Mapping a way forward

Scott Beach · 2017-04-01 16:57:50

JohnX wrote:

You probably know that most Europeans work in km

Yes, I know that they use the metric system now, and that they were using “cubits” when they designed and built the great cathedrals of Europe. I specified that the settlement would be square and that it would contain approximately 144 square miles because I knew that some people would recognize those design elements as sacred.

Building the Great Cathedrals (transcript)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/bu … drals.html
NARRATOR: Some quick math converts modern units to medieval units and produces another divine figure: 144. In the New Testament, Heaven is called the City of God. It's height: 144.
STEPHEN MURRAY: This is the Book of Revelation, the vision of Saint John the Divine: As John measures the city, he finds it's 144 cubits.
NARRATOR: Amazingly, at the dedication ceremony for the opening of Amiens Cathedral, the bishop read aloud the very same passage from the Book of Revelation that describes the divine height, 144.
STEPHEN MURRAY: So we're dealing, in the building, with, clearly, a number that expresses some kind of object of desire. They wanted 144.
NARRATOR: Their search for divine dimensions continues at Beauvais, the cathedral that partly collapsed. They measure the height.
ANDREW TALLON: ...check the measurement, and it is 144.3.
STEPHEN MURRAY: ...the same number at Beauvais. They're aiming at this celestial number.
NARRATOR: The builders at both Amiens and Beauvais used the height of God's heavenly city in the Bible to design the height of their cathedrals.
Along with the discovery of Solomon's Temple encoded at Notre Dame, and Noah's Ark at Amiens, experts have uncovered compelling evidence that some medieval architects used measurements from the Bible as a blueprint for building their cathedrals.
Using sacred numbers, Gothic engineers strived to make cathedrals a kind of Heaven on Earth, a sacred place for transporting medieval minds from their daily lives of toil to the lofty heights of eternity.
Even the floor plan of the cathedral is the ultimate Christian symbol of salvation, the crucifix.
STEPHEN MURRAY: The building is a vehicle. It takes you somewhere else. A cathedral, in a sense, is a medium; it's a transport. It takes us to heaven.

The city lies foursquare, with its width the same as its length. And he measured the city with the rod, and all its dimensions were equal—twelve thousand stadia in length and width and height.[17] And he measured its wall to be one hundred forty-four cubits, by the human measure the angel was using.[18] Revelation 21: 17-18

Scott Beach · 2017-04-01 17:22:52

JohnX wrote:

Scott, that's quite a piece of work. I have no idea if it will fly - I hope you get somewhere with it.

The Principality of “Andorra is a parliamentary co-principality with the President of France and the Bishop of Urgell (Catalonia, Spain) as Co-Princes”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andorra#Politics

If Elon Musk is willing to work with Mars Society chapters then Musk might ask the Co-Princes to issue provincial charters to the chapters.

RobertDyck · 2017-04-01 17:49:01

Scott Beach wrote:

The Principality of “Andorra is a parliamentary co-principality with the President of France and the Bishop of Urgell (Catalonia, Spain) as Co-Princes”.

If co-heads of state are officials of France and Spain, and both France and Spain have signed the Outer Space Treaty, then is Andorra really exempt?

Scott Beach · 2017-04-01 19:00:59

RobertDyck wrote:

Scott Beach wrote:
The Principality of “Andorra is a parliamentary co-principality with the President of France and the Bishop of Urgell (Catalonia, Spain) as Co-Princes”.
If co-heads of state are officials of France and Spain, and both France and Spain have signed the Outer Space Treaty, then is Andorra really exempt?

First, the Bishop of Urgell is not an official of the Spanish government.

Second, the Outer Space Treaty reads, in part, “This Treaty shall be open to all States for signature. Any State which does not sign this Treaty before its entry into force in accordance with paragraph 3 of this article may accede to it at anytime”.

The records of the United State Department of State show that the Principality of Andorra is not a party to the treaty.

https://www.state.gov/t/isn/5181.htm

You asked if Andorra is "exempt". I do not think that "exempt" is the correct word. Andorra is simply not a party to the Outer Space Treaty. Andorra can claim territorial sovereignty over whatever portions of outer space it wants to; just like numerous sovereigns have claimed territorial sovereignty over portions of Antarctica.

JohnX · 2017-04-01 20:55:09

I just spent most of an evening finishing off my income tax return. It wasn't as bad as it could have been, but I am stunned by the depth of tax-ese those forms are written in and how we have ended up with so many fiddling details. I'm very very grateful for the software that guided me through that maze. So I vowed to write one more post today:

Note to future Mars settlers: do not bring this excessively over-developed concept of INCOME TAX with you!

Here's the plan:
1 - Keep government small and cheap!
2 - If government needs funding from citizens, use a flat poll tax or something SIMPLE!
3 - Prepare an indoctrination video for kids that shows the nightmare of filing income tax returns. And while you're at it, maybe make one about lawyers and one about politicians and another about advertising executives.
4 - I'm not entirely serious about the above. There must be good lawyers out there somewhere. And seriously, if whatever government we have isn't run by our contributions in some way, it's no longer accountable and could start doing whatever it wants.
5 - end of rant.

RobertDyck · 2017-04-02 00:14:35

JohnX, since you're in Canada, could I get you to support my plan? At one point I had a look at what we are doing on this forum, and asked "Why do we want to go to Mars?" and "Can we do it here now?" Come up with a plan. Tried to run for political office to push this plan. Even won the nomination in my Riding, then got squashed.

Goal: get rid of income tax.

::Moved:: Abolish income tax on Earth

Last edited by RobertDyck (2017-04-02 16:11:05)

JohnX · 2017-04-02 15:38:42

Scott Beach wrote:

...Using sacred numbers, Gothic engineers strived to make cathedrals a kind of Heaven on Earth, a sacred place for transporting medieval minds from their daily lives of toil to the lofty heights of eternity.
Even the floor plan of the cathedral is the ultimate Christian symbol of salvation, the crucifix.
STEPHEN MURRAY: The building is a vehicle. It takes you somewhere else. A cathedral, in a sense, is a medium; it's a transport. It takes us to heaven.
...

That is fascinating. Yes I had some idea of how medieval architects viewed their work as symbolic of spiritual realities. Until then I had seen them as a misuse of money that could have been spent helping build a better nation and helping the poor.

The '144' thing isn't necessarily a mystic number (with some it would have been perhaps) - it was originally symbolic of God's chosen people - the 12 tribes of Israel, then the 12 apostles. So a building with those dimensions would signify 'this is the place where God's people will live and worship!'

We all know, I hope, how good architecture can inspire awe and reflection, and a sense of order and rightness. My hope for Mars settlements is that people will realise they have been 'chosen' in some way to do something significant with their lives, to build a new society founded on deep respect for others, fairness, restraining self-interest for the interests of all. So whether it's 12km x 12km or 12 leagues x 12 leagues, that's fine. Or some other number that inspires people in the right direction!

Scott Beach · 2017-04-02 15:54:41

JohnX wrote:

My hope for Mars settlements is that people will realise they have been 'chosen' in some way to do something significant with their lives, to build a new society founded on deep respect for others, fairness, restraining self-interest for the interests of all.

Another reason to like the "celestial number" is that 144 is the first perfect square in the Fibonacci Sequence. That sequence is closely associated with Phi, a fascinating irrational number. Please see the thread titled "A Phi-based Flag of Mars" in these forums.

http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=7610

Scott Beach · 2017-04-03 15:09:39

"Atlantis Rising: Why Floating Cities are the Next Frontier"

https://youtu.be/Jr8Iw4o7Gic

In this video, Joe Quirk speaks about “start-up governments” and how new governments can create wealth and opportunity.

In my draft "Authorization to Establish Provinces on Mars" (see post #196) I provided a means for each province to peacefully become an independent sovereign state; Just prove that you have established a viable society by producing 101 children and then you can declare your independence.

I chose the number “101” because that was the number of people who became the subjects of a new government on November 11, 1620. From that day forward they lived together under a document known as the “Mayflower Compact”. They called themselves "Pilgrims". They had traveled together across an ocean to the "New World".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayflower_Compact

Last edited by Scott Beach (2017-04-03 15:13:19)

IanM · 2017-04-03 18:26:41

Basically what I'm getting from this entire thread are essentially two different models of Martian Governance, the "Corporation and Municipalities" model favored by RobertDyck and myself, which involves a single sovereign upon the entire planet with municipalities which may (as in the US and Australia) or may not (as in Canada) also be sovereign in their own right on ostensibly the same level but which would in practice provide the vast majority of governmental services and the "Settlement-Countries" model favored by ScottBeach which would involve a country on Earth to claim sovereignty on the planet and give permits to settlements to become sovereign, making multiple sovereignties. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Interesting side note, prior to the whole Prohibition craze in the 1910s the biggest source of US Government Income was from an excise tax on Alcohol (perhaps the settlements can take note?), and Prohibitionists introduced Income Tax to replace it when it became "obsolete" with Prohibition and the 18th Amendment. Prohibition went away in 1933 but Income Tax didn't. Go figure.

Scott Beach · 2017-04-03 20:06:37

IanM wrote:

...the "Settlement-Countries" model favored by Scott Beach which would involve a country on Earth to claim sovereignty on the planet and give permits to settlements to become sovereign, making multiple sovereignties. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Ian: My “DRAFT Authorization to Establish Provinces on Mars” does not include a component of my previous proposal. Andorra would not claim the Tharsis Region, as I had previously proposed. A Mars Society chapter that obtained a Provincial Charter would instead adopt a resolution that states the latitude and longitude of each of the four corners of its 12-mile by 12-mile settlement. And two or more chapters might join together to establish a spaceport and agree on the latitude and longitude of the geometric center of a circular spaceport boundary, which might be as much as 20 miles in diameter.

So the holders of Provincial Charters could put their settlements wherever on Mars they want to, and put their joint spaceport a safe distance from their settlements.

In practice, I expect the joint spaceport to be built first. This whole plan would depend on a rocket company agreeing with the Charter-holders to deliver settlers and materials to the spaceport.

I am also suggesting that the Charter-holders establish one or more “funding corporations” that can sell shares and bonds and receive infrastructure development loans, perhaps from the World Bank or International Monetary Fund or terrestrial governments. The funding corporation(s) would have to be professionally managed and be very careful to make full disclosures about how they are handling the moneys they receive.

In regard to independence and sovereignty, each settlement might choose to become an independent sovereign or two or more settlements might join together to establish one sovereign entity. I think that this decision should be left up to the Martians of that time.

I am trying to design a minimum workable model for the settlement of Mars. I believe that this approach has the advantage that it will be relatively easy to get a consensus on "mapping a way forward".

I regard the "single sovereign upon the entire planet with municipalities" model as very unlikely to be agreed to. That model would require a terrestrial consensus that would be extremely difficult to achieve. And I doubt that the Queen of England is going to charter a "Crown corporation" and authorize that corporation to take ownership of every square inch of Mars and to exert government power over everyone who lands on Mars. That colonization model would cause lots of consternation in countries were people remember how colonial European governments treated native peoples.

Last edited by Scott Beach (2017-04-03 20:15:24)

Scott Beach · 2017-04-04 07:04:39

Draft Agreement to Establish a Joint Spaceport

This agreement is made and entered into by and between the Province of Saint Marie and the Province of Outer Los Angeles.

These provinces are individually and collectively referred to herein as the "MEMBER" or "MEMBERS".

Each MEMBER is a province of the Principality of Andorra and each MEMBER is authorized and empowered to contract with the other MEMBER for the purpose of exercising their power to establish, maintain, and operate a joint spaceport.

The latitude and longitude of the geometric center of the joint spaceport is: _______________.

The joint spaceport established pursuant to this agreement shall be known as the __________ Spaceport.

The __________ Spaceport shall be a public trust and that trust shall be administered by a Board of Regents. The Board of Regents shall be composed of six members and each of those members shall be known as a Regent. Each MEMBER may appoint and remove 3 Regents.

[This draft agreement is based, in part, on the "Joint Powers Agreement" posted at…
http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/salton/JointPow … mm%20.html ]

Scott Beach · 2017-04-05 17:32:55

IanM wrote:

...the "Corporation and Municipalities" model favored by RobertDyck and myself, which involves a single sovereign upon the entire planet with municipalities...

Ian:

The CorpWatch website has posted an article titled “Robertson Winery Accused Of Slavery-Like Practices In South Africa”.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=16098

That article includes a link to a movie trailer titled "Bitter Grapes—Slavery in the Vineyards”.

https://vimeo.com/188822041

The working conditions shown in that trailer have also prevailed in Mexico for many decades. Workers have to defecate and urinate in the fields where they work. This can lead to food crops becoming contaminated with potentially lethal bacteria.

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspect … tamination

I do not like your one-corporation-owns-the-entire-planet Mars development plan because the most likely result of that plan would be extreme economic exploitation of 99 percent of the people by 1 percent of the people. Under that system, slave plantations would be the predominant type of settlement and moral communities would not exist.

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-04-06 00:09:30

Corporations by their very nature are supposed to compete with one another, the very idea of having only one corporation defeats the purpose of incorporation. The market requires many players, not one. A corporation is not supposed to be a monopoly, that goes against the rules. As soon as you have one corporation governing the planet, someone is going to file an antitrust suit against it an try to break it up due to anticompetitive behavior!

Scott Beach · 2017-04-06 08:01:07

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Corporations by their very nature are supposed to compete with one another, the very idea of having only one corporation defeats the purpose of incorporation. The market requires many players, not one. A corporation is not supposed to be a monopoly, that goes against the rules. As soon as you have one corporation governing the planet, someone is going to file an antitrust suit against it an try to break it up due to anticompetitive behavior!

However, where a corporation owns the whole planet and dictates who the government officers are and what the laws shall be the corporation can declare that it is immune to judicial processes. This is known as the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity

So there is no legal process for stopping the corporation's monopoly. And if people oppose this evil system they get massacred.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matewan

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-04-06 08:31:19

It is not really a corporation then, but a government dressed up as a corporation. Governments don't do business, they don't try to sell you something, their source of revenue is the taxes you pay, so why should it try to sell you something? If it does sell you something, it either does so as a legal monopoly or it sells a product that is heavily subsidized by taxpayers anyway, so private business can't compete with it!

Scott Beach · 2017-04-06 08:37:02

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

As soon as you have one corporation governing the planet, someone is going to file an antitrust suit against it an try to break it up due to anticompetitive behavior!

A major problem with the "Corporation and Municipalities" development model is that there are no steps that space settlement advocates can take to put that model into practice. The advocates just have to sit and wait until a terrestrial sovereign that is not a party to the Outer Space Treaty decides to claim territorial sovereignty over Mars and then vests ownership of that planet in a corporation created by the sovereign.

Here is an example of a corporation created by a sovereign:

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces … awCode=BPC

This example "may sue and be sued" but a sovereign can just as easily provide that a corporation it created cannot be sued in any court and for any cause. In other words, the corporation can get away with mass murder.

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-04-06 09:05:21

How about the Republic of Taiwan?

Taiwan is not a member of the UN, it was kicked out in favor of China, since it is not recognized as a nation, UN treaties do not apply to it.

RobertDyck · 2017-04-06 13:02:59

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Corporations by their very nature are supposed to compete with one another, the very idea of having only one corporation defeats the purpose of incorporation. The market requires many players, not one. A corporation is not supposed to be a monopoly, that goes against the rules. As soon as you have one corporation governing the planet, someone is going to file an antitrust suit against it an try to break it up due to anticompetitive behavior!

No, Tom. You are again applying your bias. You make many assumptions. First your idea of a competition is part of the American system, and all modern western capitalist economies. But that is competition between business; you are confusing business with corporation. The corporation was invented as a means to raise capital. A corporation was invented as an artificial person, the word "corpus" is Latin for body. The idea was to limit liability. That this artificial person owed investors, and the artificial person was liable for whatever it did, not individual investors. This was a major change, previously all that existed was sole proprietorship or partnership; in both cases the owners are personally liable for whatever they do. Today in practice the board of directors can be held liable for actions an debts of the corporation, although large corporations somehow appear to shield their board of directors from liability for debts. Lawyers.

Scott Beach wrote:

However, where a corporation owns the whole planet and dictates who the government officers are and what the laws shall be the corporation can declare that it is immune to judicial processes. This is known as the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

Scott answered that one.

Are you not familiar with a "company town"? That's a town established by one company, where the one company provides most or all services. It's a monopoly. I didn't invent it. For corporate government, I'm suggesting the corporation establish one and only one settlement. That one settlement will be a company town. That means company owned dormitory for its employees, company owned cafeteria, company owned clothing stores, company owned grocery stores. I would allow others to set up business in the company town, but expect the company to dominate that one town. This town would service the interplanetary transport, so the only Earth money needed to transport settlers to Mars will be to deliver them to Low Earth Orbit. Everything from LEO to the surface of Mars will be provided by the space economy: propellant either from Mars, one of its moons, or asteroids. Food and replacement parts from the company town on Mars, etc. That way we don't need to deliver any profitable product to Earth, instead settlers pay in Earth currency, but the transport operates on the space economy. So once established, almost all of the ticket price repays investors. That's the big trick to make this work. And that means a company town. To support that company town, the company will ensure all settlers arrive at the company town, not delivered directly to any other location. So everyone arriving on Mars must go through that company town. That gives the company town a chance to recruit employees, and to sell goods.

Look, Tom. The United States had the chance to lead in space. The people of the US expected they were leaders in space, but throughout the 1950s, the American government refused to do any work or invest any money at all in space. The Soviet Union did a lot of hard work and invested a lot of money from 1951 onward, and made a lot of announcements of their successes, but the US government suppressed all news of what they did. Then in 1957 the Soviet Union launched Sputnik. They deliberately installed a radio transmitter that would transmit on a ham radio frequency, so private individuals could track it, confirm Sputnik. It worked, the US government couldn't suppress it any more. The American people responded with shock, asked how the US government could be passed. What they didn't know is he US government knew what the Soviet Union was doing, deliberately decided to do nothing themselves, and suppressed all news. The US government spread propaganda that everything Soviet was old, obsolete, decades behind the US. Obviously it wasn't. The US was ahead in some things, behind in others. The US only led in space long enough to spoil what the Soviet Union did. NASA had big plans, but Nixon drastically slashed NASA. He would have completely dismantled NASA if Congress would have let him get away with it. Skylab was only built after the Soviet Union launched Salyut 1. The US has been a spoiler, not a leader.

The US government receives more tax dollars from the space industry that it spends on NASA. For the government, space is profitable. The US slashed funding of NASA so much that the European Space Agency achieved dominance in launching commercial satellites. This resulted in the US space industry falling behind; not behind the Soviet Union or Russia, but behind western Europe. Taking commercial business meant US federal tax dollars. So the US responded by investing money to develop new launch vehicles; not just one, but two. Again this obsession with competition. They didn't seem to realize they were already competing for commercial business with Europe, Russia, and China, that internal US competition was redundant. The US federal government went to the same military contractors who had gouged and screwed American taxpayers since cancellation of Apollo. Corporate executives were certainly willing to take government money, but had no intention to develop a launch vehicle that was actually affordable. This program was called "Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle" or EELV; the two vehicles developed were Delta IV and Atlas V. Many major technological improvements, but still not competitive against Ariane for commercial satellite launch.

So you ask why the US government hasn't established settlements in space. Uh huh. They've shown two things: (1) they really aren't interested, (2) they want to see profit for the US federal government. Many space fans keep talking about Mars declaring independence right away. But if that happens, how does the US government get return on investment? If they're going to invest multiple billions of dollars, then they will insist upon positive return on investment. So those Americans who ask the US government to have NASA do it, but at the same time talk about Mars independence, are actually sabotaging their own effort.

Bottom line: The US isn't going to. We need some other way to establish settlement on Mars. I have pointed out development of the Airbus A380 cost $25 billion in US dollars. This wasn't any government program, this was all private investment. So sufficient private money is available, the but condition is private investment demands return on that investment. I proposed treating Mars as a giant company town. I have given an historical example: St. John's, Newfoundland. The first ever European settlement in North America after the Vikings. St. John's was successful, and started more than a century before any government colony. It still exists, it's now the capital of the Canadian province of Newfoundland.

Bottom line is if the US was ever going to settle space, it would have been done decades ago. Time to move on, find someone else who will.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2017-04-06 19:52:16)

louis · 2017-04-06 16:13:44

We've been here before - the East India Company and Hudson Bay Company acted as governments in effect although they were commercial outfits.

Scott Beach · 2017-04-06 16:54:17

RobertDyck wrote:

Are you not familiar with a "company town"? That's a town established by one company, where the one company provides most or all services. It's a monopoly. I didn't invest it. For corporate government, I'm suggesting the corporation establish one and only one settlement. That one settlement will be a company town. That means company own dormitory for its employees, company owned cafeteria, company owned clothing stores, company owned grocery stores. I would allow others to set up business in the company town, but expect the company to dominate that one town.

Your “company town” description reminds me of the Presidio of San Francisco, which was a U.S. Army base near the south end of the Golden Gate Bridge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidio_of_San_Francisco

However, your “company town” description also reminds me of the University of California, Davis, which is located in the City of Davis, California. The University is under the control of a state-authorized corporation named The Regents of the University of California.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regents_o … California

Perhaps we could agree on this:

A state-sponsored terrestrial university establishes a College of Sociocultural Systems Engineering. The university builds an auxiliary campus on Mars (i.e., a company town). Young, strong, healthy people enroll in the College and go to Mars. They live in dormitories provided by the University. They participate in the design, construction, testing and operation of sociocultural systems and their supporting ecosystems (i.e., complete Martian settlements) The University sells the completed settlements to groups of Martian settlers. The university builds dozens of settlements, continuously improving their settlement designs. The university, being state-sponsored, has the power to employ police, who enforce national laws and university regulations (the U.C. Regents have this power).

And maybe the University of Central Florida would consider establishing a College of Sociocultural Systems Engineering. That university is close to the Kennedy Space Center.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universit … al_Florida

Last edited by Scott Beach (2017-04-06 17:01:15)

IanM · 2017-04-06 17:42:18

louis wrote:

We've been here before - the East India Company and Hudson Bay Company acted as governments in effect although they were commercial outfits.

This, and while I do respect Scott's concern of exploitation the presumption would be that the Board of Directors of the company would maintain a rather laissez-faire view on the day-to-day operations of the planet other than appointing the President until the planet gets big enough for elections, and mostly if not entirely deferring to the elected Government.

louis · 2017-04-07 05:00:50

I actually think Universities are a good and likely model for how Mars will be run - at least in its early stages. Entry to university campuses in the US (and most countries) is strictly controlled and their internal working is actually very disciplined, however dishevelled the students may appear. It's knowledge and skills based community. There is very little crime or social disorder within the campus but people are (or have been until quite recently) relatively free to express their opinions. People however cannot just switch from one skills base (faculty) to another at will.

There are worse things a nascent Mars community could resemble than a US University campus.

Scott Beach wrote:

RobertDyck wrote:
Are you not familiar with a "company town"? That's a town established by one company, where the one company provides most or all services. It's a monopoly. I didn't invest it. For corporate government, I'm suggesting the corporation establish one and only one settlement. That one settlement will be a company town. That means company own dormitory for its employees, company owned cafeteria, company owned clothing stores, company owned grocery stores. I would allow others to set up business in the company town, but expect the company to dominate that one town.
Your “company town” description reminds me of the Presidio of San Francisco, which was a U.S. Army base near the south end of the Golden Gate Bridge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidio_of_San_Francisco
However, your “company town” description also reminds me of the University of California, Davis, which is located in the City of Davis, California. The University is under the control of a state-authorized corporation named The Regents of the University of California.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regents_o … California
Perhaps we could agree on this:
A state-sponsored terrestrial university establishes a College of Sociocultural Systems Engineering. The university builds an auxiliary campus on Mars (i.e., a company town). Young, strong, healthy people enroll in the College and go to Mars. They live in dormitories provided by the University. They participate in the design, construction, testing and operation of sociocultural systems and their supporting ecosystems (i.e., complete Martian settlements) The University sells the completed settlements to groups of Martian settlers. The university builds dozens of settlements, continuously improving their settlement designs. The university, being state-sponsored, has the power to employ police, who enforce national laws and university regulations (the U.C. Regents have this power).
And maybe the University of Central Florida would consider establishing a College of Sociocultural Systems Engineering. That university is close to the Kennedy Space Center.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universit … al_Florida

louis · 2017-04-07 05:03:09

I would envisage a gradual evolution. To begin with the company - let's say Space X and its CEO Musk - would have very extensive involvement in how the planet was run. But gradually as the number of permanent or semi-permanent residents on Mars increases, they will have more and more involvement in how things proceed.

IanM wrote:

louis wrote:
We've been here before - the East India Company and Hudson Bay Company acted as governments in effect although they were commercial outfits.
This, and while I do respect Scott's concern of exploitation the presumption would be that the Board of Directors of the company would maintain a rather laissez-faire view on the day-to-day operations of the planet other than appointing the President until the planet gets big enough for elections, and mostly if not entirely deferring to the elected Government.

Scott Beach · 2017-04-07 07:00:24

louis wrote:

I actually think Universities are a good and likely model for how Mars will be run - at least in its early stages. Entry to university campuses in the US (and most countries) is strictly controlled and their internal working is actually very disciplined, however dishevelled the students may appear. It's knowledge and skills based community. There is very little crime or social disorder within the campus but people are (or have been until quite recently) relatively free to express their opinions. People however cannot just switch from one skills base (faculty) to another at will.
There are worse things a nascent Mars community could resemble than a US University campus.

About the University of Central Florida:

The “University of Central Florida Board of Trustees, Third Amended and Restated Bylaws” provide that the University of Central Florida Board of Trustees is a “public body corporate”.

“The University of Central Florida Board of Trustees is vested by law with all the powers and authority to administer the University of Central Florida in accordance with Article IX, Section 7 of the Florida Constitution, the laws of the State of Florida and with rules and policies of the Florida Board of Governors.”

https://web.archive.org/web/20100601160 … dfinal.pdf

The term “body corporate” is an old way of saying “corporation”.

http://www.businessdictionary.com/defin … orate.html

I believe that the University of Central Florida could establish a campus on Mars without violating the terms of the Outer Space Treaty. The University just needs to refrain from making any claim of sovereignty over Mars or any portion of Mars.

When people graduate from the University and found their own settlement they can deal with the politics and complexity of declaring sovereignty over their settlement and obtaining international recognition.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#201 2017-04-01 16:57:50

Re: Mapping a way forward

#202 2017-04-01 17:22:52

Re: Mapping a way forward

#203 2017-04-01 17:49:01

Re: Mapping a way forward

#204 2017-04-01 19:00:59

Re: Mapping a way forward

#205 2017-04-01 20:55:09

Re: Mapping a way forward

#206 2017-04-02 00:14:35

Re: Mapping a way forward

#207 2017-04-02 15:38:42

Re: Mapping a way forward

#208 2017-04-02 15:54:41

Re: Mapping a way forward

#209 2017-04-03 15:09:39

Re: Mapping a way forward

#210 2017-04-03 18:26:41

Re: Mapping a way forward

#211 2017-04-03 20:06:37

Re: Mapping a way forward

#212 2017-04-04 07:04:39

Re: Mapping a way forward

#213 2017-04-05 17:32:55

Re: Mapping a way forward

#214 2017-04-06 00:09:30

Re: Mapping a way forward

#215 2017-04-06 08:01:07

Re: Mapping a way forward

#216 2017-04-06 08:31:19

Re: Mapping a way forward

#217 2017-04-06 08:37:02

Re: Mapping a way forward

#218 2017-04-06 09:05:21

Re: Mapping a way forward

#219 2017-04-06 13:02:59

Re: Mapping a way forward

#220 2017-04-06 16:13:44

Re: Mapping a way forward

#221 2017-04-06 16:54:17

Re: Mapping a way forward

#222 2017-04-06 17:42:18

Re: Mapping a way forward

#223 2017-04-07 05:00:50

Re: Mapping a way forward

#224 2017-04-07 05:03:09

Re: Mapping a way forward

#225 2017-04-07 07:00:24

Re: Mapping a way forward

Board footer