of forty to sixty period. We will probably have maybe 10,000 people on the moon too in addition to the city on Mars. We decided that we have to go to the moon first and build a mining and manufacturing facility there to hit our target of building a city on Mars in the time frame that we set out for our selfs. We also decided that we would have to have our ship yard on the moon to build those deep space space ship and then throw it off the moon using a three or four mile long sled to get it off the moon. As we advance in these new technologies to hit our target of a City on Mars, we will probably go through two or three generation of shuttle for the Earth to space orbit. We will probably go through two or three shuttle for the moon too and maybe even few generation for Mars also. Between the Earth, moon and Mars, we will probably need between two and three hundred shuttle of various generation and types. We also decided that we need about two hundred deep space space ship that can get to Mars in a 7 days or less period and go to Mars any time we want to go to Mars. So we have a lot of things to build and a time schedule to get it done in.
Your and Economist.
How would you pay for that?
In a Federal Reserve System, that would be impossible to do, because it too expensive to finance it and pay that interest back to those bank even for the US Government to do that.
However, if the US Government is borrowing that money from themselves and they have the right to generate all credit they need to finance that project and can do with that credit what they decide to do with it.
Then would it be possible to do something this big?
If such projects were taken on by the United States, it would take forty to sixty years to get it done even by us.
We would have to grow into doing something this big and retrain 70 to 80 percent of the US Population like FDR did and the Federal Government would have to subsidize that training too. Stating up front what it will take to complete the project and then figuring out how to do it, is what FDR did before and during World War II. That how America became know as the arsenal of Democracy. They started with there wish list of what they thought they needed to win the war and worked backward from there. Like they need 10,000 thousand air planes and they went down the list. After they compiled there list, they gasp at it. There first response was. How do you do that. Then they rolled up there sleeve and got at it and hit there target too.
Well, this is enough writing for now.
Larry,
Would you be happier if the US Government didn't tax you and simply ran the Fed and ordered it to print as much money as needed?
This question demonstrate you ignorance of the US Constitution and of American history and the real reason or primary reason that we fought the American Revolution against the British Empire.
First the US Constitution Article One, Section Eight.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
Just encase you don't think that this should includes a Central Bank that is owned and operated by the US Government. George Washington with Alexander Hamilton Guidance setup up the First National Bank using this as there Authority to do just that. They also setup a Second National Bank when they departed from this system, but returned to it. But, first you need to understand why this was put into the US Constitution in the first place. To do that, you have to go back 100 years or more before the Massachusetts Colony way setup and what has happened since then until the writing of the US Constitution when they put it in there. The leader of the Puritan went to the New King of England to get a charter for the Massachusetts Colony. New King in that he had just seized power and was looking for allies and was very accommodating to the Puritan Leader. The Puritan Leader asked for the right to generate credit and coin money. The King either did not know what he was asking or didn't care, but he grants the request in the Massachusetts Charter to that effect. After the Common Wealth of the Massachusetts Bay colony has been setup, they start using that right to generate credit, because they didn't have either gold or silver to coin money with. So they use there right to generate credit and after a few experiments, found out what worked best for them. So Massachusetts Colony begins to propers and even eclipses the business activities of England, because of what there doing. After awhile there is an invasion of England from Normandy and the House of Winsor take power and makes agreement with Wells and Scotland's and Great Britain is created. What it was, was a take over of England by this financial Oligarch that took over the Bank of England and put it under there rule along with West India Company which actually control Great Britain and not being controlled by the British People. Once they got control over Great Britain which include England, Wells, Scotland, they then turned there sight on the thirteen colonies in North America and primarily on the Massachusetts Bay Colony. They took away there self rule and recended the right to generate credit by the Common Wealth of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. They clamped down on the credit and bankrupted most of industry in Massachusetts. Massachusetts had there own steel mills and things like that and they were all bankrupted by these new policies. The people of Massachusetts tried to work to make things better in Massachusetts, but this financial Oligarchy refused to budge and insisted on trying to swash them under there feet instead. This was just after the French and Indian War or about forty years before the American Revolution. So it was the children of these people that saw there business bankrupted by this British Financial Oligarchy that fought in the American Revolution. Two third of the Continental Army came from Massachusetts. That is the reason that they fought so hard to get rid of the British and Private control of the money system.
Now back to why they choose to setup the Second National Bank. Under Jefferson, he privatized the Central Bank and a guy from Switzerland Banking Concerns was setup over that Bank. Once that faction got a hold of Central Bank of the United States again, they started doing the same thing to the United States that they were doing to those thirteen colonies of suppressing the credit or using that credit that was harmful to the best interest of the American People. Faction behind Lafayette who were in France were making inroads to the King of France with these American Ideas of governing a nation. To contain American concept of government and of there banking system, Great Britain staged a revolution in France that started out looking like the American Revolution, but turned ugly real soon. The British in there arrogance thought that they could raid American Ship to recruit men to fight there war against France. Besides they thought there Man from Switzerland that ran the Central Bank of the United States had sufficiently done his job of taring up the economy of the United States. And he had done a good job of taring up the US Economy too, but, we had our Ace in the hole. A modal of how you setup a Government Banking System and finance the rebuilding of the United States. Great Britain tried to invade the United States and crush there enemy and then make us a colony of Great Britain again. We won the war of 1812 and sometimes refereed to as the Second American Revolution.
The Federal Reserve has limited power, its primary responsibility is to protect the value of the dollar and keep inflation in check.
Actually, this statement isn't true.
The real reason the the Federal Reserve was created, was to give this same Financial Oligarchy the control over the US Central Bank Again. All other reason for why they say that the Federal Reserve was created, is pure hog wash and nothing but hog wash. This process of creating the Federal Reserve originated in Great Britain by King Edwards at the turn of the Twentieth Century. With the Assassination of our President, we got Teddy Roosevelt who served to British interest inside the United States. They were unable to get the Federal Reserve Act in under Teddy Roosevelt, but the wheels were greased to do it under a latter President. Now the Federal Reserve was created in 1913 under Wilson I believe. Now the Federal Reserve has the right to generate credit, which it does. When it creates that create, it loans it back to us and charges us interest on it. Now the only way that we can pay the Federal Reserve back and those Financial Oligarchs that own the Federal Reserve, is to borrow more credit or money generated out of thin air and go deeper into debt. At some point, the only way that you can keep borrowing money from the Federal Reserve and keep paying higher dollar amounts back to the Federal Reserve System and there membered Banks that own the Federal Reserve is to depreciate the US Dollar. So the very nature of having a Federal Reserve System is inflationary by it very Nature of Existence and does nothing to cure inflation at all. The Federal Reserve is currently generating trillions of dollars worth of credit right now and loaning it back into the US Economy. Now to help Finance the Federal Reserve, if not having the right to generate credit ware not sufficient to keep there system going, you pay your Federal Taxes to the Federal Reserve Bank, not the US Government. The Federal Reserve takes the Federal Taxes of the United States, pays itself and it membered banks and then give what left over to the Federal Government of the United States. To guarantee that you will pay a private bank by the name of the Federal Reserve Bank, they setup the IRS also in 1913 to force you to pay them.
After the Federal Reserve Act that put that bank in as the Central Bank of the United States, Wall Street went crazy and the financial speculation took off and in 1929 we had a depression. Sixteen year after the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act. We were saved by Franklin Roosevelt New Deal. He went back to Abraham Lincoln giving the Treasure Department the Authority to generate credit. It was these Treasury Notes that the Greenback dollars were based on that Lincoln used to finance the Civil War and to rebuild the United States after the Civil War and to touch of an industrial revolution too. So Franklin used that method to generate cheap credit with simple interest to finance all those infrastructural projects during the depression and it was this action of Franklin that restarted the US Economy. He had to go outside the Federal Reserve System to save the United States from Economic collapse and it was those Financial Oligarchs and there control of the Federal Reserve that was Franklin primary opposition to restarting the US Economy. So he had to regulate the Federal Reserve System so they could not stop him saving the United States from economic collapse. Franklin had to have his own credit that he could control and direct where it going to go and what it going to be used for and who going to get that credit. Treasury Notes served that purpose just fine.
The Federal Reserve has already generated ten of trillions of credit and maybe even a hundred trillion dollars or more of credit since it been created and it all is demanding an interest be payed on it too. There was a time that we use to drive into Canada along the border to buy fuel from them, but, now the Canadians come to the US to buy fuel because of the exchange rate. So much for the Federal Reserve stopping inflation and protecting the US Dollars Value.
Inflation, you see is a tax on wealth. Wereas the US Government taxes income normally, were it to rely on the Fed's expansion of the money supply to fund its program, the government would effectively be taxing every dollar you've saved rather than just your income for a given year. I don't know why you'd rather have the government rely on Inflation Financing to balance its budget, but I wouldn't want my savings taxed every year and made smaller and smaller by the eroding value of the dollar. The reason why the Fed is insulated from the electorate is so that electorate doesn't pressure them to expand the money supply and create inflation. The Fed occasionally has to cause recessions in order to reduce inflation. Recessions aren't very popular but are sometimes necessary, the Fed needs a free hand to do unpopular things sometimes to defend the dollar, that is the reason for the Fed.
The Federal Reserve isn't insulated against anything, since it is the same type of speculators that set the policy that caused the great depression. So, they will be just as bad as the Government or even worse than the US Government when it come to deciding how much credit to generate and what it going to be used for. The truth of the matter is, we will have to generate hundreds of billions of dollars a year no matter who owns the Central Bank of the United States. The only thing that we are deciding is who going to generate it and what that credit going to be use for, is all we are deciding. If a few hundred billion dollars weren't generated every year, the US Economy would implode on itself.
I would like to give you a quot from a famous man of the past.
I don't care who runs the government as long as I control the banks.
Rothschilds.
Now you claim that the Federal Reserve is suppose to keep the inflation in check, which obviously can't be true, but I am going to attack that problem from another direction to show you the fallacy of your argument.
In dollar amounts, ten years ago, I was making $21.90 an hour. I use to work in a machine shop with good benefits too.
So you say that the Federal Reserve needs to have the right to do unpopular things to defend the dollar.
But, today, that factory is shut down and that job has been moved overseas. I currently make about $11.00 an hour with poor benefits. By the time you factor in inflation, I am only making maybe $7.00 or $8.00 an hour of what I was making ten years ago. And the benefits. Well forget that! Because, they stink!
I am not the only one that is suffering from this problem either. There are tens of millions of Americans that are in the same boat that I am in, but they don't own there house free and clear like I do. They don't own there own cars free and clear like I do. They have two or three children to feed, but I don't and they could not live on $11.00 dollars an hour. So there out of luck and have no where to turn as they become homeless and become street people.
This is how the Federal Reserve supposedly fights inflation. By causing our factories to close down and shutting own our farms and letting the infrastructure inside the United States collapse, like the bridge in Minneapolis on W35 freeway.
And you think this is OK!
Why?
To me it looks just like what they did to the Massachusetts or what they did to us in 1812 or what they did to us before the Civil War or what FDR had to deal with to save the United States in the Great Depression.
This is what it looks like to me and we don't need the Federal Reserve serving up there poison to us for supposedly our own interest, because our interest isn't there interest and never will be our interest.
Larry,
Tom Kalbfus, what you don't understand is that the Federal Reserve is also a corporation with stocks and it is also owned by other corporations. They are primarily by other big banks based primarily in Europe. Who ever control the credit, control the health and welfare of that nation. The top dog of this financial club is the Rothschilds and the city of London financial center. This is known as a Monitorist System of Banking. It is not based on a free market system of economics. Matter of fact, there is no such thing and a free market of economics. It is a figment of the imagination of some monitorist to convince us that the market place is setting the price of what we by, when in fact, there gaming the markets or bilking to there own good. An example of them gaming the market or bilking them is Enron and the energy crises in California. It was Enron executive that wrote the deregulation laws of electricity for California. Then after they were signed into law, they and other energy companies like Dynagee, El Paso Gas other energy companies raised the rate of electricity ten time, hundred times with spot shortages that ran the price of electricity over thousand time of what it was before the electricity was deregulated. Matter of fact, most of the prices in the Market place are artificially raised and lowered by this financial oligarchy. Another example is the oil that is controlled by this group. When they want the prices to go up, they raise it and when they want the price to go down they lower it and the market forces has absolutely nothing to do with prices going up or down. An example of the oil price going up and down on cue is during an American election year. Before the election, the price of oil go down and after the election the prices go back up again. And we continue to buy the oil and from the same people that are price fixing the oil too. Of course there no other place we can buy our oil, so we shut up and buy.
Most of those people, were financed by this oligarchy to thwart the American revolution and to keep it from spreading. Because, they feared the American revolution and ideas that it was based on.
George Washington was fairly well of, is true, but he was nowhere near being one of the richest men in the world. I don't know where you got that lie.
The American System of Economics is based on a credit system. Instead of having private central bank and have it controlled by a rich financial elite or oligarchy group or people, the bank that was the First National Bank of the United States was owned and operated by the United States. Instead of having a private central bank generating credit to the benefit of this financial elite, we have government owned banking system generating credit to the benefit of the American people. Instead of letting those banking interest generate credit and then charge us interest to use that money they generated out of thin air, the US Government generated the credit and had first use of it and used it to build infrastructure inside the United States. This was the primary mechanism for transforming the United Stated from a former colony and into a world power.
Larry,
If you were to take these assumptions and give it more convincing explainations, what would they be?
I don't think you could.
But, if you were going to try it anyway, then I would try the rich mad sciencetist rout. He up up towers all over the moon to encase the moon in a field so going at light speed isn't problem, but the mad sciencetist dies and no one has access to the codes to stop the moon from jumping to warp speed and nor can they turn the moon around either. So the moon make intermittent jumps and warps to the next star system.
I told you it couldn't done, but that my best shot at it.
Larry,
That would mean you could get to Ceres in that time as well. Hehehehehe.
It is this type of technology that will solve most of our transportation problem to Mars or the Moon and not trying to use chemical rockets. With chemical rockets we have to wait for the window to launch to Mars and then it take six months or longer to get there. You would not have near the problem of radiation sickness, because you would only be in space for one week where you being bathed in radiation instead of six months or longer. You would also not have the degeneration problem of witlessness in space for six months and other such space sicknesses either.
This would be a powered craft that could fly to Mars anytime that we choose to fly to Mars and we would not have to wait for that window that we would have to wait for if we used chemical rockets. Imagine what we could do if we had two or three hundred of those space ships and the infrastructure to support them and the shuttle at all three points to get up and down on the Earth, Mars and Moon. Some of those ships would be passenger ships. Others would be cargo ships to carry needed supplies back and forth where we need those supplies. And still other would be mining ships to gather resources from the asteroid belt and bring it to the factories to manufacture other goods and services to supply a space economy that we want to build.
If we are really serious about colonizing Mars, that the only way to go and get the job done.
Larry,
We have talked about it before and this article may already be here on somebody else post. It so, disregard or check out this site anyway.
http://www.photonics.com/content/news/2 … 88894.aspx
Enjoy it!
Larry,
Tom Kalbfus, you have a very simplistic view of what the roll of government, private business or the super rich people that operate in that roll of private business and/or the big banking interest that operate the government from the back room. This is basically the Imperial modal of government where one Empire will attack another Empire or suppress there own people to serve there own vanity or to maintain control over there own populations. They want to be top dog even if they destroy there own country or use the lower class or the working class in useless wars and such. An example of this type of government or being controlled by major company of a government would be the British Empire and the East India Company. The East India Company had there own armies and basically ran the British Empire and they even controlled the British government and even directed which laws would be made and who would benefit by those laws. They were the primary beneficiaries of those British laws that favored there Private Corporation. Even today, the Lords of London will put into a contract that they can only be tried in the British court system and not in any other court system or any other country where they may be doing business in. Which is basically a violation of that nations sovereignty and they even do that in the United States where they do a lot of business. There were several places in the United States where Lords of London has engaged in fraudulent insurance business and several states inside the United States has gone after Lords of London and they basically gave them the finger. They showed the the contract that say they can only be tried in Great Britain and not inside the United States where crime was committed and they did commit crime too. They wanted it to be tried it Great Britain where they would have sympathetic judge that would let them off the hook and give them the verdict that they wanted to have instead of being held accountable for the crime they committed.
The roll of a government that controlled by the people instead of this super rich or oligarchical controlling the government. Here where the US Constitution come into play. There is no government that functions by itself. That government is either controlled by this financial elite or it has to be controlled by the people of that nation and there is no third alternative control of any government that has ever existed on planet Earth or ever will exist on planet earth or in space either. Governments aren't self existing, but are an expression of either this financial Oligarchy or of people of that nation. Most government of this world were formed around the Oligarchy control of that government and generally make the laws according to suit there interest. The US Government and the US Constitution was not originally oriented to this financial interest of the Oligarchical. Now this financial Oligarchy has intruded into the US Government and has subverted the US Government to serve there interest, but it wasn't that way in the beginning. If this were not so, then we would not see things like Enron, Hallibutan, Blackwater private security teem which is basically the beginning a of private army again. But, in a Republic form of government, it isn't in the interest of the people to go around and invade other countries like Iraq or Afghanistan. Those are the things that Empires do and not a Republic. If George Bush doesn't stop doing what he is doing, then the United States will be transformed into an Empire, which we don't want and laws of the United States will be altered too and away from benefiting the people of the Untied States. The only that the vast majority of mankind can benefit in this world or off this world in space is to have a government that has been setup to guarantee those rights or the financial Oligarchy will setup there government that will guarantee there advantage at the expense of the vast majority.
Are the vast majority of the people going to have to depend of there government to defend there rights?
Absolutely, but it has to be a government that they setup and not a government that this financial Oligarchy has setup to rule over these people.
Down through the history of man, these two faction have been fighting each other and that why we have had so many wars down through the Century. Any government that has ever existed has been controlled by one of the two faction.
If you don't believe that it this way, them do a history study of the British Empire and new Young American Republic as it was setup and see if you can see difference between the two. There banking system were different, there concept of what wealth was, was different. The effects that it had on there own population were different, one suppressed human development and other promoted human development. One of them, suppressed technological development and the other advanced technological development. Matter of fact, if the one that supported the advancement of new technologies had never existed, then we would not be having this discussion of colonizing Mars right now, because it would not be technologically possible to do it. Beside, there would be no internet by which we could share these ideas or have our discussion, because this was also an out growth of that development.
Larry,
Eventually it will probably get to a point where there is a Martian war of independence. The orbital shipyards would be used for building fighters. What methods could prevent it?
Stay away for the concept of setting up an Empire and go with the nation state idea. If we go with the idea of setting up an Empire and then intend to loot Mars after we colonize it, then war is inevitable and will have to be fought some time in the future. This is the monetarist view of the world and ownership by a few people over the many or property right and by another name, it called slavery in one form or another. Here where the land lords will fight to protect there property and tenets will fight to defend there right from those tyrants the land lords who own everything at the expense of the general population on Mars. It is for this reason that the American revolution happened and we will see it happen again on Mars if we get Mars sufficiently colonized with enough people and industrialized sufficiently.
However, if we go out with the nation state concept of rule where every one equal and we state from the get go that the future population on Mars has right over those land lords on earth. Better yet, that they have dominion over there own habitats or colonies right from the get go. That would mean that we get completely away from the current concept of wealth that most people have right now and go back to the concept of the American economic system of wealth. It based on government generated credit vs private generated credit. Where the government invest in building infrastructure and financing the development of new technologies. Where it make sense to use private corporation to do certain things, then use them, but otherwise it base on the General Welfare of the people of Mars and according to a Constitution to protect those rights. Anybody that doesn't want to operate under these rules, refuse to do business with them or even outlaw those business that don't want to operate by these rules.
You can't let them operate outside of these rules for 50 to 100 years and then tell them that these are the rules that they will have to now honor or we will seize there property from them. The South considered Black Slave there Property and they refused to turn them loose. We fought an American Civil war as a consequence of there actions. It is best to not even start down that road right from the beginning and go with the nation state with there right declared right up front and what we intend to accomplish. Slavery in the South was constantly putting a strain on whether the United States would continue down the path of being a nation state or would even continue to be a nation even.
Larry,
Precusor, technical developement or demonstrator mission what beyond the MSL will be needed before man can set foot on mars to stay.
Would such a mission be to explore the ice packs, in proving water is trapped there?
Are there other such mission that would need to be executed?
Two question would have to be answered for that to happen.
The Nation State getting control over there money supply and then making an expanded Kennedy type Moon Mission kind of goal for colonizing Mars or building a City or something there.
If you don't have one or more Nation like the United States that controls there own credit system and can use it to build the needed infrastructure then you can't finance putting a permanent colony on Mars.
Without a National Mission to build a major out post on Mars by one or more governments, you won't build the needed infrastructure or develop the needed technology to make it happen.
If both of those things don't happen, then I would expect to see any permanent on Mars, let alone of us just going for a visit.
I wish that were not so, but that the way it will either happen or not happen.
Larry,
Found this article on developments in commercial space travel- http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/new_ … pace.shtml
Thoughts?
Although it look good and that is the way to go for bring down the price of going into space. Whether or not it bring the price down a thousand time, is in dispute, but even if it only brings it down to a tenth of what it is now, it would still be an improvement over what we have now. I don't think the private sector has the resources to finish developing the key technologies that need to be developed to make that happen. But, with what these private contractors have to work with, No, I don't see it happening. Now if NASA goes back to developing Scram Jets sub-orbital in the Mach 10 to 15 range and bring that kind of technologies on line, then I might see it happening. Then use polymers and epoxies instead of using metals to get the weight down, then that might be possible. That would be the only way that a two piece shuttle to the ISS station might be possible and that would have the prospect of bring down the access to space that we are all looking for.
But, just slapping on a private venture on something, doesn't necessarily have to bring down the access to space a 1000 times or more. I see the private sector using technologies that has already been developed to build there sub-orbital craft or there artist concept of the craft they intend to build, but nothing that could actually get the job done that needs to be done to go where we want to go. I don't see them developing any new technologies that we need to have in hand to do what they say they want to do.
Larry,
Nuclear is not out. If it is built within proper containment facilities, nothing is contaminated. At Three Mile Island, nothing was contaminated. No, nuclear should be our primary option.
It would depend on what type of nuclear power plant that we are talking about. Now if we are talking about the first or second generation of nuclear power plant, then you would be right, because they have to be big and massive with a concrete containment dome around it encase of accidents or guard again melt downs and such. You have to have an on site construction of one of these behemoths to be able to build one of these plants. Of these plants it would be impossible or impractical to build nuclear power plants on Mars anytime soon even if we wanted to build them.
Now there is a Third or Fourth Generation of nuclear power plant that doesn't need those containment buildings and nor does it use water, but uses gas cooled turbans to do the cooling and they will not melt down even in the worst case possible that could happen to them. This type of nuclear power plant could be manufactured in a factory and shipped to the site that you want to assemble them in there entirety or possibly even just move them one piece if we go to the small side of building such a plant. This Pebble Nuclear Power Plant doesn't use the regular nuclear rods like the older plants do, but uses what called Pebble type. The Pebble would be loaded after it been set into place after the plant been set down and checked out. The fuel part is completely self contained and there would be absolutely no possibility of it breaking open or causing leaks. It works by using one of what called a Pebble that inside the fuel container and then it uses another Pebble inside to generate a continual nuclear action to generate power to run the electric turbans to generate electricity. Now one of those containers that has those Pebble can generate electricity for about 20 years or so, before it uses up those Pebbles within that container. You would then get rid container and get yourself another contain to continue to use your nuclear power plant. In that form they can not leak or cause us a problem, because it locked up in those Pebbles and not sitting out there like a spent fuel rod. It not like we are going to have nuclear waste scattered all over the place in thirty or forty years or so. That not going to happen. We might have a half dozen canisters after thirty or forty years or so with three or four nuclear power plants running full blast. And we would have the power to generate power for maybe a million people or so and the power to run the manufacturing side of the house too. To be able to generate this kind of power any other way, you would have to build probably ten time as much infrastructure or more to generate that much electricity and it would probably be a high maintaince problem too. The Pebble Nuclear power plant would be a low Maintaince and could be managed by just a few people in one location and not have them scattered all over the place to manage the electric generator system. Once the system is up and running a Pebble type Nuclear power plant could probably be managed by ten to fifteen people or so. Because of ease of convince and the fact that it would generate a whole lot more power than with any other system that we could come up with, would make nuclear power the clear choice if we can get them up them.
Now whether we can get them to Mars is another story altogether and would need to be addressed too. We may have to put together a skunk works on the Moon to be able to either build or assemble them there and then launch them to Mars for our colonization program. But, to be able to get them to Mars is still in question, but there advantage over other generating process is not in question or it superiority in generate the amounts of electricity that we need to have to colonize Mars.
We may use other ways to generate power on Mars, but it won't be the bulk work of what we need to generate power for our Mars colony.
Larry,
There are things that we can do with the shuttle that can't be done easily with rockets, like building the ISS and maintaining it. But, the sure cost factor to keeping the shuttle up and running, is the show show stopper and it really needs to go by by in the near future. For the cost of keeping it running for the next five year or so and doing two or three shuttle launches a year, we could probably build a scram jet shuttle and have it flying in five years for near the same price of flying this shuttle. Even if it were not cheaper then maintaining this generation of shuttle and doing those flights, it would be cheaper to do future flights and be more useful to us than the current shuttle.
I don't like going back to rocket, but we might do that for awhile until these new shuttle come on line. The current shuttle are just too expensive to keep flying and there wearing out and there dangerous to fly. Whether we like it or not, the current shuttle is basically just a museum piece and nothing more.
Larry,