Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2007-10-04 17:10:46

Simple. Too much American tax payer money would go out of the country to buy Ariane rockets. For the US Congress, spending money which ultimately returns to the American economy is one thing, but spending money that stays in France/Italy/England is another.

But for some reason Outsourcing NASA to India is fine

Offshoring NASA Projects To India
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/05/21/195004.php

To add insult to injury, President Bush has recently agreed to have India launch two American lunar mapping instruments from their space hub in Bangalore in 2008 rather than having it done from NASA's facilities in Florida!

cIclops · 2007-10-07 01:12:23

This whole notion that when NASA fly instruments on other agency spacecraft it is outsourcing is nonsense. It is international cooperation. Give NASA more funding and they can fly more spacecraft to carry those instruments. Until then it is a very cost effective way to do science.

No it is NOT outsourcing, no jobs are lost becase without the cooperation of other agencies those instruments would not be built and jobs would be lost.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2007-10-07 02:38:11

This topic was created by cIclops after protesting from Spacenut and himself after a discussion I had with GCNR went a bit off-topic. Ok before I get accused of xenophobia let me expalin why I've got this bone to pick with outsourcing

Offshoring was the business venture of the 80s, sometimes it works, it cuts costs, brings trade to other countries. Outsourcing can help us improve relations foreigners and with third world nations, improves supplier and it helps make things cheaper for the American taxpayer.

NASA outsourcing should only be done if the USA their is political and tech benefit or if has something to gain from it.

Cassini-Huygens was jointly done with the ESA this could be considered outsourcing. Perhaps it could have been a great pure NASA mission made in America. However costs started to over-run and a joint venture with the Europeans was the right thing to do. Technologically Europeans are near the same level of research as Americans, they build good cars like the Merc, the French make Airbus and with a history of mission like InfraredObservatory and Giotto the Europeans had a lot to offer NASA with Huygens as well as ESA contributing over half a billion dollars to the mission.

Russian experience could be extremely useful for NASA, as long as Putin does not use it for political leverage over the USA. They built some fantastic launchers, technologically the Russians were ahead of the US in many areas until the late 60s. Part of co-operation with the Soviets went along side with the political quest for peace between two nations, keeping arms out of space as seen during the Apollo-Soyuz dock. They sent unmanned missions to return samples from the Moon and had huge experience with the study of Venus. Russians may be our political rivals, but the are no longer the looming threat as seen during the days of the USSR's military might. They also still hold a number of achievements over NASA such as Heavy-Lift capability at a time when NASA had none and duration records with their cosmonauts for the longest continuous human presence in space. Soyuz has been a very useful workhorse for keeping the ISS afloat and keeping the US manned presence in space at a time when NASA was in crisis.

I could also foresee outsourcing some types of mission to Japan (who are politically friendly with us and have good knowledge of tech/robotics) and for this to be a credit to NASA.

Problems with outsourcing include that it damages the labor market result in the loss of space industry jobs. Very often in outsourcing we can receive services which an easily be deemed to be of lower quality. Politically
India has been something of a rival, look at how they dragged their feet on Burma just like the Chinese and Russians. Kissinger used to refer to India as "Commie Stooges", techwise they are way behind the United States
The US space industry should also have the social responsibility to have a program that benefits the US and create jobs for America. If Bush tries to outsource NASA to India, it will basically be the end of NASA, because congress will refuse fund NASA if it not being both managed and the equipment is being send into space is not built inside the United States. Outsourced managers can view the lower quality acceptable to meet the business needs at the right price. The space program is also a job creation program along with developing new technologies and the stated goal of what the US and want it desires to do and not what India or Egypt or Vietnam or whatever wants to do in space.

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-10-07 08:22:50

Making NASA a jobs program is what prevent it from getting anything accomplished. If I has NASA's money, I could easily make a jobs program out of it. I'd hire a bunch of engineers and get them to design space colonies and starships, they's make blue prints and perspective drawings, do all the calculations and presentations, then when they're done, I'd tell them to go make some more. I'd hire thousands of engineers, then I'd go on a lecture curcuit, go to high schools and colleges and have seminars, touring the whole country. I'd make piles and piles of papers with design studies, consult with scientists and go on and on and on. I'd hire alot of people successfully, and they'd all have well paying jobs, just doing what I'd mentioned, but not a thing would get built. You'd see If I started building stuff, I wouldn't need to hire as many engineers to do design studies.

If you actually want to get something built, you'd need concern yourself with efficiency, that means getting the most for your money, if you hire the most people that you possibly can, you are not getting the most for your money, you are getting the most jobs for your money, but anything that cuts down on the labor reduces the number of jobs you'd be creating, and if you buy raw materials to build your spaceships out of, that's less money which would otherwise go towards paying someone's salary.

EuroLauncher · 2007-10-09 01:50:04

That whole India thing was about George Walker Bush courting India, it was carrot-and-stick style politics. The courting, sending Griffin over, siging the reactor deals etc was done particularly in relation to them signing that Non-Proliferation thing. However the Donkey Ate the Carrot and the NPT is dead now. India is still committed to buying fuel from Tehran and it may not be long before the Iranians test a Nuke like the N.Koreans did.

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-10-09 13:07:46

That whole India thing was about George Walker Bush courting India, it was carrot-and-stick style politics. The courting, sending Griffin over, siging the reactor deals etc was done particularly in relation to them signing that Non-Proliferation thing. However the Donkey Ate the Carrot and the NPT is dead now. India is still committed to buying fuel from Tehran and it may not be long before the Iranians test a Nuke like the N.Koreans did.

And the Muslims plant a bomb in India and kill hundreds of Hindu civilians. How stupid do you think the Indians are. Most of the Indians that still want to be neutral are a coalition of Socialists and Muslims. The Hindu Indians realize they have a common interest with the United States in fighting terrorists. The Communists who in principle hate the United States, and secretly want to overthrow India's democracy and replace it with a dictatorship probably want to remain "neutral" and buy stuff from Iran, no matter how many Indians they kill, they just look the other way and ignore that for as long as possible.

Someday the "Islamic monster" will bite the Russians on the butt also.

EuroLauncher · 2007-10-15 05:15:29

Your view of Muslim terrorism, is extremely simplistic and very wrong. The Communists were fighting Muslim terrorists long before Bush 43 came along. Hundreds of US servicemen died from radical Muslims at the marine barracks and yet Reagan was indeed the fool for not responding to Iranians that attack, instead he ordered US Marines to run home with their tail between their legs. You can read his archived speeches, Reagan dropped the ball on the radical Islamic issue because he hated the Soviets more. US support for insurgents continued starting with funding from the US, shipping through Saudi and finally into the front supporting the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan. Clinton also had a bleeding heart for the Muslims, Clinton also can be blamed for not taking the threats of Islamic terrorism seriously enough and getting all cosy with Arafat at the Whitehouse. Tom do you oppose Musharraf because did you know right now he's one of the few friends the US has in the Middle East ? Musharraf is helping the US on this war on terror, unlike India (a nation described by Nixon as commie stooges). India hasn't been a great ally, India which has contributed nothing to America's war in Iraq and India never helped with Afghanistan. There are many Hindu crazies and thier roots trace back to the partition 60 years ago. India remembers when it was all just one country. Musharraf has made mistakes but he's a key ally, he destroyed radical islamic schools and he opposes islamic extremism. Pakistan is a free nation with a pro-American leader. If he falls, then there is a chance nuclear weapons will fall into the hands of the kamikaze Islamics.

I'm no fan of Communism, I think its got a terrible record on freedom and its a deeply flawed political system - but Reagan supporting Islamics against the commies was a mistake, Clinton also dropped the ball.

and Tom I've seen some of your posts and some of them are really rightwing or biased, your negative attitude is very often irrational
I think you might put into your signature "I hate the Russian race and I hate commies" Practicing racism is however unacceptable and generally against the law.

-> Back to this outsourcing business, I think NASA will try to avoid it but if the missions get too costly there's nothing NASA can do to prevent it from happening. If it can't be homegrown and NASA wants to cut costs then contracts will go to Europe, India, Russia...wherever. With Shuttle soon retiring NASA may have to rely solely on Russian ships, effectively having to buy trips into space. Did you know that one of the reasons the Lockheed Martin Atlas rockets are flying so well is the rocket uses the RD180 design made by some commie Ukrainians and Russians.

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-10-15 07:41:38

Your view of Muslim terrorism, is extremely simplistic and very wrong. The Communists were fighting Muslim terrorists long before Bush 43 came along.

You mean by putting AK47s in their hands? Isn't it amazing how those Muslim terrorists always seem to end up with Russian weapons? Now tell me, how does the AK47 make the journey from the Russian factory into the hands of the screaming fanatical muslim terrorist? I thought Lenin said that "Religion was the Opiates of the People", I guess the Russian people are a bunch of hippocrites. Also we helped the Russians fight off the Germans, who were trying to exterminate them, and how do they repay us, by arming fanatical terrorists who are trying to kill us. The United States has never been at war with Russia, so why does Russia spend so much energy trying to hurt us? Why do they point missiles at the United States and publicly threaten to kill millions of our citizens? Why all the hostility, there is no logical reason for it? The breakup of the Soviet Union? It was a voluntary union and all the member states including Russia decided that they no longer wanted to be a part of it, and now they have this big chip on their shoulder and no other ex-Soviet state has ever regretted leaving the USSR, only the Russians. Could it be that while the Russians were extolling the virtues of their Soviet Constitution and proclaiming that the Soviet Union was a voluntary union of member states, while at the same time decrying "American Imperialism" that they were practising Imperialism also? The Russians clearly miss having other nations in their thrall, I have some friends who have relatives in the Ukraine, and those people clearly do not want to return to the Russian Empire in whatever form the Russians may choose to call it.

Hundreds of US servicemen died from radical Muslims at the marine barracks and yet Reagan was indeed the fool for not responding to Iranians that attack, instead he ordered US Marines to run home with their tail between their legs. You can read his archived speeches, Reagan dropped the ball on the radical Islamic issue because he hated the Soviets more.

Perhaps you've heard that Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat in the time of FDR. You can assume that Reagan was just following FDRs example by helping one of America's enemies fight the other, rather than let one enemy conquer the other and make for a larger enemy against us.
FRD thought Hitler was the greater Enemy, and the Russians repaid our generosity by starting the Cold War.

US support for insurgents continued starting with funding from the US, shipping through Saudi and finally into the front supporting the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan.

That's the problem with you folks, you offer nothing but criticism and no solutions. You never once offered your own solution on how to fight the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, would you have put even more US troops in harms way and risk open conflict with the Soviet Union and all of its missiles. The Mujaheddin were willing to fight the Soviets, and so we put weapons in their hands, not all of them were terrorists, some of them were memebers of the Norhtern Alliance, and like everyone, we solve one problem at a time rather than waiting for the perfect solution that solves everything.

Clinton also had a bleeding heart for the Muslims, Clinton also can be blamed for not taking the threats of Islamic terrorism seriously enough and getting all cosy with Arafat at the Whitehouse. Tom do you oppose Musharraf because did you know right now he's one of the few friends the US has in the Middle East? Musharraf is helping the US on this war on terror, unlike India (a nation described by Nixon as commie stooges).

Nixon is dead, he hasn't been to India lately, the Communists are out of power, and never have been in power in fact, they have been coalition allies in the government of India, but they have never gotten their wish, which was to have a political monopoly of being the only legal party and rigging all the elections. India, since its independence has been a functioning multi-party democracy, which is more than can be said of either China or Russia. India is also the largest Democracy, and may eventually be leader of the Free World due to its high population and fast growth. India is abandoning its neutrality along with its third world status and the communists in its government are steamed.

India hasn't been a great ally, India which has contributed nothing to America's war in Iraq and India never helped with Afghanistan.

I don't care about where India's been, I care about where it is going. It is interesting how you seem to want to turn democracy against democracy, so the dictators can divide and conquer.

There are many Hindu crazies and thier roots trace back to the partition 60 years ago. India remembers when it was all just one country.

I don't remember any Hindu attacks against Americans or Jews, I don't care if they are crazy, just so long as they don't hurt anybody.

Musharraf has made mistakes but he's a key ally, he destroyed radical islamic schools and he opposes islamic extremism. Pakistan is a free nation with a pro-American leader. If he falls, then there is a chance nuclear weapons will fall into the hands of the kamikaze Islamics.

Musharraf won't live forever, if the Pakistanis are such a danger that they would elect Muslim Radicals, then the problem is with the Pakistanis, having a dictator that keeps them under control is only a temporary solution. Its all about problems with Muslims supporting or joining terrorists isn't it.

I'm no fan of Communism, I think its got a terrible record on freedom and its a deeply flawed political system - but Reagan supporting Islamics against the commies was a mistake, Clinton also dropped the ball.
and Tom I've seen some of your posts and some of them are really rightwing or biased, your negative attitude is very often irrational
I think you might put into your signature "I hate the Russian race and I hate commies" Practicing racism is however unacceptable and generally against the law.

Technically racism is not a crime in the United States, only discrimination is, holding opinions is an expression of free speech. I'd hate to reach a point where the Unted States ends up prosecuting "Thought Criminals" for thinking the wrong thoughts. I deny the charge of racism however as I am the same race as the Russians which is white caucasian.

What's this? You've "invented" a race?
I think white people should be allowed to criticise white people. One has to ask though, why do the Russians keep on screwing up their country?
Why can't they get democracy right? Why do they always put dictators in power? Most other white European Christian-based countries have managed to get democracy right, what makes the Russians so different? Many Europeans hold the United States to European standards, so I'm just doing the same thing with Russia, why do the Russians get a pass on human rights abuses in their own country, while the Europeans criticise the US executing convicted criminals. The Russians are like the "barbarians with the clubs" when it comes to European civilization, they are "crude and rude", I call pointing nuclear missiles at people and publicly threatening to blow up their cities unless they lower their defenses both crude and rude. I'm sure your mother may have told you that its impolite to point, but apparently its part of old Russian custom to point "guns" at people's heads as a form of greeting. Russians are both white and European, but they are an embarrassment to more civilized members of their race. When Russians start behaving themselves and start acting like civilized gentlemen, that will be the first time.

-> Back to this outsourcing business, I think NASA will try to avoid it but if the missions get too costly there's nothing NASA can do to prevent it from happening. If it can't be homegrown and NASA wants to cut costs then contracts will go to Europe, India, Russia...wherever. With Shuttle soon retiring NASA may have to rely solely on Russian ships, effectively having to buy trips into space. Did you know that one of the reasons the Lockheed Martin Atlas rockets are flying so well is the rocket uses the RD180 design made by some commie Ukrainians and Russians.

It is pathetic how so many people can't resist the urge to get their digs into the United States. Makes some people feel good as opposed to tackling some people who really threaten your freedoms.

If we have a foreign partner who wants to contribute to the mission.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2007-10-21 09:26:38

Guys stop dragging the thread off-topic. let's stick to the Outsourcing NASA subject and Outsource science subject

Here's more on this business

http://lalitkjha.com/index.php?page=hin … icle_num=5
An American geologist, selected by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) as an investigator for Chandrayaan-I, has said she was excited and honoured to be part of the historic lunar mission, which aims to "unlock the mysteries" of the moon.

LISA: A proposed joint ESA-NASA gravitational-wave mission
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001gwvs.conf..115.

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/31480
Work begins on Chinese-US neutrino experiment. Work has begun on a new experiment in China to study the ubiquitous and ultra-inert sub-atomic particles known as neutrinos. The aim of the $32m experiment, which is a joint effort between physicists from China and the US, is to improve the measurement of one of the parameters of “neutrino oscillation”. Being built in hills close to a nuclear power plant in Daya Bay, the experiment is set to collect its first data in 2011.

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-10-22 08:20:55

Guys stop dragging the thread off-topic. let's stick to the Outsourcing NASA subject and Outsource science subject

Yeah, it always comes after someone calls me biased and I defend myself and tell them they are wrong. Oh never mind.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2007-11-23 03:57:56

India can be an equal partner in space: Boeing
http://sify.com/finance/fullstory.php?id=14536068

http://www.satellitetoday.com/st/headlines/19560.html
U.S. Representatives Raise Issue With NASA Contract For SSTL
“We are concerned that NASA funding is going directly to a foreign company with a record of aiding the Chinese military expansion into space,” the letter said.

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-11-23 16:23:18

First they say we're oppressing and exploiting them, then they say we're giving them too many jobs. I say again the space program is not a jobs program, we don't have enough money to create jobs, congress to too stingy for that anyway. Whenever they want to cut money, its always NASA or the Military, never Social Security, or highways or whatever, they always raise taxes for those. Either we do something in space of we create alot of "busy work" jobs. NASA has plenty of "Busy Work" jobs, that's why things are so expensive.

Martian Republic · 2007-11-24 09:39:57

First they say we're oppressing and exploiting them, then they say we're giving them too many jobs. I say again the space program is not a jobs program, we don't have enough money to create jobs, congress to too stingy for that anyway. Whenever they want to cut money, its always NASA or the Military, never Social Security, or highways or whatever, they always raise taxes for those. Either we do something in space of we create alot of "busy work" jobs. NASA has plenty of "Busy Work" jobs, that's why things are so expensive.

NASA sure is a jobs program, just like government financing of the roads system is a jobs program. Building city sewers and water system is also a jobs program. We also use those things after they been built, which is the best kind of jobs programs to have. So our jobs programs have two primary purposes:

1. To provide good paying jobs to the American People. NASA is a good way to use some of our surplus manufacturing in the car and use it to build the infrastructures in space that we need built, while maintaining those manufacturing jobs for Americans. That why I am against sport arenas being built by the city government for private benefit. There generating poor wages that are part time work and there being subsidized by the government to do that.

2. To build things, that we need to have built and to maintain a modern society. Like infrastructure both down here and in space at the same time.

So you would Wal-Martize NASA? That cheaper is better and that we should out source it. Where you drive the wages down or ship those jobs overseas, basically what there doing. These policies are bankrupting the United States and will ultimately destroy the United States. If this is what we are doing, then I am not interested in it now or ever.

Whether you like it or not, we need engineers to design those space ship or colonies on Mars. But, we also need to have a commitment to build those things and not just talk about it or have seminars about what we would like to have. We need to have a clear National Goal to do those things and not just talk about it. I have talked about building a City on Mars before and it will cost trillions of dollars to do it too. If we aren't going to create millions of jobs in the process, then why spend the money in trying to do it. Whether you like it or not, NASA has to be a jobs program and has to return some of those benefits back to the US Economy or there no reason to do it or for the Government to finance it. The NASA moon mission created 14 dollars for ever 1 dollar invested in it in business activities and technological spins off. If we are paying it, then we need to be the first ones in line for those government contracts to build that space hardware. The ones that finance it are the ones that get the first crack at those good contracts. That the way it works.

Larry,

Martian Republic · 2007-11-24 10:11:28

India can be an equal partner in space: Boeing
http://sify.com/finance/fullstory.php?id=14536068

http://www.satellitetoday.com/st/headlines/19560.html
U.S. Representatives Raise Issue With NASA Contract For SSTL
“We are concerned that NASA funding is going directly to a foreign company with a record of aiding the Chinese military expansion into space,” the letter said.

Actually, I would like to see 2.6 million jobs being created in America, starting with those NASA contracts.

Larry,

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-11-24 14:26:52

Yes, but a liberal might argue that the people who need jobs the most are the people without valuable skills. NASA hires alot of people with valuable skills, but if we want to put a dent in the unemployment rate, we'd have to hire unskilled people, give each one a desk, plenty of paper, and lots of pencils to scribble with, they punch in at 9:00, punch out at 5:00 monday through friday getting 14 major holidays off a year and they get paid $15 per hour. At the end of the day, they turn in all their scribblings to the boss and they punch out. Nice job eh? Would you want your government to make a bunch of jobs like that at taxpayers expense? Let them form their own Union in fact, they can go on strike and demand pay raises if they feel they aren't getting paid enough for their scribbling, they can start the United Scribbler Workers of America!

Mars_B4_Moon · 2008-02-07 09:05:28

NASA and India Agreement

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=24669

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2008-03-08 09:54:33

India can be an equal partner in space: Boeing

Angry Boeing Supporters Target McCain
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g8dw … QD8V9AE100

Angry Boeing supporters are vowing revenge against Republican presidential candidate John McCain over Chicago-based Boeing's loss of a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract to the parent company of European plane maker Airbus.
There are other targets for their ire — the Air Force, the defense secretary and even the entire Bush administration.

DonaldSpace · 2008-03-16 07:25:14

Actually, I would like to see 2.6 million jobs being created in America, starting with those NASA contracts.
Larry,

36% of scientists at NASA are Indians: Govt survey

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/36_o … 853178.cms

Martian Republic · 2008-03-16 08:18:20

Actually, I would like to see 2.6 million jobs being created in America, starting with those NASA contracts.
Larry,
36% of scientists at NASA are Indians: Govt survey
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/36_o … 853178.cms

Yes, that part of this out sourcing crap, which I am against. It defeats one of the reason for having your own space program, which is to have good paying jobs for people in your own country. You also ship your expertise over to other countries when it comes to building or engineering things when you use scientist. I have no problem with other countries participating in the space program, but I am not interested in financing it while we dismantle our space program and out source it to them.

Larry,

cIclops · 2008-03-17 02:24:55

The world is increasingly global. First products and now people are moving around the globe seeking markets. This a good thing for everybody. International trade has helped produced the highest level of prosperity ever in history. Withdrawing from world trade and throwing out all those skilled immigrants would wreck the US economy.

SpaceNut · 2008-03-17 06:24:43

Ya got reminded of this when I found out that a New Hampshire native left the state to get that dream job, but that is part of the problem when sending jobs or of importing the talent as the jobs never get to the rest of the country as it should be. The down side to this is the appathy that people have when it comes to space activity as it is seen as a waste of money. If the jobs were there then people would not see it as that way.

Martian Republic · 2008-03-17 21:06:28

Yes, but a liberal might argue that the people who need jobs the most are the people without valuable skills. NASA hires alot of people with valuable skills, but if we want to put a dent in the unemployment rate, we'd have to hire unskilled people, give each one a desk, plenty of paper, and lots of pencils to scribble with, they punch in at 9:00, punch out at 5:00 monday through friday getting 14 major holidays off a year and they get paid $15 per hour. At the end of the day, they turn in all their scribblings to the boss and they punch out. Nice job eh? Would you want your government to make a bunch of jobs like that at taxpayers expense? Let them form their own Union in fact, they can go on strike and demand pay raises if they feel they aren't getting paid enough for their scribbling, they can start the United Scribbler Workers of America!

No, that not how it works at all. You have absolutely no idea how the physical economy run or how it functions.

The way that a physical economy is suppose to be run by a national government like the United States is like this:

1. The Federal Government picks a worthwhile project that needs to be built like subways, levitated super trains, nuclear power plants, build new cities and/or National Space Goals like next generation shuttle and/or lunar bases and/or Mars bases or cities.

2. The Federal Government that get it funds by generating it own credit through it own banking system like Treasury Notes or from a Third National Bank run by the congress or management.

3. Interest rates at simple low interest rates of 1% to 2% long term loans by the Federal Government to finance those projects. These loans will spans a time frame of twenty to thirty year or so to build those projects, because that how long it will take to build those projects that we decided to build and we need built too.

4. Those Scientist, Engineers, Machinist and tool and die people are important, because they are the ones that develop those new technologies and build those machines, fixtures and such.

5. After this prep work been done, then you bring in those un-skilled worker and train them how to run those machines and actually build those things that we want built. So now we have to have a government training program to get those un-skilled laborers trained to master those skills so they can build those things. So now we have a learning curve to bring there standard of living up in a productive sector of the economy.

That how Roosevelt did it when we were in the Great Depression of the thirties. That how those dams were built. That how the Tennessee Valley Authorities was created that electrified that area of the United States. That how the US was salvaged and put back into use to rebuild America and get us ready for World War II which was on the horizon and was imminent.

Larry,

Commodore · 2008-03-17 21:34:06

Still Larry, you can't deny the natural tendency for such projects to devolve into either corporate or union welfare. To combat that tendency, you have to compete with either the image of destroying seniors stock portfolios by slighting the corporations, or taking candy from the union members kids. In other words the Achillies Heel of any legislator.

No, it might not be how the physical economy is suppose to work. But you can't brush it aside either.

Martian Republic · 2008-03-18 18:24:53

Still Larry, you can't deny the natural tendency for such projects to devolve into either corporate or union welfare. To combat that tendency, you have to compete with either the image of destroying seniors stock portfolios by slighting the corporations, or taking candy from the union members kids. In other words the Achillies Heel of any legislator.
No, it might not be how the physical economy is suppose to work. But you can't brush it aside either.

That why I qualified what we wanted to do with those investments. That why those goals were stated so everyone will know what we want to accomplish. Now there will be some companies that will make money, which is perfectly OK, we expect companies to make money on there government contracts. That what there in business for. We expect Union Jobs created also, that was one of the reason for building those project. We expected to create good paying Union Jobs to be create. We expected to be generating hundreds of billions to maybe one trillion dollars of Government credit per year to finance these infrastructural projects. On these infrastructural building projects, I figure that we will be creating between 8 to 12 million new jobs that will be created building those projects. So there going to be a lot of business bidding on those government contracts and a lot of Union Jobs being created in the process of building those infrastructural projects. Actually, we wanted thousand of US Companies bidding on US Government contracts and we wanted millions of Union Jobs created as a result of our activities. We don't really consider that a major problem and would like to do the following things.

I personally would like to see the President sign into law the act to build these things:

1. Sixty to seventy subway system in the major city of the United States.

2. Build and Amtrak passenger train system to every major US City on the Continent of North America. I would like it to be a levitated Rail System that goes at three to four hundred miles an hour.

3. Water projects of NAWAPA, dikes, dames, levies, locks, etc. To promote the development of the water supply inside the United States.

4. Nuclear Power of fission power and the commitment to develop fusion power for future use.

5. Would like to see an economic summit of all the major nation to carry these policies worldwide for the rest of the world and for there benefit too.

6. I would like to see an aggressive space program as a National Space Mission Goal of the United States. Where the United States Would take a fairly long range time frame goal of forty to sixty year or so. Something like build a city on Mars of say 100,000 people or so as our stated goal of what we want to accomplish in that time frame. Now we would have other stated National Space Goals too, but that would be the big one that would be our main prize that we are after. That way everyone would know what we are trying to accomplish and can get on the same page to get the job done.

Larry,

Gregori · 2008-04-04 19:37:34

O Christ NO!! The space program should be used to create jobs and industry in the US. It using US tax payer's money.

What is the point of so called "US" exploration of space if you're trying to rip off your fellow country men just to save a bit of money.

If everything is outsourced, the US will eventually be fucked. It'll will have little or nothing to trade and will get out competed by India, China etc etc

I agree with greater international cooperation in space programs, that more resource can be brought to the table by all the world's nations.

I'd also much prefer if money that is wasted on stealth bombers and millitary occupations was spent on space.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2007-10-04 17:10:46

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#2 2007-10-07 01:12:23

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#3 2007-10-07 02:38:11

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#4 2007-10-07 08:22:50

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#5 2007-10-09 01:50:04

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#6 2007-10-09 13:07:46

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#7 2007-10-15 05:15:29

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#8 2007-10-15 07:41:38

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#9 2007-10-21 09:26:38

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#10 2007-10-22 08:20:55

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#11 2007-11-23 03:57:56

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#12 2007-11-23 16:23:18

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#13 2007-11-24 09:39:57

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#14 2007-11-24 10:11:28

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#15 2007-11-24 14:26:52

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#16 2008-02-07 09:05:28

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#17 2008-03-08 09:54:33

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#18 2008-03-16 07:25:14

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#19 2008-03-16 08:18:20

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#20 2008-03-17 02:24:55

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#21 2008-03-17 06:24:43

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#22 2008-03-17 21:06:28

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#23 2008-03-17 21:34:06

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#24 2008-03-18 18:24:53

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

#25 2008-04-04 19:37:34

Re: Outsourcing US exploration of the Moon/Mars to foreigners.

Board footer