You are not logged in.
Some people think that going to Mars might be a waste of their money. I don't think it is but what should we say about it. I think that that is what got the missions to the Moon stoped along with everybody thinking that we already beat the Russians. I think that everyone should think of what to say in defense of going to Mars when people start to think about taxes and problems here on Earth. There is a conflict between people who want to use taxes to go to Mars and people who want to solve problems here on Earth. How should we respond to these issues. I'm not against going to Mars, but I've become aware of these issues and I don't know what to say about them when I talk about how someday people will go to Mars to others. What should we all say to the people who worry about the costs of all of this so that we can actually go to Mars?
Offline
We should point out the fact how good investment Mars will be for us. And in fact as it is such a good investment, we will not have to tax people to go to Mars, investors will pay for it themselves.
Leifur
Es. [url=http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2776]Private creation and enforcement of law on Mars
Old-Icelandic/ Anarco-Capitalistic system on Mars[/url]
Offline
Do you think that the investors will pay for people who have merit to go to Mars? Also, which investors will pay for it? Will private compainies give money to pay for a Mars Mission? Which corporations will pay for a small crew to go to Mars?
Offline
Actually I beliewe, weather done by private means or by government(s) agency(s) that when we go to Mars it should not be done by a small crew to land, and then return after some flag wafing and impromptu science reaserch. Rather by full scale colonization crew that should put up a self sustaining base.
Those that should go are of course those that are willing to invest their lifes in Mars and the reasearch of it and terraforming project. Mostly I beliewe those that are willing to pay for such a project should go there themselves, or their partners in such investor/terraforming companies. I have no doupt that those that will go will not just be some employees, but full time share holders, although their contribution will maybe mostly be their own labour.
I doupt private companies will give money for such a project, they will want returns eventually, weather that means hard money, or the possibility to settle ther themselves. The companies that will pay for this are those that will be founded for the sole purpose of terraforming and settling by the settlers themselves and their backers.
I hope I have answered most of your quistions on this thread, but as to those remarks on the other thread:
What kinds of people should be on the first mission to Mars? I think it should be people who have the merit to go to Mars and not just the wealthy. I think that it should be the people who know how the spacecraft works and how to pilot it and who are scientists and the people who fly it should be people who have experience flying planes and who have flown in simulators. They should choose people like Nasa choose the people who went to the moon. Those people weren't rich but they were very educated and they had enough merit to do it.
I have no doupt that those who will go will have all those skills, others would just be futile in their efforts, and would certeinly not have an easy time getting backers for their projects. Investors will not back someone that does not know what they are doing. Although I beliewe those that go will have to invest all they have got into it, I doupt they would be rich, but you don´t have to be rich to start a company if you have a good idea. But you can become rich if the idea bears fruit, and I have little doupt that the idea of terraforming Mars is something that will give those that pursue it good returns of their investments of money and labour.
So the basic merit for going to Mars is I beliewe willingness to give Mars and the ideal of making it habitable to humans, your life and lifework.
Leifur
Es. [url=http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2776]Private creation and enforcement of law on Mars
Old-Icelandic/ Anarco-Capitalistic system on Mars[/url]
Offline
Companys sometimes go out of business after a while. Would there be any other terraforming compainies like you described after that? How long would such a company last?
Offline
Some people think that going to Mars might be a waste of their money. I don't think it is but what should we say about it.
That depends greatly on who you're talking to and what their real objection is, which may not be their stated reasons.
For some it stems from a misconception of how much is actually being spent on space. For these folks, simply pointing out that of the US federal budget, NASA's entire cost amounts to roughly 1/2 of one percent. Not bad, considering the wastes that consume far greater amounts.
Related to this is the "but that money would be better used to pay off the national debt" line. An understandable but fallacious understanding of how government works. While it may apply to personal finance, government plays by different rules. No significant amount of savings from cuts will ever be put toward amassed debts. The reason we have a debt in the first place is because government constantly spends money it doesn't have. Even if we borrow all the money for Mars on top of current expenses it's another .5% on the pile. Hardly noteworthy. It may not be enough to convince someone to support humans-to-Mars, but they'll need to find another bogeyman.
More common is the "fix problems down here" argument. Sure, great, let's fix 'em.
When are we done? When can we declare victory and get on with something else? The short answer of course is never. We can either wallow in the misery that will always exist in the world or we can live and try to achieve great things. It doesn't mean we don't care and it doesn't mean we stop trying. But it does mean trying to "fix" things can't be allowed to consume all our efforts.
And if they persist in that argument, tell them they're short-sighted miserable people and leave them alone.
Somewhat less frequent are arguments like "why can't we just send robots?" The two answers are obviously
1) humans are better, and
2) We can't colonize with robots, now can we? :;):
"But people can't live on Mars." Well, no, not without technological assistance. By that standard, and given the physical constitution of the average American, people can't live in Canada either.
As for why we should settle Mars, Bob Zubrin gets into all sorts of frontier analogies of varying relevance, but the shortest answer I can think of is simply because we can. All of human history has been a story of moving into new enviroments and improving ourselves and our standard of living by doing so. Whatever practical benefits one can find for going to Mars, perhaps the most significant is that it's our next step. Do we continue in the tradition of humanity and move outward, or do we halt and slowly die? That's the choice.
That seems worth a piddling shaving of the fed budget, doesn't it? I can think of lesser things to waste tax dollars on.
A whole list actually, but that's another thread...
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Offline
This idea that private companies will somehow be able to take tourists to mars is insane. It will never happen because it will never be profitable. Even if mars were made of gold it's still not profitable.
The money that the US and other countries give in foreign aid is enough. The real problems with third world countries is the lack of population control. People have children that they cannot feed, clothe, and otherwise provide for. In India these extra children are simply pushed out the door to fend for themselves while the parents continue to have more children.
It's a cruel way to look at it but AIDS is preventing starvation in Africa.
No one can fix any of these problems until those people learn to match their population growth with their economic growth.
Offline
If you can get costs down to the point where an average citizen can sell his/her house and buy a one way ticket for the prize will be the turning point where the real colonization will begin. We are still far from that point, but it is not impossible to reach it one day.
I agree tourists won't go beyond the moon for a long time, simply because it would take too long to return.
As to the problems in 3rd world countries, they have at least as much to do with flawed systems of government and lack of good medical care as with no birth control.
Offline
As to the problems in 3rd world countries, they have at least as much to do with flawed systems of government and lack of good medical care as with no birth control.
Birth control is available, they just refuse to use it.
Offline
NASA gets money from the government is not not enough, then it opened up as the Private Sector came in and did jobs NASA could not do.
NASA's budget for financial year (FY) 2020 is $22.6 billion. It represents 0.48% of the $4.7 trillion the United States plans to spend in the fiscal year
Will a future government of Mars tax its citizens, regulate the Mars economy with more rules and then pay back these citizens with stimulus and relief when the economy goes bad?
California inflation relief checks: How the state will send your payment
https://fox40.com/news/california-conne … r-payment/
When Will Californians Receive ‘Inflation Relief' Payments?
https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/nation … s/2990264/
and if Mars has a 'Monkey Pox' type outbreak?
California, Illinois Latest To Declare Monkeypox Health Emergency
https://www.yahoo.com/now/california-il … 52433.html
‘Last Week Tonight’: John Oliver Shares Frustration Over ‘Key Mistakes’ In Managing Monkeypox Outbreak
https://deadline.com/2022/08/last-week- … 235087013/
Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2022-08-08 03:07:16)
Offline