New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: As a reader of NewMars forum, we have opportunities for you to assist with technical discussions in several initiatives underway. NewMars needs volunteers with appropriate education, skills, talent, motivation and generosity of spirit as a highly valued member. Write to newmarsmember * gmail.com to tell us about your ability's to help contribute to NewMars and become a registered member.

#101 2004-11-17 00:54:31

Martian Republic
Member
From: Haltom City- Dallas/Fort Worth
Registered: 2004-06-13
Posts: 855

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Michael,

From different focus groups in the space culture will push their own agenda for why we should be in space, on the moon, or going to mars. You talk about being efficient about space, interesting question !!!! we need to get away from the prototype developments and work on recycling technology from one vehicle to the next, just in car manufacturing development of engines in series using the same cost and return principles.

We need high quality training facilities for crews, developing space transportation principles outside the government administrations with standardisation of control systems, emergency procedures, and also processes to working with government space vehicles in orbit and re-entry.

But the long term goals are the explore and expand the frontiers of humanity. That means advanced vessels that have larger computer capacity than currently, might include development of solid state storage cores that will store very large amounts of data ( TB or PB) repairable electronics, Power Systems for these facilities onboard and more.[/color:post_uid0][/quote:post_uid0]
[color=#000000:post_uid0]I think your going in the right general direction when it come to space, but this system going to have to be a hybread system of Government taking the lead and working with Private enterprise. Like you talk about prototyping, well OK, but it not business that going to be doing it. Going from one Prototype to another Prototype is also a good idea and will also need to be done if we intend to do any serious colonization of space. But, to engage in this kind of development will be very very expensive and you have to do the science, set perameter, engineer, design, build and test it and this is going to be very expensive in the tens of billion of dollars every time we go to a different or new Shuttle type Prototypy. This cost is going to be so great, that there will absolutly be no direct return on the invest in a payback like business is use to. But, a Government sponsered program could do it, because there looking for the spin off benifit like the Apollo program return to the U.S. Economy 14 dollar for every 1 dollars invested in the Apollo Project, but there was no direct return of resource other than Lunar Rocks. The Government did something that would have been a non profitable project for a Private Corporation and made a profit out of it. Besides these ten of billion of dollars that need to be done to do these project and we are not counting every thing else that needs to be built to justify building those shuttle and that cost would be in the hundreds of billion if not trillions of dollars to built.

But, don't forget that Space Ship One is recycled technology or knowledge gained from the old X-15 Program that was cancelled in the 60's. Now they did a lot of work and I don't have any problem with that, but the space ship one is still based on the X-15 Program and that where the base understanding to build the Space Ship One came from. NASA was the one that did the science on the technology.

Larry,[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#102 2004-11-17 09:11:40

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 21,693

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid14]Being stuck always in a proto typing mode is not a good thing for there must be a solid steady state product yielded from that research. Granted the goal of long term use may be a valid question to raise but in the same token reduced cost would be another for manufacturing quantites of production units.[/color:post_uid14]

Offline

#103 2004-11-17 14:32:16

Martian Republic
Member
From: Haltom City- Dallas/Fort Worth
Registered: 2004-06-13
Posts: 855

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Being stuck always in a proto typing mode is not a good thing for there must be a solid steady state product yielded from that research. Granted the goal of long term use may be a valid question to raise but in the same token reduced cost would be another for manufacturing quantites of production units.[/color:post_uid0][/quote:post_uid0]
[color=#000000:post_uid0]That the point SpaceNut, we have to be doing both of them or we are not going to be colonizing space. We do the Prototyping to develop our first base line like rockets and then we go to a second base line the current shuttles and we go to a third base line for the next generation shuttle and so on. We do the same thing with the rocket between the Earth and Moon and shuttle from Lunar Orbit to the Moons surface. We continue this process from Earth and Moon Orbit to Mars Orbit and we working on the Mars Shuttle generations that we intend to build. We are also going from one generation of space station to the next and from one generation of lunar base to the next and one generation of Mars colony to the next.

Yes, SpaceNut this is expensive and can not be done by private enterprise, because they can neither get there investment back nor can they then invest in new technology that will guarantee that there old investment loses money. Instead of everybody on this board crying about NASA screwing everybody around, they will be crying about XYZ Space Corporation screwing everybody around because there trying to recover there investment in some space enterprise. Neither they nor there competitors will do much after about five to seven years, because of there inefficiencies and lack of infrastructure in space. Let take the current shuttle as an example and say it was owned by a private corporation and there going to upgrade to the next shuttle type. They have one billion tied up in one shuttle and maybe another billion tied up in real state and infrastructure on the ground. But, even assuming that they did not lose the Columbia so they have four shuttle or five billion dollars worth of assets, but the also have about five billion dollars of development cost to build the next generation of shuttle. Let say for the sake of the argument that they been doing this for ten years, but they decide to build the next generation Shuttle. If they go for the next generation shuttle there not going to be able to pay off there debt, besides there going to have to spend another billion dollars to just do science on it to see if it can be done and get any thing for there effort either. The ramjet is a create idea, but to these people it just another five to ten billion debt for them to absorb of which they can not afford to pay back and will be  accruing interest. Oh, you can go into space for 1/10 the price of our current shuttle. OK, but we don't want it, because we are still retrieving our investment. But, the current shuttle is useless to us for what we want to accomplish. But, they decide to do it, but in ten years they have the same problem. There a new generation of shuttle to be build and they have neither paid off the first or the second generation of shuttle. Oh, this shuttle will be catapulted into space off the end of a rail system that stuck fifteen to twenty miles in the air. Oh, and we can do that at the price of a current air line ticket once it been built, sound good but we about thirty or forty billion dollars in debt and we can't afford it. Oh, it going to cost forty to fifty billion dollars to build the track and maybe one billion for the new shuttle per copy. I have no problem with it but I can't make the trip. Also, it will take ten to twenty years to build the rack too, I absolutely can't do that. But, if we intend to make space cheap and access to the average American for either business trips or vacation or for living there, we have to do this. If we really intend to do something like this, it going to have to be setup more like a Kennedy Moon Mission project with Private Enterprise dipping into it and getting what they need to build the next generation shuttle and getting a Kennedy type right off system so they can buy the next generation of shuttle and retire the old generation of shuttles. Or otherwise this getting cheap access to space is not going to happen or at least it not going to happen any time soon like in the next 50 to 70 years or so. Business can't afford it and you have to sell it to the Government as a good business deal which is by the way. The reason that it a worth while business deal for the Government and not for the businesses is, because the Government is trying to expand the physical economy of the nation along with creating new jobs with a more productive population and generating physical wealth. So a Government that is based on the Old American System of Economic as John F. Kennedy understood it would be sticking one Prototyping project behind the other in an assembly line fashion, because that how you generate wealth and in this case make access to space to the average American in about twenty years or so.

SpaceNut, right about this time everybody on this forums jumps on me and says that too expensive and we need to go cheap rout if we want to do space.

OK, let go the cheap rout. I'm game for it!

OK, let go with a Bigelow habitat for five billion dollars. Let buy one of those Bigelow habitat every year for thirty years and we would still only have thirty of them and it would take about 1/3 of NASA budget of fifteen billion dollars or 150 billion dollars over a thirty year period. We still have not bought the rockets nor the shuttles or anything else for that matter. Is that too much for you? How about if we cut that number in half to fifteen Bigelow habitats or 1/6 of NASA budget for 2.5 billion a year. We need at least fifteen Bigelow Habitats because we want to send eight Bigelow habitats to Mars  which will cost us 45  billion dollars over a thirty year period. Now we will rocket to send our Bigelow Habitat there and so will probably need three separate busters to get our Bigelow habitat plus anything else we are send too. We are pulling stuff off the shelf to save on development cost. So we will get ourselves a Prat-Witney nuclear rocket for six billion dollars a piece that can make trip and that will cost us a 144 billion dollars for each of the nuclear busters if it a one time use. We also want to keep 7 or 8 Bigelow habitats in either earth orbit or on the Moon for another 45 billion dollars and for a grand total of 239 billion dollars over the next thirty years and we have not enclued shuttle or rocket for either the moon, mars or the earth anything else. We were only dealing with nuclear powered Prat-Witney rockets and Bigelow Habitats. Now that would be about 1/2 of NASA budget to do that. Now keep in mind that those Bigelow Habitats will not be much more that the International Space Station goes to Mars or the Moon or now we have two ISS space station type numbers. We go cheap we buy some that we either can't use or won't serve our purposes, but it absolutely will not make going into space cheap either.

Let just say that neither option is acceptable. Without a government that pushing  the prototype button coupled with government mission statements or programs or intent, there will be no future wealth or development in space to speak of and without private enterprise pushing the product button on the other side with the technologically already developed or near so developed, we probably will not do a whole lot in space.

Larry,[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#104 2004-11-17 15:01:37

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 21,693

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid14]Thanks Martian for the responses I had not ment to point my words directly at your previous comment. My comment in general was in regards to how we have floundered in demonstrator mode since Apollo with the only out come that works has been the shuttle as a production unit.

I do not know how much money was spent in the developement of the shuttle program but we do know how much each cost to build and we do have real numbers to plug into the equation to justify why we should not be using the shuttle. Especially when it comes to how much money is currently available within the Nasa budgets years to come.

I do not feel that cheap or expensive is the goal but rather one of affordability. Spending huge sums of money on developement must be balanced with regards to the actual product in the end and its eventual cost.[/color:post_uid14]

Offline

#105 2004-11-17 16:35:34

Martian Republic
Member
From: Haltom City- Dallas/Fort Worth
Registered: 2004-06-13
Posts: 855

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]I do not feel that cheap or expensive is the goal but rather one of affordability. Spending huge sums of money on developement must be balanced with regards to the actual product in the end and its eventual cost.[/color:post_uid0][/quote:post_uid0]
[color=#000000:post_uid0]I think I understand what your saying.

But, I would like to remind you that even your so called affordability or even a sustainable space program can go all over the place too and has no solid landing pad either. Like most people trying to work inside this 15 billion dollars budget. They would say that affordable and may even try to work within it. But if I right about the US Economy and it on the way down, then NASA budget will also fall off the radar too. Then the affordability or sustainable space program would be a whole lower. But, they could fall back to somebody like me who would put the Federal Reserve into bankruptcy and reorganization. I would do that so I could reverse the economic collapse by generating a trillion dollars of government credit. I would dedicate 9/10 of that credit for down here to rebuild America and the other 1/10 of that credit for NASA. So NASA would go 100 billion dollar budget and it would be affordable and sustainable too.

I guess you could say that NASA would be affordable and sustainable from one billion to hundred billion.

Affordable                                                 sustainable
1B     15B     25B             50B           75B            100B
[******                                                              ]

Don't mind my. I thought it was kind funny.

Larry,[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#106 2004-11-17 19:01:09

comstar03
Member
From: Australia
Registered: 2004-07-19
Posts: 329

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Larry (Martian Republic)

But 100 Billion per year from one income stream is capable for global private enterprise (GPE) you need to look at the global landscape. Clue > " big issues need big solutions "  The major issues are other country governments that might get in the road.

Issues are Tax, Control, and government policies, that could effect the outcomes in the GPE Income streams. By using a tax heaven (Phase 1 - Corporate Structure ) you could assembly a global corporate to build a private enterprise space sector. ( Phase 2 - Infrastructure ) as part of this global corporate you assembly locations on each major land mass to co-ordinate global industrial activities for expansion in space and other income generating operations. Phase 3 -  Primary Private Spaceport facility where the bulk of the research and assembly take place for space expansion.

All three phases are expressed in simple terms but they are complex and have many issues to overcome. But can be done in the same timeframe that the current governments have plans for expansion to the moon. I can't provide anymore detail regarding the operations and what requirements are needed.[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#107 2004-11-17 21:10:46

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 21,693

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid14]A few more could be to consider these space oriented businesses non profit, Attracting non union or civil servant for staffing needs as well as off loading of work to other more benificial locations as to maximize the use of available dollars.

On that same list would also be purchasing products where possible from other spare faring nations, working with developing nations for lower cost of developement of designs and the list goes on....

Creating other sources of funds to utilize in this whole process is a must as well.[/color:post_uid14]

Offline

#108 2004-11-18 00:41:14

Martian Republic
Member
From: Haltom City- Dallas/Fort Worth
Registered: 2004-06-13
Posts: 855

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Larry (Martian Republic)

But 100 Billion per year from one income stream is capable for global private enterprise (GPE) you need to look at the global landscape. Clue > " big issues need big solutions "  The major issues are other country governments that might get in the road.

Issues are Tax, Control, and government policies, that could effect the outcomes in the GPE Income streams. By using a tax heaven (Phase 1 - Corporate Structure ) you could assembly a global corporate to build a private enterprise space sector. ( Phase 2 - Infrastructure ) as part of this global corporate you assembly locations on each major land mass to co-ordinate global industrial activities for expansion in space and other income generating operations. Phase 3 -  Primary Private Spaceport facility where the bulk of the research and assembly take place for space expansion.

All three phases are expressed in simple terms but they are complex and have many issues to overcome. But can be done in the same timeframe that the current governments have plans for expansion to the moon. I can't provide anymore detail regarding the operations and what requirements are needed.[/color:post_uid0][/quote:post_uid0]
[color=#000000:post_uid0]comstar03,

I understand what you want to accomplish in space and some of the stuff I would like to see done too. But, what you are basically preaching is fascism in the way that you want to accomplish your space mission. Just so we are on the same page, fascism is basically a form of Corporatism by private individual controlling the government. Fascism is basically Corporate ownership of the government. I know that you have said that we are not going to dissolve the nation states or have corporation dictating policies inside the United States, but there can only one sovereign intity in any physical space and the other one has to be subservient. If I were the President of the United States and you had a meeting with me and asked me to either submit the authority of the U.S. Government to you and/or dedicate hundred Billion dollars to you, I would end the meeting right there and I would reject every thing that you had to say from that point on. I'm not in the business to surrender the sovereignty of the United States on any level or obligating US Government to paying some annul amount to some private international Corporation for any reason.

I may support several national corporation in a piece meal to construct a whole space program and/or have other nation with there private corporation, but an international corporation on to itself controlling the whole works, never.

Larry,[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#109 2004-11-18 04:10:19

comstar03
Member
From: Australia
Registered: 2004-07-19
Posts: 329

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Martian Republic (larry),

I think you are misunderstanding me, when we talk about space, I am not talking about facism, I am talking about the private ownership of space assets and infrastructure and creating a private space program sector, separate from the country governments on earth.

They have enough issues to I don't want to deal with those local or national issues. But the fact is the creation of global private enterprise (GPE), must also deal with the complex political environment within these countries in the world to recive income from customers and also purchase resources.

I agree that large volumes of money are required to maintain the asset grow into space and build the infrastructure to substain a space colony in orbit, on the moon, and on mars. Running these space orbiting platforms and ground installations through a private enterprise will change the way space is viewed and colonized.

I see a place for all types of space fairing systems, government, govt / private hybrid and purely private. You will need to get ready to meet the changes of having private sector controlled bases in orbit and on planetary bodies within our solar system in the next 50 years.

But it depends on the current country government views on having a private corporation or group of corporations controlled assets worth billions and trillions of dollars that could expand humanity in space, I see many different reactions to the idea of private corporations having that power in space. These reactions can benefit the growth in private space sector or harm the sector, It just depends on the leadership within these countries that matter in the global environment.

Inclusion - I didn't mean facism - corporate running the existing governmental structures on earth, but a private group building a private space sector outside the existing space sector under various governmental controls by various governments.[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#110 2004-11-18 04:43:35

Grypd
Member
From: Scotland, Europe
Registered: 2004-06-07
Posts: 1,867

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]I honestly believe that we will never get big buisness to pioneer the advancement of man in space. There just appears to be too litle profit for it and too much regulation stopping them from making those profits. But I also believe that buisness will aid goverment when it does decide to go forth by providing cheaper services and a willingness to run already set up operations so to use the limited funds available for the most we can get out of them.[/color:post_uid0]


Chan eil mi aig a bheil ùidh ann an gleidheadh an status quo; Tha mi airson cur às e.

Offline

#111 2004-11-18 07:00:31

comstar03
Member
From: Australia
Registered: 2004-07-19
Posts: 329

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Grypd,

You see the world of micro-business as profit driven, Large business is driven differently, it is based on return ( that is not just income , but market share, asset growth through expansion, and market control - strategic movement, just to name a few other reasons for large business to be involved )

Large Business is like a micro-couuntry in many aspects, countries do things that benefit themselves, allies, or gain a strategic movement. Large Business can make decisions that might seem not profitable but provide return in different areas, new technology, training of human resources, structural advances in the corporate access to markets and more.

Grypd, I think you don't understand the Large Business sector mechanics and you don't understand the people behind the large corporates - do some research into the industrial era business titans, and you will see a different thought processes. The space titans of the future will be the same with resources that would make the industrial titans look like boy scouts.

In the 1950's no ATMs existed, today we have millions of ATMs globally - remember the first person to show the way for large corporates then a new breed of large corporates are developed called Interstaller Corporates (ISCs). Grypd, even George Bush's Plan doesn't allow them in because NASA is running the show, so you create a show outside the current infrastructure.

Grypd, I have a suggestion for you, go and watch " Contact with Jodie Foster" and look at the Industrialist, and he isn't doing it for money, but return on investment, same as Paul Allen in the Allen Array with SETI not making money , but a return in investment. I think you need to open you defined look at private corporations.[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#112 2004-11-18 07:50:29

Grypd
Member
From: Scotland, Europe
Registered: 2004-06-07
Posts: 1,867

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Grypd,

You see the world of micro-business as profit driven, Large business is driven differently, it is based on return ( that is not just income , but market share, asset growth through expansion, and market control - strategic movement, just to name a few other reasons for large business to be involved )

Large Business is like a micro-couuntry in many aspects, countries do things that benefit themselves, allies, or gain a strategic movement. Large Business can make decisions that might seem not profitable but provide return in different areas, new technology, training of human resources, structural advances in the corporate access to markets and more.

Grypd, I think you don't understand the Large Business sector mechanics and you don't understand the people behind the large corporates - do some research into the industrial era business titans, and you will see a different thought processes. The space titans of the future will be the same with resources that would make the industrial titans look like boy scouts.

In the 1950's no ATMs existed, today we have millions of ATMs globally - remember the first person to show the way for large corporates then a new breed of large corporates are developed called Interstaller Corporates (ISCs). Grypd, even George Bush's Plan doesn't allow them in because NASA is running the show, so you create a show outside the current infrastructure.

Grypd, I have a suggestion for you, go and watch " Contact with Jodie Foster" and look at the Industrialist, and he isn't doing it for money, but return on investment, same as Paul Allen in the Allen Array with SETI not making money , but a return in investment. I think you need to open you defined look at private corporations.[/color:post_uid0][/quote:post_uid0]
[color=#000000:post_uid0]Comstar, we are in a situation where no buisness can see a potential return on developing the space infrastructure needed. It just is not on the horizon. You have to ask yourself what buisness is willing to spend a substantial proportion of its own Venture capital on producing this infrastructure. Especially as it falls into a legal gray area where utilising the materials found in space may not be allowed. ie the Moon treaty or challenges by sovreign nations.

Buisness is profit driven, if its immediately or further down the road, do not kid yourself that it does not. Buisness will develop new ideas of course they will. But there has to be a good reason. Spending $trillions to send people to Mars is not for them a reason. Big Buisness has shareholders they want to see a return on there money, thats why they invested in it in the first place.

But the corporate sector of the world does see profit in doing and making things for goverment to use. But goverment has to take the lead first. Only after we have a need to create cheaper spaceflight and are doing the equivalent of sending busses to space will buisness begin to invest in its own ideas and begin to take the lead.

Oh and comstar, Contact is a science fiction film where a multi trillionaire spends his fortune doing something as he no longer had need for the money he was going to die. He was not investing for himself or his buisness he was spending his own money as he no longer had a need for it he had no children or heirs. And he wanted to do something "good" for once. And that is scienceFICTION not the real world do you know of any dieing multitrillionaires with no heirs and a fancy for spaceflight.[/color:post_uid0]


Chan eil mi aig a bheil ùidh ann an gleidheadh an status quo; Tha mi airson cur às e.

Offline

#113 2004-11-18 08:00:43

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 21,693

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid14]So this may be the wrong thread but we are discussing how to make a profit. The only private industry right now is tourism or another way to put it joy riding to sub orbital or the zero G experience.
Lets look at that business model since developement cost must be recovered over a long time and we must manage the cost per flight over that same period. It is not hard to see how we start out with the first half of that time frame to only break even and only in the second half do we finally have the chance to make a profit.
So the developement cost for spaceshipone is in the 30 million range and the cost for flights are x (maybe some on has this data) and the expected life of the vehicle is XX( others might know this ) to average against the number of paying seats of 2 for a minimal break even cost balanced across all the years. Oh and we can not forget to add in some repair or refurbishment costs as well for the entire time period of use.[/color:post_uid14]

Offline

#114 2004-11-18 12:26:45

Martian Republic
Member
From: Haltom City- Dallas/Fort Worth
Registered: 2004-06-13
Posts: 855

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]comstar03 I understand what your saying and we have clashed over this argument or issue before. To accomplish what both of us want to do in space, we both understand that it going to take 100 to 200 billion dollars a year for 40 to 60 years of investment to accomplish our plan. So we could be talking about an investment in excess of 4 to 12 trillion dollars. There only one way to generate that kind of financial resources and going to include with everybody on this site going out to the street with bucket asking for donation. It also will no be including everybody here and anybody we can pan handle into investing in this multinational corporation either. Nor will it include Wall Street or Big Banks either, because they neither have nor would they commit the financial to resources if they had the resources.

Your going to have to plug into the same socket that I'm trying to plug my plan into to make it happen. Basically it take over the Central Bank of the United State which is the Federal Reserve System which currently is a private bank. There no other way to generate that kind money, credit or investment capital to accomplish what both of us are trying to do. It will either be the Government leading the charge, making the rules and regulating the system or it will be the Private Enterprise that doing it.

Before anybody responds to my post, think this over:

Every War that the United States got into during the 20th Century was a Corporation war to defend and promote Corporation and/or Private Interest. The current war in Iraq is also Corporate War to promote and defend the no-bidder contract of Haliburtan, Becthel. That American are dying and have killed over hundred thousand Iraqi in an illegal war that has turned into a genecidal policy of extermination. This was all done to defend those Corporate or private interest so that they can do a resource grab in Iraq. The Viet Nam war was an attempt to control that section of the World for these same private interest. The rise of Adolph Hitler was financed by these same Corporate or private interest and even the Current President George Bush’s Grandfather was one of Adolph Hitler’s bankers and they even financed the German Wars Machine. Dick Cheney is a fascist beside being the former CEO of Haliburtan and the one that setup the No Bidder Contract for Haliburtan is prepared to start World War III. But, that should not be surprising, because they also were the ones that stated World War I and World War II too and most of the other wars over the last century or so too. The Energy Crises inside the United States was cause by these Corporation or Private Interest like Enron, Dynagy, El Paso Gas, Duke, Reliant Energy, etc. It was Enron and Kenneth Lay that wrote the deregulation laws for California before these energy pirate ripped off 35 billion dollars from the Californian citizens in over charges and gaming the energy market and Dick Cheney ran interference for them.

The only way we can block something like this is through Government Regulations by a Government that is run by the people and not by some Corporation or private interest.

Although I support developing the moon, developing Mars, building space station and building large fleets of space ship, I oppose the format that you want to put it in. Because all you will be doing is setting up a New Empire and we will have an Empire that will be traveling through the solar system and doing the same thing that we are doing in Iraq right now. I will have absolutely part and nor will I support that kind of venture. I have not met and nor do I know you, but even assuming that your sincere in you effort, you have absolutely no control over keeping this corporation from becoming an Empire. If you think that I’m seeing monster where there aren’t any, then look at all the farmers and small businesses that have been destroyed by these people in there grab for power and to control resources. These thuds that control George Bush like a puppet will take over your corporation and run it the same way they work George Bush and have him say what George Bush to say.

Private enterprise and individual activities are beneficial and serve to promote our interest both down here and in space. But, any multination Corporation with no allegiance to a nation or nations or communally accountable to those people of that nation or nations is a threat to those people and that Corporation will at some point try to suppress those nations as it become self-aware of itself and will set itself up as being the dominant and sole ruling power and excluding all government and rules by the people of that country that originally set that Corporation into place.

Larry,[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#115 2004-11-18 12:52:34

Martian Republic
Member
From: Haltom City- Dallas/Fort Worth
Registered: 2004-06-13
Posts: 855

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]So this may be the wrong thread but we are discussing how to make a profit. The only private industry right now is tourism or another way to put it joy riding to sub orbital or the zero G experience.
Lets look at that business model since developement cost must be recovered over a long time and we must manage the cost per flight over that same period. It is not hard to see how we start out with the first half of that time frame to only break even and only in the second half do we finally have the chance to make a profit.
So the developement cost for spaceshipone is in the 30 million range and the cost for flights are x (maybe some on has this data) and the expected life of the vehicle is XX( others might know this ) to average against the number of paying seats of 2 for a minimal break even cost balanced across all the years. Oh and we can not forget to add in some repair or refurbishment costs as well for the entire time period of use.[/color:post_uid0][/quote:post_uid0]
[color=#000000:post_uid0]The thing is SpaceNut, what ever they do with space ship one will have virtually no impact on either the private or government space program or access to space. Outside of being just a moral victory and generating excitement.

Space ship One can't reach the ISS and to build a new Space Ship One that can reach the ISS will cost a whole lot more than 30 million dollars and to go totally private like buy a Begelow Habitat will cost about 5 billion dollars just to get inside door. So anybody that might be thinking that we will grow this from the ground up is not in the real world  nor understands what really going on.

Larry,[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#116 2004-11-18 19:25:14

comstar03
Member
From: Australia
Registered: 2004-07-19
Posts: 329

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Grypd, Bush doesn't have the formular to create and maintain a large volume of funds to space development becuase he must manage the other critical issues like health, education, defence and transport as well the future of the country.

The correct formular that would be successful is 600 million customers x US$30 per month = 18 $Billion x 12 = US$ 216 Billion per year. I have designed the income stream and working towards the implementation of this income stream.

Martian Republic,

I see your issues regarding a private enterprise of this size, I but before the creation phase happens the right structure, ruling council, and policies that will ensure the correct development in space and working with other space fairing bodies. This corporate will be a catalyst for other smaller corporate to get into space, expanding the base of personnel in orbit and on the moon.

The Moon Treaty and Space Treaty only apply to member states not individuals or corporates outside their country borders.

The basis rule would be to stay out of political issues and earth based government matters, unless they directly impact on the corporates assets and infrastructure or revenue stream/s like any other person or corporate do.

At the end of the day, and long the way to the completion of the infrastructure and space development many issues can arises from small legal issues, to security issues, to other technological and resource issues, all issues have solutions, it depends on the resolution and complications.[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#117 2004-11-19 06:25:21

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 21,693

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid14]So what is the current american tax paying size?

Also if this were a tax income deductible donation much like the dollar for campaigne costs. We would still probably only get according to polls about 60% of what ever figure was asked.
Would I contribute an amount to the space programs? That is a Yes.
Would it be just for Nasa? I would hope that would be a no. For we need have more involvement by others in order to achieve this goal.[/color:post_uid14]

Offline

#118 2004-11-19 07:05:30

comstar03
Member
From: Australia
Registered: 2004-07-19
Posts: 329

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]SpaceNut,

The american tax paying public is about 120 million, but consumer globally are approx. 3000 million ( 3 Billion ) working on 20% of the consumer market would provide private enterprise the funding to get into space and the ability to create all the infrastructure required to effectively mount a campaign into space for the long term.

216,000 million per year /120 million = US$1800 per year or US$150 per month. I don't think the people of america would fund per taxpayer that some per month for forty - sixty years.[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#119 2004-11-19 09:40:34

GCNRevenger
Member
From: Earth
Registered: 2003-10-14
Posts: 6,056

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0][i:post_uid0]"Every War that the United States got into during the 20th Century was a Corporation war to defend and promote Corporation and/or Private Interest. "[/i:post_uid0]

Nonsense, complete unmarried-from-reality hallucenation nonsense. Loved the bit about Facism [i:post_uid0]actually[/i:post_uid0] being because of companies too... MR, how about you just provide links to LaRouche glossies instead of filling page on page of the board with this fiction?

The idea that the government suddenly "makes" $1,000Bn USD in credit would be economic [i:post_uid0]suicide[/i:post_uid0] today, and this concept that if the government spends a little money and produces a return, then if it spends big money it will produce a proportionally larger return is a pipe dream too. Perhaps reading a basic macroeconomics textbook would be worth your time.[/color:post_uid0]


"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw

The glass is at 50% of capacity

Offline

#120 2004-11-19 13:18:20

Martian Republic
Member
From: Haltom City- Dallas/Fort Worth
Registered: 2004-06-13
Posts: 855

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]So what is the current american tax paying size?

Also if this were a tax income deductible donation much like the dollar for campaigne costs. We would still probably only get according to polls about 60% of what ever figure was asked.
Would I contribute an amount to the space programs? That is a Yes.
Would it be just for Nasa? I would hope that would be a no. For we need have more involvement by others in order to achieve this goal.[/color:post_uid0][/quote:post_uid0]
[color=#000000:post_uid0]SpaceNut,

That not the way to go at it and it will ultimantly fail. This kind of hand out for a space program will alway come up short and won't give the benifit back the the physical economy that we want to have. But, it would be nice if there were a tax deduction for a space donation, but I don't see it.

Larry,[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#121 2004-11-19 13:28:06

Martian Republic
Member
From: Haltom City- Dallas/Fort Worth
Registered: 2004-06-13
Posts: 855

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]

[i:post_uid0]"Every War that the United States got into during the 20th Century was a Corporation war to defend and promote Corporation and/or Private Interest. "[/i:post_uid0]

Nonsense, complete unmarried-from-reality hallucenation nonsense. Loved the bit about Facism [i:post_uid0]actually[/i:post_uid0] being because of companies too... MR, how about you just provide links to LaRouche glossies instead of filling page on page of the board with this fiction?

The idea that the government suddenly "makes" $1,000Bn USD in credit would be economic [i:post_uid0]suicide[/i:post_uid0] today, and this concept that if the government spends a little money and produces a return, then if it spends big money it will produce a proportionally larger return is a pipe dream too. Perhaps reading a basic macroeconomics textbook would be worth your time.[/quote:post_uid0]
OK, you ask for more information as to Dick Cheney and some of the other Neo-Cons being fascist, here my source. When I call Dick Cheney a fascist, that exactly what I mean, he a fascist.

http://larouchein2004.net/pages/other/2 … 409cos.htm

http://larouchein2004.net/pdfs/pamphlet0401cos2.pdf

http://larouchein2004.net/pages/other/2 … 14cos3.htm

Larry,[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#122 2004-11-20 00:34:54

Yang Liwei Rocket
Member
Registered: 2004-03-03
Posts: 993

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]

[i:post_uid0]"Every War that the United States got into during the 20th Century was a Corporation war to defend and promote Corporation and/or Private Interest. "[/i:post_uid0]

Nonsense, complete unmarried-from-reality hallucenation nonsense. Loved the bit about Facism [i:post_uid0]actually[/i:post_uid0] being because of companies too... MR, how about you just provide links to LaRouche glossies instead of filling page on page of the board with this fiction?

The idea that the government suddenly "makes" $1,000Bn USD in credit would be economic [i:post_uid0]suicide[/i:post_uid0] today, and this concept that if the government spends a little money and produces a return, then if it spends big money it will produce a proportionally larger return is a pipe dream too. Perhaps reading a basic macroeconomics textbook would be worth your time.[/quote:post_uid0]
OK, you ask for more information as to Dick Cheney and some of the other Neo-Cons being fascist, here my source. When I call Dick Cheney a fascist, that exactly what I mean, he a fascist.

http://larouchein2004.net/pages/other/2 … 409cos.htm

http://larouchein2004.net/pdfs/pamphlet0401cos2.pdf

http://larouchein2004.net/pages/other/2 … 14cos3.htm

Larry,[/color:post_uid0][/quote:post_uid0]
[color=#000000:post_uid0]Look man there's no need to tell me stuff about Cheney, he is a slime ball. If you are posting to people who don't think much of him or people like me then you are already preaching to the converted. Mister VP Aparthied ( Cheney ) hasn't been doing much good in the minds of the minorities in the US, his friends and links with the uptown klan, and his ideas for the banning of a the M.L.King holiday are issues which are very disturbing for some.
However if you want to continue on Cheney I think you should go to the [b:post_uid0] Political Potpourri  [/b:post_uid0] just so the boards don't go crazy, because when you look into Dicks history ( Mister Apartheid ) you find a lot of strange stuff, which American newpapers have wrote on and I'm not just talking Haliburton fraud and corruptions.

Back to the Mars goal,
yes I think NASA needed a push it was in need of new direction however was it the right goal ? There are many leading scientists and there are astronauts that have spoken against this kind of Mars mission.  The Economics for such a mission isn't to good now, and ever since his vision was announced there has been a deafening silence. The high cash needed to fix medi-care problems , the recent cut backs on NASA and focusing on issues like blocking Stem cells, and stopping the liberty of gay people have many wondering  how will the US move forward with so  many Conservative Goals. I think it is very important that the USA returns to manned space flights, and it needs to get NASA to improve its safety record. Failures like the Mars polar lander, the Genesis crash and others highlight the need for better management and the need for people to take responsibility, nobody here needs to be reminded of Colombia. George Bush senior wanted to go to mars and the whole thing just got dumped, because of lack of technology, the costs and the risks to human life. Now NASA is even further back than before.
NASA has done wonderful things in the past, the manned mission to space, building space stations, the Viking missions,  putting people on the Moon, the Voyager missions. When it done these things it didn't just make America proud, mankind was happy at waht could be achieved by a wonderful space agency. However thinsg aren't so hot now, and there are still safety questions to be answered so let's hope NASA can move forward again.[/color:post_uid0]


'first steps are not for cheap, think about it...
did China build a great Wall in a day ?' ( Y L R newmars forum member )

Offline

#123 2004-11-20 00:49:15

BWhite
Member
From: Chicago, Illinois
Registered: 2004-06-16
Posts: 2,635

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]The Moon Treaty and Space Treaty only apply to member states not individuals or corporates outside their country borders.

The basis rule would be to stay out of political issues and earth based government matters, unless they directly impact on the corporates assets and infrastructure or revenue stream/s like any other person or corporate do.

At the end of the day, and long the way to the completion of the infrastructure and space development many issues can arises from small legal issues, to security issues, to other technological and resource issues, all issues have solutions, it depends on the resolution and complications.[/color:post_uid0][/quote:post_uid0]
[color=#000000:post_uid0]I think a Church could build the first settlement on Mars and avoid many of the political issues related to the Outer Space Treaty, the Moon Treaty and controversies over the recognition of private property rights.[/color:post_uid0]


Give someone a sufficient why and they can endure just about any how

Offline

#124 2004-11-20 08:56:53

deagleninja
Member
From: USA
Registered: 2004-04-28
Posts: 376

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Good point Bill. I like the tag too  big_smile

I don't believe the question is weither Bush set the right goal for NASA, but weither goal setting is enough. Kennedy did more than make an election year speech, he backed up his words with record increases in NASA spending to ge the job done. As far as I know, Bush has said nothing more since his January speech.

I'm also severly disappointed that Boe/Lock seem destined to build the CEV. I guess white elephants breed.
big_smile

As for the Bush Administration's overall science policy, I think the Emporer of Star Wars fame said it best, 'your failure is now complete.....'[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

#125 2004-11-20 16:39:49

Martian Republic
Member
From: Haltom City- Dallas/Fort Worth
Registered: 2004-06-13
Posts: 855

Re: Bush Sets Wrong Goal?

[color=#000000:post_uid0]Yang Liwei Rocket,

I generally try to stay away from getting too political most of the time. Obviously I was not talking to you or trying to convince you of who Dick Cheney is. But, GCNRevenger likes challenge me so I responded with a proof if he wanted to check it out.

But, have a good day!

Larry,[/color:post_uid0]

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB