You are not logged in.
ants have class systems, the queen and princes live more luxuriously than the workers. just because there is no money explicitly, doesnt mean there isnt a similar work value system.
it would be pretty hard for a tiger, bird, or alligator to make money without an opposable thumb. chimpanzees and apes barter much the same as people.
how do you propose we get around with money? if everybody received the same benefits, then there would be no incentive to work harder. or, you could specialize and trade your good for somebody elses. but this is barter, which places a value on your good versus other goods. money is just a physical, near-static representation of the relative value of your goods and services.
i dont agree with people who say we dont need money. its too idealistic, at least for this time. money makes people poor...yes, but it also drives people to accomplish more...it is a goal. money, like anything else, can be used for good or evil. if i believed that we could live in a society where money was not needed to regulate values, i would happily support such a society. but i really think its just an idealistic theory.
im sure there are (or would be if russian space development hadnt collapsed) russian blueprints that we dont have. our government has every right to control the information they have developed, and if boeing is ditributing it without government approval, they are in the wrong, not our government.
put it this way, if you write a book, does your coauthor have the right to sell it without your approval?
lemme guess, youre not american?
i dont suppose russia is giving us their rocket blueprints, or anyone else for that matter. is russia conspiring against the world?
theres no conspiracy to stop space development. its an effort to keep top secret material top secret. if we stopped them from giving american stealth technology to china, would you say its a conspiracy to keep the world out of the skies?
Before we can do this, political obstacles to space exploration must be put aside.
how does this sound: an international space agency, funded by the UN, with countries receiving a share of the mission benefits (people on board, video, etc.) proportional to the percentage of the amount they contribute. the agency would be funded entirely by countries, and would share the space information and equipment throughout. this agency would be in charge of developing new, advanced systems, and exploring space. a council of representatives from the field would vote on how the money would be allocated, not the governments (we dont want icky fear of nuclear energy or politics to get in the way), so the best results would come out.
what does everyone think?
no, the invasion a decade ago was a justification for our action.
we havent sold them weapons for over a decade. so why are we focusing on things 15 years ago, when the discussion is about now?
if youre gonna cite something, cite the new york times article (basically combined both at the same time). but yes, we should pull out. i dont think were there for south koreas sake though, the government wont say it, but we're there to protect japan, who as you might know, is forbidden from having a military (is it completely prohibited or limited, i dont remember exactly)
i was thinking that too
notice that china is building, i believe, 300 miles of maglev tracks, first maglev ever built?
maybe itll give the West a kick in the read :0 ???
now lets discuss the resolutions condemning the arab pre-emptive attacks on israel, and continued shelling of israel from lebanon, and suicide bombings. or the PLO charter, which until recently, called for israels destruction. hmmm.
we are not completely responsible, but we must foot some of the blame. we did not know that he was going to use them for such atrocities, which is not true in the case of hezbollah. giving missles to an organization who has pledged to push israel into the sea is pretty much aligning with the cause. telling reporters he wants to exterminate israel is a pretty good indicator too.
its more reliable than the guardian.
oh, and what was that tiny little explosion cnn reported in lebanon the same day? oops, they screwed up.
and why is it that UN inspectors have suddenly become more bold...hmmm it all ties together...but no, bush is going to be wrong no matter what in many people's eyes.
go back to playing gta.
when i read in the New York Times that it was a 5 mW test reactor, i said to myself, thats not going to power many people, and if they are using it for power, why kick us out?
i had a long discussion with my family about nuclear. my father is pro-nuclear anyway...my mother wants me to prove to her using "credible sources" the safety of nuclear. so im going to research the topic. im going to gather whatever i can, from both sides, and make an objective analysis. i might even mail greenpeace and see what theyre response is.
I was being facetious, if nobody noticed ???
using a space elevator, theoretically:
1. send a central or end piece up, capture it to the space station counterweight.
2. Attach the subsequent parts, using overlapping vacuum seals and computer controlled screws and bolts, that can be double checked later, and monitored by computers.
3. Once the ship is assembled, send up all supplies that are not prone to rotting. Tools, computers, etc. Now, astronauts can put things in place.
4. Send up propellant and sensitive gear, along with long-lasting foods.
5. Send up crew, perform final checks, launch.
Jee, nothing beats a Times Square New Year. Million people fit onto that one block. Damn.
john, i think SSTO spaceplanes (nuclear powered) and the space elevator will replace chemical HLV's.
And we could make the parts of the Orion vacuum seal to each other, with multiple failsafes, so nuts and bolts are hardly needed. a computer programmed robot, or simply computer, could handle screwing it together. not hard.
for now, lets use the orions as the basis for mining centers in the asteroid belt. it will make us money, and keep people in space.
Happy New Year from New York!
if it is worth the benefits in speed, im sure factories on earth could be built to produce anti-matter--we produce all kinds of useless crap, we could certainly produce something this beneficial.
if we used nuclear power from the start it might not be such a stretch.
i think on earth, connecting some of the major cities with maglev trains would be a brilliant project for the next 20 years. maglev trains would expedite and lower the cost of cargo and passenger shipments tremendously. the US is running on 150-200 year old train technology. lets move into the future. im not proposing we connect every bumble...er...poo town to a maglev web, just the major transportation and commercial hubs.
What applications will carbon nanotubes be capable of, besides being used for a space elevator ribbon? Will they be able to make an impact on other industries as well?
cal, if you dont accept the popes authority, then why do you celebrate christmas in december?
in any case, you dont hear pagan songs the same way you dont hear classical music on your average radio station (there are classical music stations, but thats not the point)--most people in the West are christian or jewish (at least in the US). these people want to hear their own songs, and the radio stations are going to play what people want to hear, basically what cindy said.
and like clark said, wheres the proof of god? he hasnt visited me lately.
constantine?