Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

Josh Cryer · 2002-11-14 04:15:25

Therefore capitalism will continue. I win.

Unregulated, ?free market capitalism? doesn't even exist in a form you seem to suggest. When we deregulate essential commodities / natural monoploies, what happens? Hello California.

Just because you're to ignorant to understand what I said doesn't mean it's incoherent.

You were inferring that the free market is the only way to regulate essential commodity consumption. There is simply no justification for this, and history shows that an unregulated monopoly of essential commodities simply becomes an unfair distribution of resources. Prices go up, people suffer, and the system collapses.

The "market inputs" are inputs of information. The interaction of supply and demand in a free market creates the market price. The market price is the only way of matching supply with demand.

Well, these so called market inputs didn't keep California power companies from exploiting everyone by charging out the ass for electricity, when overall capacity of the system wasn't even overloaded! This ?market price,? when it comes to essential commodities, is ridiculous.

One must note that the whole ?catastrophe? was averted by consumers conserving. In the future they arguably won't have to, due to the effiency of technology.

You're projecting, Josh. As far as I can determine, you've got no coherent picture of what you want, just anything that isn't capitalism.

Well, I admit that I fluctuate between anarchism and a less appealing, yet still largely decentralized form of socialism, but that doesn't mean I have no coherent picture of ?what I want.? It's not ?what I want? though. It's a realistic portrayal of resources. Your problem is conflating capitalism with the free market. Arguably, the free market can't even exist within capitalism, since it pretends that competition exists when it doesn't.

So sometimes it's techno-autarky, where everyone does everything for himself, but now it's a mostly capitalist mixed economy with some "essential" resources provided publically.

Capitalist mixed economy? No, that's a form of socialism, damnit! From Webster:

socialism; any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

You're conflating socialism with communism, damnit.

communism; a theory advocating elimination of private property b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed

I prefer anarchism, a form of socialism. (Remember, there are various theories.)

anarchism; a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups

This is the ideal of libertarianism, with the reality of socialism. It's no surprise that anarchism has often been called libertarian socialism.

So under capitalism essential resources are centralized under public control? The government providing food is capitalism?

Wow, just when I thought you couldn't twist any more, you go and say something that convulted. No, I was saying that the only system which we can say is most definitely centralized is capitalism. There are many variations of socialism, but capitalism doesn't have that fortune.

The fact that capitalism is a economy which promots profit, pretty much proves that it's centralized. You can't profit off of magic, you have to have those below you, supporting the overall structure. You can't deny that.

Must you redefine every word in the English language? Your attempt at twisting "starve" was bad enough; pretty soon you'll redefine "if" and "the".

I didn't redefine anything. You clearly misunderstood what I meant. It's no big deal, though. I don't blame you. You're probably annoyed with my unrelenting, yet civil, responses.

And no, I didn't twist the word ?starve.? If I had, you would have almost surely replied with some pathetic critique of my explaination.

It is the nature of socialism. If you've ruled out profit-seeking guided by market prices, the only way it's ever going to be organized is the Essential Resources Planning Commission. The idea that everyone will just do what needs done, on their own, isn't very realistic.

Oh, so your argument is that it's ?not very realistic.? And that's all? The realistic bit, comes when you apply advanced technology to people, then the whole process of managing ones self or a collective of selves is largely hygienic! That's the damn point.

Your position, is almost like the position of some whites before slavery was abolished. ?The idea that a black can handle a gun isn't very realistic.? But the reality of the situation was, ?If a black had a gun he could liberate himself.?

The supply of closed-minded, economically ignorant rants won't dry up. I'm thrilled.

Heh, if I was close-minded I would have stopped talking to you long ago. That's one reason I like this forum. There are so many diverse opinions. I will admit when I am clearly wrong, but since the future is unknowable, no one can say how things will happen. But we can certainly form arguments which can stand up to criticism about how certain variables could or couldn't play out.

Thus is the concept of human nature born.

Other than biological processes, it's impossible to argue that all humans share a psyche in common. Indeed, cultures form the psychology of people; psyches are as diferring as cultures!

I don't think you'll even notice what you've done. You've redefined survival from a matter of life to a matter of lifestyle. But, that [consumers] work for the lifestyle they prefer, and not just survival, was MY point. You've capitulated.

You're actually a testament to how a society can form someone culturally. You can't identify lifestyle preference with survival, despite the fact that most people can't come to grasp with losing everything they have. Consumers are worried about losing their things, not their lives, sure; but the fact that their things are their lives, shows my point. It really shows how pathetic their existances are.

Yes, socialism.

You should go read the definition again... you poor poor man.

Josh Cryer · 2002-11-14 04:21:55

BTW, I don't think we're going off topic. Golconda and Mariner are just having a friendly duel. Had Byron been more precise with his definition of Mariner, we wouldn't be having this. I certainly won't defend strict communism when it comes to space.

clark · 2002-11-14 10:41:03

I understand that anyone who can pay the cost, can come to Golconda. However, Golconda exists because of Ares corp. Ares corp. is interested in mining- that is their business model. The majority of people who will live at Golconda are miners and the people necessary to support the miners. What financial incentive does Ares have in creating a larger base? What is the financial incentive for Ares to allow people to set up business in Golconda that would compete with Golconda? For example, growing food. Ares has complete market control if they are the only ones producing food on Mars, so they can set the price to whatever they want since there is no competition- why would they invite competition? It goes against their own financial interests.

Sure, they may allow anyone who wants to come to mars, to come to Gloconda, but who would come there other than workers of the Ares Corp? Tourists? Okay, who would afford the trip? Well to do rich people- they also would be the only ones capable of taking the time off necessary for a trip and back to mars (6 weeks in either direction at the fastest- plus the actual stay). How many people can take 3+ months off to go to Mars?

Again, those who might emigrate to Mars, what would they do? Only well financed individuals can afford to get to mars- then they have to pay for everything themselves (rules of Golconda)- so where are they going to get the continued finances to keep living on Mars, or to build onto the existing base? Any profit that one individual might realize in Golconda is lost since Ares Corp provides all the air, water, and power- they simply raise the rates, and the would be Martian entrapanuers are held in virtual slavery since they cant make enough money to really get ahead.

Who would these people sell to? The few miners that exist? Ares has a financial incentive to reduce this population, which reduces the size of the market for everyone else. Are they going to sell to the Mormons? What? They get everything they need from earth, and their only interested in their religion and expansion- Ares would be better suited to meet their needs, and would probably squash any competition to once again maintain a monopoly- why share the market with others if you don't have to? Or perhaps they might sell to Mariners; but then again, they are self-funded and probably have the skill sets to develop their own "superior" way.

Ares has a financial incentive not to allow competition in any form. Why allow others to make a profit if Ares can do it itself? Sure, maybe doctors or scientists who want to come to mars might get grants to support them on Mars- or even charge people there to live- but the basic necessities will always be maintained by Ares Corp to ensure that they maintain dominance over Golconda and eek out maximum profit.

If your job is a scientist or a doctor, or even a whore, you are producing nothing but a service- you are exchanging your labor for the necessities of life on mars- you become in a sense a slave because you will always be dependant upon Ares corp. If you have alternatives to achieve your basic needs, then Ares Corp no longer has the advantage of control- it must compete- again, why would it want to do that? It could no longer dictate price, which is really dictating profit- again, why would they give that up by allowing others to provide for their own food and water or air?

Golconda is a warehouse for people who are mining- and "customers". The customers help subsidize the cost of the miners- Ares Corp has to put the people some where- Ares Corp is responsible for making available the necessities that will enable the workforce to do their job- it doesn't make financial sense to allow competition in.

I'm sure Ares Corp wouldn't object to people growing their own food, or making their own air and water- but then, they can always charge extra for the chemicals or machinery necessary to set that up- they price out the competition by making the entrance fee so absurdly high as to make the risk-benefit cost worthless.

What will people do in Golconda that are not working for Ares Corp? Scientists- but then they are just paying customers, not producing anything really. Whores? More customers. Tourists? The holy grail of customers.

The cost of living in space will be expensive in comparison to what it would cost to live on Earth, anywhere (except the bottom of the ocean perhaps). All three bases are elitists- Aj, you made some side comment about eastern European immigrants or what not, I nearly laughed- The Mormon base is elitist based on belief. The mariner base is elitist based on some arbitrary ability value- and Golconda is elitist in that the only people who can get there will be those who can afford the cost of travel and living there- third worlders are not part of that group- most of humanity is not in this group, and never will be. The rich- those with the financial backing- those with access to venture capital- everyone else is excluded.

Also, please note that I am not calling you a liar- just misguided. You have been entertaining as of late, and you seem to have a grasp of some economics, so I am a bit surprised that you can't see the sense in what I am discussing.

Bill White · 2002-11-14 11:27:26

This has gone way off topic.
Here's a scary, somewhat on-topic thought:
A Scientologist colony

Scientologists couldn't raise the money. Mormons could.

Also, there are 5 or 6 Mormon senators - a tipping point in the US Senate.

Suppose Senator Hatch [R - Utah] decided to trade support for selected judicial appointments (or other non-essential Bush agenda items) for $25 billion in federal aid to fund Mars - - wouldn't it fly through Congress with full Administration support?

Recall the havoc Senator Jeffords caused 2 years ago when he switched affiliations. I am not saying 5 Mormon Senators will become Democratic (that will NOT happen) - - > they just threaten to vote with the Democrats on select issues UNLESS the needed billions are given to do Mars. This is done in back rooms well below the radar of the popular press.

Question: Would funding a Mars colony help Mormons persuade Americans they are not anti-science and thereby possibly win converts in competition with anti-Darwin Pentecostals and evangelicals? How many religions claim to be "forward" looking rather than "backward" looking on issues of science?

Question #2 Recall our making babies thread. If the Mormons make Martian babies as fast as is safely possible (I agree with clark about the need to husband resources) and if left alone for 100 - 150 years they would "own" the planet no matter what the United Nations might say.

Question #3: If Salt Lake City funded a colony does anyone doubt the Vatican would follow suit? Sounds like a possible new fangled space race - a "kinder and gentler" space race. . .

Bill White · 2002-11-14 11:39:56

Sure the Mormons could try to compete, but the Ares has a built in time advantage and probably the most valuable mineral rights- which means they can always send their own miners in if the Mormons get uppity (not that they would since they [Mormons] depend on the revenue from Ares in order to maintain their primary goal, continual expansion to allow constant and unmanaged breeding)
Of course, maybe I am missing something; I have yet to understand what all these Mormons are doing, other than breeding. So a world full of people peopling an empty world, sounds hollow and meaningless to me- but, I guess life must have a purpose, so why not that, eh.

If Salt Lake leaders were clever, they would not allow Ares to gain the time advantage you speak of and would seek to structure the initial landings to assure their own mineral rights. Byron's scenario need not begin the way he proposed.

I am not Mormon myself, but my reading suggests many Mormons find considerable meaning in having descendants. Recall the Mormon obsession with genealogy. Try Harold Bloom's "The American Religion" for an introduction to Mormonism from the perspective of an insightful agnostic Jew - who also happens to be America's greatest living literary critic.

Josh Cryer · 2002-11-14 13:07:23

clark, how is what you said about Ares Corp any different than what I said?

I find that we're agreeing a lot lately (I only respond when I don't agree, you know- your comments about intellectual property, for example, were legit to me).

clark · 2002-11-14 13:09:15

True, the scenerio does not have to begin as Byron proposes, however, I am merely discussing his proposal as is- throwing in my own variables will only side track this particular thread.

I think Byron did an exemplary job of presenting three elitist versions of Mars.

All are based on a particular idealogy, and all are equally exsclusive in their own particular way.

Skill, belief, or resources- choose your poision.

clark · 2002-11-14 13:22:10

I said it better.

I think we have always agreed on a lot of issues, I tend to play devils advocate for the sake of testing ideas. We will continue to agree becuase we both seem to be pretty rational, however, I just don't have the same level of optimism, or trust, that you have- I think that ultimetly influences how we perceive problems and their solutions. Quite complimentary, so we both win.

I also have tried to "tone it down" a bit- I think I was letting my self appointed role lead me astray.

Live and learn. Maybe others can do the same...

Byron · 2002-11-14 13:43:17

clark:

I understand that anyone who can pay the cost, can come to Golconda. However, Golconda exists because of Ares corp. Ares corp. is interested in mining- that is their business model. The majority of people who will live at Golconda are miners and the people necessary to support the miners. What financial incentive does Ares have in creating a larger base? What is the financial incentive for Ares to allow people to set up business in Golconda that would compete with Golconda? For example, growing food. Ares has complete market control if they are the only ones producing food on Mars, so they can set the price to whatever they want since there is no competition- why would they invite competition? It goes against their own financial interests.

Clark, you've made some good points about Ares/Golconda in your posts in your thread, and if Ares Corp does indeed have the mindset as you describe, yes, then the scenario you have described would come to pass.

However - what if Ares Corp was a different sort of company, one in which immediate profit is not an immediate goal, but long-term survivability and growth is? What if Ares was founded mainly by the Japanese, who give the term long-term planning new meaning? In that case, then Ares Corp would actually encourage competition...just not in the things they came to Mars for in the first place, which is to extract valuable minerals, and perhaps the space liners that ply back and forth between Mars and Earth (to control distribution). What if Ares Corp has major plans to mine the asteroids, but they need to use Mars as a "staging ground" (the .38g being quite attractive in respect to getting needed people and supplies out into space, as opposed to doing all that from Earth) ? In that respect, wouldn't it behoove Ares to focus only on the mining, and actually make it easier for the frontier-seekers to come to Golconda and set up shop, so to speak? (such as financing the passage to Mars on one of their ships and the like)

The more people that come to Mars, the incremental costs of producing the necessities of human life would fall, and it would be a win-win situation for everyone. Once Golconda became large enough to produce a surplus of food and other supplies, such as clothing, Ares could then begin shipping people out to the asteroids, taking advantage of an effecient marketplace of food production and the like to keep the asteroid miners supplied.

Also, one can look at the Ares Corp's attempt to make a profit on Mars in the same way one can look at America in the 19th Century, when companies were building railroads. When a single railroad was completed at great expense, people saw that it was a profit-producer, and guess what? There was a stampede of companies building railroads. If Ares ran a 'tight ship' so to speak, controlling all aspects of life on Mars to make the most profit, there would be other firms coming in right behind Areas, all setting up their little mining camps all over Mars. You wouldn't have a big Golconda located in the Sharonov Crater, but a whole bunch of little ones all over Mars.

Would it not be smarter for Ares Corp to encourage people to come and settle at their settlement, perhaps even subsidizing the cost in the early going to make it a bit more reasonable to carry out a decent lifestyle within their city in order to secure Ares' place on Mars as a Martian "superpower"? I also think that the both the Mariner settlement and the Land of Mormon would attempt to work with Ares and the people in Golconda in order to generate trade and construct a global economy based on free trade...as it would again be a win-win situation for everyone. The Mormons specialize in building cheap habs that can be set up almost anywhere. They sell them to the folks at Golconda. The folks at Golconda sell the Mormons their extra food. The Mariners sell specialized technology to the folks at Ares, as it's a whole lot cheaper to buy home-grown machinery than it is to haul them all the way from Earth. A system of interdependence is created on Mars, rather than each settlement relying heavily on Earth for much of their needs. The costs of being on Mars begin to fall for nearly everyone that lives there.

A lot of this has to do with economies of scale...for example, like in the early days of the 20th century, there were many car companies, each of them making automobiles..but they were all very expensive...and sales were too low to justify mass production. When Ford came along, he realized that in order for the automobile to be profitable, they had to be produced on a mass scale, and made much cheaper. He spent a great deal of money on building new-style assembly lines and developing new technology, and he then turned around and sought out the best possible workers by paying above-board wages and making sure they were well-provided for. Before long, all the little car companies were dropping like flies as his Ford Model T became by far the cheapest car on the market. As more people could afford them, the more he could produce, and the more he could produce, the per unit cost continued to fall, which only generated more sales.

This is why there are only 3 car companies in the U.S....all of them behemoths. When it comes to expensive projects / high technology, it's just cheaper to do things in a big way. Same thing for Ares on Mars. They would need to spend big in the beginning, get a large number of people there in proportion to the other major settlements on Mars, and make every attempt possible to grow the Martian economy. The sooner Ares can depend on a domestic economy for their needs, the sooner the big profits would roll in. Who cares who they trade with...Ares is focused on mining...let others grow the food, build the habs, etc. Ares wants to dig deep and fast, get that platinum and titanium flowing to Earth to establish their market share (even if it's done at a loss in the beginning).

Also, can you imagine the good will Ares would generate back on Earth (who buy their stock and finance all this growth to begin with), if they can show that they are providing a place for people to come to Mars to start a new life (No elitism here...Golconda is open to Everyone! Low Interest Financing Available!), which would help generate excitement and continued support for what Ares is doing on Mars.

As for Mariner...in answer to your earlier question about where the extra people would come from once they finished their massive dome...some would be the children of the original founders, of course, but mostly the new people would have to come from Earth, and yes, they wouldn't be of such "high quality" as the first 10,000. I also wouldn't deny the fact that this might create some problems for Mariner as the new people rushed in once the dome was completed.

B

Bill White · 2002-11-14 14:12:04

However - what if Ares Corp was a different sort of company, one in which immediate profit is not an immediate goal, but long-term survivability and growth is? What if Ares was founded mainly by the Japanese, who give the term long-term planning new meaning?

The Japanese? Heh! I am reminded of an anecdote about a Jesuit commenting on Soviet 5 year plans.

"Five year plans? Bah! We Jesuits follow five hundred year plans." Now that is long range planning. Yet even the Japanese you tout are not looking for economic or corporate longevity and stability, rather it is cultural longevity and sustainability. The company does not matter - the underlying culture is what matters.

We are looking at long range planning that goes beyond the lifetime of every shareholder, officer and director. Why would Wall Street invest in that? Religions and cultures might. Societies might. Profit motivated investors will not.

Would it not be smarter for Ares Corp to encourage people to come and settle at their settlement, perhaps even subsidizing the cost in the early going to make it a bit more reasonable to carry out a decent lifestyle within their city in order to secure Ares' place on Mars as a Martian "superpower"?

If your goal is to found a new culture or a new "people" then - yes - I believe you are correct. And its a worthy goal.

If your goal is to pay dividends to shareholders, to make a profit that can be paid out in less than 100 years, you are flatly wrong.

Also, can you imagine the good will Ares would generate back on Earth (who buy their stock and finance all this growth to begin with), if they can show that they are providing a place for people to come to Mars to start a new life (No elitism here...Golconda is open to Everyone! Low Interest Financing Available!, which would help generate excitement and continued support for what Ares is doing on Mars.

Byron - I am with you part way - please amplify this point. What good will? Why? How does this translate into cash?

Can Ares be all things to all Terrans? Will Muslims be thrilled with and therefore support Ares? Hindus? Japanese? Yanks (US-ians)? Brits (UK-ians)? Europeans (EU-nics)? Starving Africans?

It rather sounds like you see Ares as a starting point for a new global humanistic integrated culture - hardly something Wall Street will invest money in however worthwhile the end result.

The goal of Ares Corporation is simple: Extract rare and valuable metals from the Martian crust and ship it back to a resource-hungry Earth.

Finally - is the above premise even remotely plausible as a way to make money?

Current famines and low living standards for the majority of humans do not arise from an absolute lack of resources but from political and economic dislocations. I believe Amartya Sen won a Nobel Prize arguing this point.

Mine 100 million tons of Mars platinum and platinum's price per pound will fall sharply. IMHO the Ares premise depends upon finding a way to spin straw into gold.

But okay - its a hypothetical fun and games. . .

Also, one can look at the Ares Corp's attempt to make a profit on Mars in the same way one can look at America in the 19th Century, when companies were building railroads. When a single railroad was completed at great expense, people saw that it was a profit-producer, and guess what? There was a stampede of companies building railroads. If Ares ran a 'tight ship' so to speak, controlling all aspects of life on Mars to make the most profit, there would be other firms coming in right behind Areas, all setting up their little mining camps all over Mars. You wouldn't have a big Golconda located in the Sharonov Crater, but a whole bunch of little ones all over Mars.

IMHO - [Whether or not]. . ."Ares ran a 'tight ship' so to speak, controlling all aspects of life on Mars to make the most profit, there would be other firms coming in right behind Areas, all setting up their little mining camps all over Mars."

If Ares does make the astronomical profits you speak of there will be thousands of Ares competitors flooding Mars, regardless of how well Ares treated its settlers - unless you posit that the United Nations granted Ares a monopoly. If Ares stock did go up 1000-fold, every "wet behind the ears" MBA will be out there trying to start up competing companies

And, if Mars ever came to have a democratic constitutional convention with the principle of one man/woman - one vote, the fast breeding Mormons would soon run everything and enact high taxes on Ares anyways.

Byron · 2002-11-14 14:44:55

Bill:

If your goal is to found a new culture or a new "people" then - yes - I believe you are correct. And its a worthy goal.
If your goal is to pay dividends to shareholders, to make a profit that can be paid out in less than 100 years, you are flatly wrong.

Who's to say that it would take a hundred years for Ares to turn a profit? It might take 20 or 30 years to get the ball rolling, but if Ares had the technology to get established on Mars in the first place, I would think they could get a decent-sized settlement going and be making money from their mines within a reasonable time span. One reason for convincing others to come and settle at their city is to generate a domestic marketplace that would be intrumental in getting the costs of production down.

Quote
Also, can you imagine the good will Ares would generate back on Earth (who buy their stock and finance all this growth to begin with), if they can show that they are providing a place for people to come to Mars to start a new life (No elitism here...Golconda is open to Everyone! Low Interest Financing Available!, which would help generate excitement and continued support for what Ares is doing on Mars.

Byron - I am with you part way - please amplify this point. What good will? Why? How does this translate into cash?
Can Ares be all things to all Terrans? Will Muslims be thrilled with and therefore support Ares? Hindus? Japanese? Yanks (US-ians)? Brits (UK-ians)? Europeans (EU-nics)? Starving Africans?
It rather sounds like you see Ares as a starting point for a new global humanistic integrated culture - hardly something Wall Street will invest money in however worthwhile the end result.

That's the thing, if Ares enjoyed popular support, if even only in the Western countries, the 'buzz' of a new frontier being developed by hardy settlers...that would likely encourage individuals to buy Ares stock, driving the price higher, making it a 'hot' commodity, like the internet companies in the 90's. Yes, I suppose Ares Corp stock would crash sooner or later, but hopefully that wouldn't happen until after they had gotten a solid foothold on the Red Planet!

Aslo, the new settlers would essentially be paying their own way over there, but but they will yield a positive outcome within the Martian economy, which can only help Ares reach profitibility that much sooner...

B

Byron · 2002-11-14 14:55:48

The goal of Ares Corporation is simple: Extract rare and valuable metals from the Martian crust and ship it back to a resource-hungry Earth.
Finally - is the above premise even remotely plausible as a way to make money?
Current famines and low living standards for the majority of humans do not arise from an absolute lack of resources but from political and economic dislocations. I believe Amartya Sen won a Nobel Prize arguing this point.
Mine 100 million tons of Mars platinum and platinum's price per pound will fall sharply. IMHO the Ares premise depends upon finding a way to spin straw into gold.

Missed this part in my last post... Of course, no one knows whether Mars would have resources that would make it worthwhile to send back to Earth, so that much is just a guess at this standpoint. There's no way to be certain until we get people on Mars to find out...

As for Earth needing these raw materials from space sometime in the future, I think it will, as this planet's supplies of many types of metals needed for a high-tech society will eventually become very expensive due to sharply increased demand and dwindling supplies. Imagine if most of the 3rd world countries today got their act together, so to speak, and began enjoying U.S./European-style living standards? You really think there's enough metal in the Earth's crust to provide 4 billion people with automobiles, refrigerators and computers? I've often heard it would take the resources of four Earth's in order for the world's six billion people to enjoy the same standard of living the U.S. does at this current time.

Sooner or later, the raw materials that make our modern technological society possible are going to have to come from space. Why not Mars?

Bill White · 2002-11-14 15:02:52

Who's to say that it would take a hundred years for Ares to turn a profit?

From mining? I probably edited my previous post unfairly so I will quote myself :-)

"Current famines and low living standards for the majority of humans do not arise from an absolute lack of resources but from political and economic dislocations. I believe Amartya Sen won a Nobel Prize arguing this point. Mine 100 million tons of Mars platinum and platinum's price per pound will fall sharply."

Terra cannot absorb and consume enough raw materials to return 10% or 15% on a $250 billion investment and given the very real possibility of sudden death and loss of equipment, I believe venture capitalists are going to want a whole lot more than a 10% - 15% rate of return.

Also, unless Ares is granted a monopoly, being the second mining company would be far preferable since Ares investors will have paid the learning curve costs.

That's the thing, if Ares enjoyed popular support, if even only in the Western countries, the 'buzz' of a new frontier being developed by hardy settlers...that would likely encourage individuals to buy Ares stock, driving the price higher, making it a 'hot' commodity, like the internet companies in the 90's. Yes, I suppose Ares Corp stock would crash sooner or later, but hopefully that wouldn't happen until after they had gotten a solid foothold on the Red Planet!

Hey! I fully support selling "red sky" stocks, if the financial projections are plausible. A Mars based "stock bubble" and the short selling when it pops would be truly spectacular!

Ares might end up more like Iridium - the failed satellite venture - those guys filed bankruptcy but the sats are still in orbit and the bandwidth will likely be purchased and used by someone else who pays the bankruptcy court a small fraction of the true developemnt cost.

Bill White · 2002-11-14 15:12:19

As for Earth needing these raw materials from space sometime in the future, I think it will, as this planet's supplies of many types of metals needed for a high-tech society will eventually become very expensive due to sharply increased demand and dwindling supplies. Imagine if most of the 3rd world countries today got their act together, so to speak, and began enjoying U.S./European-style living standards? You really think there's enough metal in the Earth's crust to provide 4 billion people with automobiles, refrigerators and computers? I've often heard it would take the resources of four Earth's in order for the world's six billion people to enjoy the same standard of living the U.S. does at this current time.

Using inefficient current technology? NO In theory? YES

The economic question is whether learning to re-cycle is cheaper than importing from Mars. Metals are the easiest to re-cycle of our resources and the technologies needed to live on Mars will do double duty in improving our ability to re-cycle on Earth.

Once we learn how to live on Mars we may no longer need to - - except to grow the sum total human population.

An example of how to give everyone cars with a smaller ecological footprint is the GM plan to market fuel cell autos using the fuel cells like a skateboard to replace the chassis. General Motors is investing billions of dollars in this idea. Right now.

These cars will be made out of fiberglass and would not be safe or street legal in the West. But they will cost less than 1/3 to 1/2 of a typical Detroit vehicle and are safe when they crash into each other or into bicycles.

GM does not expect to sell any in the West - none - but they do hope to sell tens of millions in India and China.

clark · 2002-11-14 15:49:55

Okay, I cry foul here. Byron, you're biased and changing the rules to support your dark horse (Golconda).

That being said, I'll play along.

IF Ares corp. is different kind of company, a softer gentler kind, then no amount of guess work will be sufficient to predict obvious developmental paths- it is outside general human experience. The fact if the matter is Ares is a mining corporation- they extract resources from one place, and move it to another place to sell. There is no long term survivability in this business model- it is strictly a consumption model- discover, devour, move on, repeat.
I didn't create this financial equation, Adam Smith did.

Now we can cut through a lot of this by assessing the overall situation of the mars you have created- three separate colonies, right? Well, let's consider the situation. Ares needs workers, right? Where on Mars would they find a growing population that needs some source of revenue to meet their needs? If you said "Why the Mormons!" you get a cookie.

I pointed this out earlier, Ares corporation is all about the money- the profit. It exists because some people decided they could make a buck by moving and abundance of a commodity to a place where that commodity is scarce- everything they do is motivated by this one fact. The people that Ares hire have a job that is based on this, and only this. Why would Ares corp. hire anyone that isn't related to their primary objective? Remember, Ares corp. also has to pay for the transport of their employee's- to and back. Now, how long before you think they decide that they can save a few bucks by using the local Mormons as labor for their mines? The Mormons win out because now they have another source of revenue to help with the expansion. Golconda can then be shut down, since Ares corp. doesn't have to have habs on hand- the Mormons have their own. Companies don't like to buy their workers housing unless they have to. In fact, Golconda would probably be sold to the Mormons, and everybody is made happy. Ares corp. isn't going to get rich off of the people that live on Mars, so the sooner they divest themselves of the necessity of maintaining extra infrastructure that produces nothing, the better (their perspective)

Notice that this also solves their problem with workforce for the Mormons. After all, the Mormons would still be sending more and more people- how long before someone says, hey, why not set up some colonies in space near the asteroids- repeat the Martian endeavor out there- Ares once again has a ready workforce. It works to, since Ares corp. could transport the Mormons in one direction, and the minerals in the other. Again, Ares is a business, and a business usually looks to take advantage of the situation- they don't care if the people are Mormons or Scientologists- ideology tends to get in the way of profit. They just want someone to work the machines for as cheaply as possible.

Also, it isn't the responsibility of Ares Corp. to make sure everyone is fed- remember, your rules, everyone who can pay their way is welcome- Ares corp. just has to make sure that the necessities are available, at a price. Since the Mormons have their weird colony, they are probably creating their own food for all Mormons- which means that Ares corp. has no incentive to feed anyone, or even worry about it- just hire Mormons and they'll feed themselves- one less thing to worry about. How many companies buy your meals?

I have no doubt that if someone shows a profit, that others will follow- however, you only listed three colonies as existing- I have been laboring to restrain myself to the limits of the situation.? However, even supposing multiple Ares Corps- they would all be competing for the preexisting labor pool- all competition will bring is a higher standard of living for the Mormons- it will not necessarily lead to more people on mars.

Ares corp. will maintain it's superpower status by control of mineral rights and also by being the major employer of Mormons on Mars- if the most populous people all work for the same company, who do you think will have influence?what is that saying, "what's good for GM is good for America"?

So Mariner would lower the standard? The place might fall apart- social class determined by what "cut" you are? However, if this is the case, Mariner becomes less elitist since skill is really the perquisite for being allowed in, and as room is made available, only the most skilled get to go. However, I don't think we can adequately discuss this colony because so much is tied into the process of how colonists are selected.

Byron · 2002-11-14 17:23:12

Hey clark, I'm not biased towards Golconda...just attempting to justisfy the reasons for its existence..lol...I suppose if Ares really wanted to become a Martian corporate superpower, they would have to become involved in a whole lot more things than just mining.

Your thoughts about the Mormons eventually working for the corporation is all good and well...but what of the consideration that the two settlements are on opposite sides of the globe? The Mormons have centered their resources at the location of their original settlement in the Hellas basin..sure a few workers would probably migrate to go to work for Ares, but I think most would rather stay with their brothers and sisters...most people with a herd instinct don't like to strike out on their own.

The whole point about Ares building a city so that people could come from Earth is that Ares would then become a major player in the fledging Martian economy, as opposed to just sticking with the whole discover/devour/move on thing.

All this is just speculation...so I like to look at these things from different sorts of angles.

As for Mariner,

So Mariner would lower the standard? The place might fall apart- social class determined by what "cut" you are? However, if this is the case, Mariner becomes less elitist since skill is really the perquisite for being allowed in, and as room is made available, only the most skilled get to go. However, I don't think we can adequately discuss this colony because so much is tied into the process of how colonists are selected.

I described the process of selecting the founders of Mariner...I imagine it would make sense for the existing members of Mariner taking over the process of selecting new immigrants from Earth...how do you suppose they would carry out that process? Continue to select the best and brightest of Earth that want to come to Mars? Pick people with the most appropiate skills? Or will they have renounced their 'elitist' society and just pull in 'average' people for the sake of diversity (and to have people perform the less desirable jobs? )

I'll leave it up to you guys to discuss those possibities...

B

clark · 2002-11-14 19:09:55

We can nitpick how many Mormons would want to go work for Ares, but I don't think that will be very productive. Just to be brief, Mormons have to do two years of service, usually missionary work, is it hard to imagine changing this to two years of service to help the colony... in mining.

My overall point is that business on Mars will only need to import labor as long as there is a labor shortage- yeah, no-brainer, right? And that is exactly what the Mormons are- they are the death pill to a business aproach to colonizing mars. Business isn't interested in colonizing mars, at least Ares isn't, and so has no financial incentive- notice the silence of Aj on this issue. Captialism has its advantages, but it has an inherent weakness when it comes to this scenerio- it will not produce the results you are looking for.

As for Ares becoming a major player in Mars- it does so by virtue of the neccessary transportation infrastructure it must create to bring it's product to market.

Control of distribution is control of ANY economy- witness the RIAA (Josh) and other media companies scrambling with the advent of the internet- it decentralizes the distrbution system, which in essence disolves the entire profit model which was based on distribution.

Diamonds are values based on a control of the distribution.
Drugs, distribution.
All of this is pretty straightforward, no?

I also understand the need to look at all angles at an issue, I enjoy it, really... I do.

Considering the setup (co-op) of Mariner, I would expect that the first generation would pick people with skills that are needed, or that replicate their own- every member to the society is actually an employee of the group as well.

I can't say much other than I don't have a problem with it per se- they are privatley funded, use skill/ability as the primary determinant (which at least offers an opportunity to all on some basic level), and are really just a bunch of commune hippies. Who are they hurting?

That said, why would the best and brightest WANT to go to Mars? Earth will undoubtably have more in the way of opportunity- and the "best and brightest" tend to make more on their own- if they join this group, they are less likely to achieve the same economic adavantages as they would realize on Earth- there is also the lack of cultural interest, or entertainment value that can be realized on Earth.

Of course it will have it's appeal to some, but not neccessarily all. What will the best and brightest do on Mars, living in abubble surrounded by death-vacum that they could not do on Earth, comfortably, and safley?

Why would these people really want to go to Mars? How about that angle?

Bill White · 2002-11-15 10:26:52

That said, why would the best and brightest WANT to go to Mars? Earth will undoubtably have more in the way of opportunity- and the "best and brightest" tend to make more on their own- if they join this group, they are less likely to achieve the same economic adavantages as they would realize on Earth- there is also the lack of cultural interest, or entertainment value that can be realized on Earth.
Of course it will have it's appeal to some, but not neccessarily all. What will the best and brightest do on Mars, living in abubble surrounded by death-vacum that they could not do on Earth, comfortably, and safley?
Why would these people really want to go to Mars? How about that angle?

Fascinating question, IMHO, perhaps the most fascinating question concerning the psychology and essential meaning of doing "humans to Mars" - A question best answered through true literature - not pulp sci-fi novels - all of which remain beyond my current talent level. But perhaps someday such a writer will materialize.

My initial short answer to your question - - > sublimation.

Mars will be settled by talented people who are driven by internal daemons (not demons) of one sort or another. Well rounded and psychologically grounded people simply won't ever choose to go. Those who do go will be going to tame their internal daemons. And, this may well give them the fortitude and dedication to actually make it work.

Here is another question - I daresay everyone reading this board is too old to ever settle Mars themselves. Who among us would want their own children to be among the first Mars settlers?

Remember the play/movie "Others People's Money?" (The stage play was far better than the Danny DiVito movie btw)

How about a story titled "Other People's Children?"

Scott G. Beach · 2002-11-15 16:12:36

Here is another question - I daresay everyone reading this board is too old to ever settle Mars themselves. Who among us would want their own children to be among the first Mars settlers?

Bill:

During the settlement of the American West, men would go West and homestead a piece of ground and build a house and then send for their wives and children. With a little help, this history could be repeated on Mars.

The people who live in a prototype Martian settlement could produce children who believe that it is their destiny (1) to become Martian explorers, (2) to build a Martian base, and (3) to expand that base into a permanent settlement so that their wives and children and brothers and sisters and cousins can emigrate from Earth to Mars.

The settlement of Mars is such a difficult and long-term undertaking that creating a Martian civilization will have to be a goal that is embedded in the culture of a people.

Scott

A.J.Armitage · 2002-11-17 22:20:34

Josh;

When we deregulate essential commodities / natural monoploies, what happens? Hello California.

Other states deregulated at the same time and didn't have the same problems. It would do you good to find out why.

You were inferring that the free market is the only way to regulate essential commodity consumption.

The word you're looking for is "implying", and I didn't imply anything, I came right out and said it.

There is simply no justification for this

Instead of repeating myself, I'll just tell you to read what I wrote.

Read what I wrote.

and history shows that an unregulated monopoly of essential commodities simply becomes an unfair distribution of resources. Prices go up, people suffer, and the system collapses.

Indeed it does. The British health system, for example.

Oh, wait...

socialism; any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
You're conflating socialism with communism, damnit.
communism; a theory advocating elimination of private property b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed

So by the above, if you want socialism you either want government ownership (which is what the Soviet Union had), in which case things are going to be a little centralized, or you want collective ownership, which is the same as owning goods in common, which is, according to the definition you provided, communism.

The fact that capitalism is a economy which promots profit, pretty much proves that it's centralized.

LOL

You're probably annoyed with my unrelenting, yet civil, responses.

"Apparently you still can't get your head out of your ass and understand what I'm saying." --Josh Cryer, who is suffering from memory loss.

And no, I didn't twist the word ?starve.? If I had, you would have almost surely replied with some pathetic critique of my explaination.

And then you would have said something like, "Can't you at least argue valid points rather than replying to everything I say?" But then when I don't reply to everything, you take that as some sort of validation of what you've said.

Josh, what's pathetic was your attempt to squirm out of the simple fact that I nailed you.

Oh, so your argument is that it's ?not very realistic.? And that's all?

The idea that people will organize production properly without the information provided by market prices is not very realistic in the same way that the idea you will fly like Superman by jumping out the window is not very realistic.

The realistic bit, comes when you apply advanced technology to people, then the whole process of managing ones self or a collective of selves is largely hygienic! That's the damn point.

Um, no. No level of technology will make it realistic. Before, you were saying that "high level technology" will lead to techno-autarky (it won't, unless someone comes up with Star Trek-style replicators), but now you seem to be saying it will make centralized economies work. But their problem isn't technological, it's in the decision making, and even artificial intelligence won't help, because the quality of decision making is limited by the quality of information, and the information needed can only exist in a free market.

Your position, is almost like the position of some whites before slavery was abolished. ?The idea that a black can handle a gun isn't very realistic.? But the reality of the situation was, ?If a black had a gun he could liberate himself.?

Here we see more of your "civil" way of replying.

We also see your typical inversion of reality. Capitalism is simply what people do when there isn't a coercive economic planner bossing them around. If you doesn't like it, the only other alternative is the coercive planner. But you'll say there are various systems, blah, blah, blah. It's all nonsense. If you remove the market and the profit motive, the only way to get anything done is with coercion.

Other than biological processes, it's impossible to argue that all humans share a psyche in common. Indeed, cultures form the psychology of people; psyches are as diferring as cultures!

You've grossly misunderstood the concept of human nature. Of course souls are different (psyche comes from the Greek for soul and is usually translated as such, as in Bloom's Plato's Republic). And obviously, souls are more diverse than cultures. Each has his own unique type. But why can we communicate? If you say "I love you" to a loved one, it depends on both you and the other person knowing what love is, which means both of you have experienced it. So even a simple statement depends on a common experience of an inward condition of the soul.

You're actually a testament to how a society can form someone culturally. You can't identify lifestyle preference with survival, despite the fact that most people can't come to grasp with losing everything they have. Consumers are worried about losing their things, not their lives, sure; but the fact that their things are their lives, shows my point. It really shows how pathetic their existances are.

Eh? Which society do you think formed me to identify survival with survival? And how does it differ from the Western consumerist society that forms people to identify survival with their lifestyle?

A.J.Armitage · 2002-11-17 22:36:05

I understand that anyone who can pay the cost, can come to Golconda. However, Golconda exists because of Ares corp. Ares corp. is interested in mining- that is their business model. The majority of people who will live at Golconda are miners and the people necessary to support the miners. What financial incentive does Ares have in creating a larger base? What is the financial incentive for Ares to allow people to set up business in Golconda that would compete with Golconda? For example, growing food. Ares has complete market control if they are the only ones producing food on Mars, so they can set the price to whatever they want since there is no competition- why would they invite competition? It goes against their own financial interests.

In the first sentence you admit Ares will let anyone come to Golconda, and then you act as if it weren't the case.

It doesn't matter if Ares has a financial incentive to have a larger base. The new settlers, the ones we've already agreed Ares won't stop, do have an incentive, namely, a place to live. Likewise with the others. Ares isn't depending on Golconda for profits. Golconda isn't going to provide any at all unless a non-Ares population comes in, since if it's just employees they can only pay with money that came from Ares in the first place.

A.J.Armitage · 2002-11-17 22:48:06

Scientologists couldn't raise the money.

If there's one thing Scientologists know how to do, it's raise money.

Also, there are 5 or 6 Mormon senators - a tipping point in the US Senate.
Suppose Senator Hatch [R - Utah] decided to trade support for selected judicial appointments (or other non-essential Bush agenda items) for $25 billion in federal aid to fund Mars - - wouldn't it fly through Congress with full Administration support?
Recall the havoc Senator Jeffords caused 2 years ago when he switched affiliations. I am not saying 5 Mormon Senators will become Democratic (that will NOT happen) - - > they just threaten to vote with the Democrats on select issues UNLESS the needed billions are given to do Mars. This is done in back rooms well below the radar of the popular press.

But that leads to an American colony, not a specifically Mormon one. I suppose they could wait until costs come down under the influence of government-funded exploration and then start their own, but they'd give any potential competition the same advantage.

Question: Would funding a Mars colony help Mormons persuade Americans they are not anti-science and thereby possibly win converts in competition with anti-Darwin Pentecostals and evangelicals? How many religions claim to be "forward" looking rather than "backward" looking on issues of science?

You're assuming that Americans who care whether a religion is "anti-science" would be willing to ignore archeology.

Still looking for those Lamanite swords...

Question #2 Recall our making babies thread. If the Mormons make Martian babies as fast as is safely possible (I agree with clark about the need to husband resources) and if left alone for 100 - 150 years they would "own" the planet no matter what the United Nations might say.

Unless others are doing the same. For example...

Question #3: If Salt Lake City funded a colony does anyone doubt the Vatican would follow suit? Sounds like a possible new fangled space race - a "kinder and gentler" space race. . .

At least Catholics qualify as Christians. I'm not sure about a religious space race being kinder and gentler, though.

Josh Cryer · 2002-11-17 23:10:09

Other states deregulated at the same time and didn't have the same problems. It would do you good to find out why.

Prices went up, demand went up, and supply went down in all states that deregulated. The only difference between them and California, is that California is very highly dependent on electricity, and California is much more suceptable to market manipulation.

I admit that there are successes with deregulated commodities, but those are in all honestly, still largely regulated.

There's nothing else to respond to, with regard to the rest of the crap you've spewed, since it's just mostly insults with zero substence. You don't justify anything else you say. Indeed, this very comment suggests that I go out and see why deregulation didn't work for California, implying that it ?works? for other states. I'm not a fool, the DOE's own site show that deregulation is a dismal failure across the states, with very very few exceptions.

What I find ironic with the language most people use with regards to unfettered capitalism, is that it largely reflects someone who desires a form of socialism. They think that corporations ought to control and own everything, though, instead of individuals or communities. Their language and views can only be called corporate socialism; the worst possible kind.

A.J.Armitage · 2002-11-17 23:50:21

Josh;

There's nothing else to respond to, with regard to the rest of the crap you've spewed, since it's just mostly insults with zero substence. You don't justify anything else you say.

You obviously didn't read it.

Josh Cryer · 2002-11-18 00:12:21

Anyone who read it would say otherwise.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2002-11-14 04:15:25

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#27 2002-11-14 04:21:55

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#28 2002-11-14 10:41:03

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#29 2002-11-14 11:27:26

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#30 2002-11-14 11:39:56

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#31 2002-11-14 13:07:23

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#32 2002-11-14 13:09:15

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#33 2002-11-14 13:22:10

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#34 2002-11-14 13:43:17

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#35 2002-11-14 14:12:04

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#36 2002-11-14 14:44:55

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#37 2002-11-14 14:55:48

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#38 2002-11-14 15:02:52

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#39 2002-11-14 15:12:19

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#40 2002-11-14 15:49:55

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#41 2002-11-14 17:23:12

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#42 2002-11-14 19:09:55

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#43 2002-11-15 10:26:52

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#44 2002-11-15 16:12:36

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#45 2002-11-17 22:20:34

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#46 2002-11-17 22:36:05

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#47 2002-11-17 22:48:06

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#48 2002-11-17 23:10:09

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#49 2002-11-17 23:50:21

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

#50 2002-11-18 00:12:21

Re: Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

Board footer