Fun and games - 3 hypothetical Martian settlements...

Scott G. Beach · 2002-11-19 15:54:04

Maybe I am being unfair to Byron, or breaking the rules of his hypothetical, but mining as a profitable scenario for opening up Mars never made much sense to me.

Bill:

Mining is not going to pay for the exploration and settlement of Mars. If Martians were able to extract platinum on Mars and then transport the platinum to Earth and sell it for $600 per ounce (approximately the current price), they would not make a profit.

Scott

clark · 2002-11-19 17:02:36

If nobody will be a competitor in Golconda, is it wrong to assume that they will all simply be customers? As such, what would be the incentive to go to Mars? Just to live? I might imagine that there would be other non-Martian locales that would offer greater opportunity than being an eternal customer.

Golconda is like Disneyland, and the analogy does apply. Ares Corp is building little more than glorified theme park on Mars. The entire base belongs to Ares Corp in the same way that all of the property that encompasses Disneyland belongs to the Disney Corporation. Disney Corp, like Ares Corp, gets to decide who sells, and who doesn't. When you enter into Disneyland, you enter into total market control by one company. When you enter Golconda, you enter a private property that is completely controlled by one company, Ares Corp.

The point is not about profit; it is about market control. The only markets that can exist on Mars are where the infrastructure exists to support people. Yet this very infrastructure is controlled by one company, which has an incentive not to develop their property, and by association, the market, any further than is necessary to achieve their primary objective, which happens to be extracting as much resources as possible as cheaply as possible, which means reducing operating costs and labor costs, both of which undermine the usefulness of using a free-market approach to colonizing mars.

Sure, a system could be developed where we avoid some of the problems, but this is the scenario as stipulated by Byron when it is extended out.

It would seem that declaring yourself a Mormon, irregardless of personal belief is the best bet to getting to mars and making a living there. Hey Bill, something to consider- add in some characters that are ambivalent towards the whole Mormon issue and use it as a pragmatic approach (ticket) to mars.

Josh Cryer · 2002-11-19 17:12:53

Yeah Scott G. Beach, this is a total hypothetical. We've all criticized it slightly, because some of us like realistic hypotheticals, but we're pretending it would somehow be magically profitable. Perhaps it would, a long time down the road.

But it's nice to see that A.J. finally understands where we're coming from. Of course, there really is no stopping anyone from setting up a settlement just a few miles from the mines, since there would be no world government at the time to enforce the claim rights (which you guys have been pointing out). Mariner could concievably mine the same platinum mines, and sell the platinum to Ares Corp for a huge profit (mining being cheaper than Ares Corp, because Mariner will be using the magic of technology, and not a human work force). It could cause a war, of course, unless Ares Corp was built on top of the mines (in which case Mariner would have no physical access), which is hard to imagine, because platinum is found over great distances.

As to the suggestion that Ares Corp will allow people to join their colony to grow food, and things of that nature. No, I find this highly unlikely. If these newcomers have cheaper food (and they most likely will- technology would have advanced, and so on), that would lower the incentive for workers to work as hard as Ares Corp would most efficiently operate. So either Ares Corp wouldn't allow it, or Ares Corp would tax these people so much that they could never make a profit. Ares Corp will control your lives, period. Ares Corp doesn't exist to make things easy. Byron points this out in his hypothetical, which at least makes it somewhat realistic.

And A.J., you didn't win anything. Try not to approach argument to win (which it seems you've been doing, with your rants and so on), it really is insincere when you do. And to correct one of the things you twisted. No one said that Ares Corp wouldn't have outside competition. Everyone (or at least me) has said that Ares Corp wouldn't allow competition within their own property. This is a no-brainer.

Byron · 2002-11-20 07:30:17

Well, I must say my "hythotheticals" have gotten quite bit of a workout...lol. Some good debates, and a lot of valid points have been brought up, which was the whole point of this thread anyhow.

When I came up with those three different settlements on Mars, I knew there were "problems" with each of them...and I think that is a reflection of "real life," as there's always going to be problems...especially on Mars!

What I hope everyone's who's been reading (and contributing) to this thread have realized by now is that getting humans firmly established on Mars is a bit of a "chicken and the egg" dilemma. How do people get started in a place that needs such a huge amount of support from Earth? How will people on Mars "pay their own way," so to speak? These are the questions I've been seeking by launching this thread in the first place, as well as attempting to flesh out the various faults of human-derived systems.

For example, if Ares goes to Mars to make a profit...they will make darned sure that they close out any competition, or at least limit it though the use of a "hegemon," as Bill has mentioned. But this same authority could very well protect incoming settlers by declaring Golconda a "free zone," leaving Ares to focus just on their mining, or whatever they came to Mars for in the first place. I think the discussions about profit-making entities on Mars illustrates that there will have to be some sort of overarching "space agency," or some kind of "Martian Charter" or whatever set up in the beginning to ensure that companies just don't come in and rape the planet and its people, or have subsequent firms come in and undo the efforts of the first one in the gate, so to speak. If there is ever a chance that profits can be made on Mars though the use of exports to Earth, I would think there would have to be some sort of monopoly set up, like the early-mid 20th century phone system in the U.S., otherwise, you can forget about it...you'd never get people to invest in that sort of venture.

As for the other settlements, I find it rather interesting that many of you feel that the Mormon settlement has the best chance of success...and the premise that people will 'fake' it just to get to Mars would surely be a problem for the Mormons, as what happens when they realize they have all these 'secular' people in their midst?...lol..not that would be such a bad thing, unless you're a true-blue Mormon...

As for Mariner, I painted that particular scenario in order to point out the dangers of creating a so-called 'elitist' race, based on intelligence, good genes, etc...this is the sort of thing that has been tried in the past, and with Mars being the blank slate that it is, there's no reason to suspect that someone(s) (of great power and/or wealth) wouldn't attempt something like this on the Red Planet. The main problem there is, of course, is that sort of "perfect society" would be inherently flawed (just like a totally laissez-faire, capitalisitc society), and would likely crumble sooner or later. The Mormon settlement, on the other hand, which is already "diversified" right from the get-go, would likely be able to maintain a cohesive, growing society motivated by the sheer desire to populate Mars.

As for having a settlement in which everyone can come, with no barriers whatsoever...I just don't see that happening for a long, long time. Getting to Mars, at least in the early going, is going to be an extremely costly proposition, and whoever pays for it is going to want to do things "their way," whether it be a nation, a company, a mega-egotist, a religion, or whatever.

The fact that humans have always gotten ahead in the past by having / exercising power over others just can't be overlooked, and that's the thing all of us humans-on-Mars supporters have to be vigilant for - because it will happen...unless enough people step up to the plate and say, no, we need to do something different this time.

B

Bill White · 2002-11-20 11:20:11

I think the discussions about profit-making entities on Mars illustrates that there will have to be some sort of overarching "space agency," or some kind of "Martian Charter" or whatever set up in the beginning to ensure that companies just don't come in and rape the planet and its people, or have subsequent firms come in and undo the efforts of the first one in the gate, so to speak. If there is ever a chance that profits can be made on Mars though the use of exports to Earth, I would think there would have to be some sort of monopoly set up, like the early-mid 20th century phone system in the U.S., otherwise, you can forget about it...you'd never get people to invest in that sort of venture.

*IF* this is right - how could such a system be devised unless all Terran nations with space faring ability unanimously established such system?

The economic opening of Mars may well require a unified world governmental structure (not necessarily one world government) but a sufficiently unified confederation to assure than no spacefaring nation sponsored Beta Corp. How many of us are in favor of a unified world government - if only as a loose confederation of states?

Not many in the United States I daresay, unless we mean Pax Americana with Washington being the dominant player. Except for the global Pax Americana scenario, can anyone imagine any political entity being granted the authority to tell a US corporation they cannot be Beta Corp and thus compete with Ares Corp?

clark · 2002-11-20 13:22:44

Perhaps the denial of national terrestrial markets is enough of a "stick" to disuade anyone from sponsoring "beta corp".

If USA declares that any nation who sponsors beta corp will be denied access to the United States market, who would willingly court that disaster?

There could be economic alliances created among interested parties that impose tarriffs on all non-terrestrial products or resources that are not from the sanctioned companies.

A.J.Armitage · 2002-12-03 20:21:21

clark;

The point is not about profit; it is about market control.

Golconda isn't the market. Earth is. How obvious does that have to be before you'll see it?

BTW, even if Golconda were the market, it's already stipulated Ares won't "control" it, because anyone who can afford it is welcome.

clark · 2002-12-03 20:57:36

A.J.! Welcome, come to play again have you? Hopefully you have left the childish insults behind.

Golconda isn't the market in the sense of the business model for Ares corp. However, the people that will be living in Golconda will be, by and large, be employee's of Ares Corp.

Let us not forget, Golconda exsists by virtue of Ares Corp. need, and anyone else who can afford to pay the price can live there. These people, along with the employee's of Ares corp are for all intents and purposes a captive market that can be used to offset and subsidize the cost of operating Golconda. Are you familiar with Factory towns during the early industrial revoultion? It is analogous to that experience.

And, yes anyone who can afford it is welcome, but as I and others have tried to point out, Ares Corp still gets to decide who goes, or how much it will be when they get there.

Anyone can go to Disneyland, but not everyone can set up shop there.

Golconda is in effect a giant toursit playground- those who can pay admission to the park, get in- that's my point. There will be no real competition, becuase all the usable area is owned lock stock and barrel by Ares Corp. And if perchance Ares Corp were to allow competition, it simply need raise the cost of doing business by charging more for all the basic neccessities, thus reducing the profit of any competing company.

It's been a while since this issue was discussed, are you sure you want to rehash it?

soph · 2002-12-03 21:17:46

wouldnt a sort of real estate center have to be established before settlement could occur? i mean, realisitcally, this would be important. Maybe parcels of land could be sold to companies, up to a maximum. If one company could secure the best parts of a resource lode, other companies might seek out other places. it is never a good idea to set up shop right next to your competition. logistically, its stupid.

but back to real estate, there should be a loose "zoning" of land before private industry moves in. we dont want people spread out in communities of 20 all over mars. we want a few strong cores first, a few industrial development areas, and a huge amount of areas given to scientific interests, for experiments, terraforming, farming, etc.

in zubrins book, he mentions mars being a waypoint for asteroid mining. if the payload could be transported cheaply enough, $150 billion for a run of the mill asteroid is not a bad deal, if it can be mined in a reasonable amount of time.

colonist · 2003-01-09 00:54:28

I would bet thay the lifespan of a golcondan executive will be measured in weeks at best after he tells inteligent, freedom minded miners that tey are now a company resource to be exploited for the proffit of others. The miners will have access to earth moving equipment, explosives, colony life suport equipment, all the machinery that was required to set up the colony (and can be used to expand it) and all of the truely productive members of the colony. The execs OTOH have a surface dome, easily vented.

After the rebellon, the miners can negotiate from a position of strength with the shareholders back on earth. Would a cargo flight sufficient to tip the scales towards self-sufficiency be worth a return flight of 500 lbs of assorted, high grade gemstones? With the sizes of olympus mons et-al, there might be some MONSTER diamond pipes out there. add in satalite footage of the entire planet and you might be able to find some exquisit VIRGIN gemstone areas. Further cargo flights could reward the shareholders with greater wealth in gems, fossils (possibly), exclusive rights to data, anything that could be returned at a profit.

Thoughts?

soph · 2003-01-09 05:37:21

the miners would have little leverage. there would always be other equipment, more could be had from earth, the town could cut them off from access to markets for their goods, and find another mountain to mine.

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-09 17:26:09

soph, how could they mine without people to mine? colonist is obviously arguing what would happen if they had the resources to actually gain leverage (note the bit about ?expand[ing the colony]?). This is why I'm always arguing that they won't be allowed to, and that the colony will both be highly dependant on Earth and that the conditions would be simply horrible. These miners are taking a risk, but if one cargo flight can help them gain self sufficency, I am betting they just need seeds or something- I bet they could take over the colony without Earth knowing. They could get those resources. But expect a future war.

But I agree with your assessment, colonist.

soph · 2003-01-09 17:29:10

More people from earth?

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-09 17:32:25

soph, right. It'd be cheaper to try to take everything over again. At the risk of destroying the city, but still. Bribr some people who are already there to have an anti-revolution or something.

soph · 2003-01-09 17:36:28

Not destroy anything. bring new miners, find a new mountain, let the original workers either start a new town or come back to the colony.

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-09 17:43:48

Um, where at the old miners going to go? They just started a huge rebellion, probably killed a lot of the higher uppers and so on. Much like the Cuban Revolution, I expect that they would be executed. By virtue of the fact that without air you can't survive in space.

soph · 2003-01-09 18:05:54

the point is, they couldnt go anywhere, so they would have no leverage. they could be punished in some form or another (demotion, deportation...but who knows).

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-09 18:12:19

Of course they couldn't go anyhere. That's why I said it would be easier for Ares Corp or whatever to take it over again. They may even force them back to work. But they certain'y aren't going to bring more people, at least not until the viable manpower no longer exists (ie, they all die).

Ares Corp's interest is to make profit. They would barter with the miners for the simple reason that taking over the city could prove too costly. The miners would have much higher turnaround because they're not being so abused. Ares Corp would win out.

The key is not letting Ares Corp prevent you from having self suffiency. It would be stupid to suggest a barter situation without that. They would have to take it over quietly, keeping Earth from knowing what's going on. Perhaps during a solar storm or whatever.

colonist · 2003-01-10 00:08:24

With regards to keeping the colony dependant on earth, that might work with some things, but the vast majority of material needed on a day-to-day basis MUST, in the interest of profit, be produced on mars. It is prohibitively expensive to ship such things as bricks and basic foodstuffs from earth so local supies will have to be developed. I offer this alternative "Golconda version 2.0" for consideration.

The basic colony is layed out in a series of "tin can" habitats, tunnels and vaults, with the central fetre being a sealed and pressurised natural cavern. This cavern is a marketplace for the surrounding steadholders to rent space for trade with other steaders and with company reps. New arrivals caneither sign up with existing mining and prospecting concerns or (usualy by pre-arrival arangement) indenture with one of the existing steadholders to both learn the ropes and earn the localy produced equipment that will be needed to start one of his own.

While the Ares corp. buys anything that can be shipped home at a proffit, its stock in trade is LIFT CAPACITY. Excess space on the colonisation landers is filled with materials ordered by the colonists in exchange for their products. The landers themselves, being one shot, are taken apart and sold in the same manner.

what do you guys think?

soph · 2003-01-10 05:53:35

They could build inflatable plastic, brick, or kevlar domes, and use the tin cans as storage.

but i think stock should be based on lift capacity and lift cost. if it can lift at $1,000/kg and lauch 50 tonnes, its better than $10,000/kg and almost any tonnage.

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-10 12:10:46

Indeed, it's very expensive to ship anything at all to Mars. The simple matter of trade has to compensate for delivery cost, and Mars absolutely doesn't offer many things that do. Precious metals and so on being the only real exportable material (and even then, I question their overall value, since a Martian dimond would be priceless, and few could afford one). Raw stuff, however, isn't exportable at profit at all. To keep the workers at bay, you would undoubtedly have to keep the colony less than self sufficient. If this means merely sending seeds which grow into plants that don't produce seeds. A couple of tons a year in payload is more than worth it, when you consider that it would keep the miners (or even the people in charge! ) from rebelling. It doesn't take much to keep a colony dependent.

Colonists wouldn't have products which were as valuable as the cost of delivery, unless they were allowed to keep a percentage of what they've mined personally (which isn't likely, because that would mean less profit for Ares Corp). Assuming it was, though, and colonists / miners did get a portion of what they've mined, directly, I would agree with that (and then, I would question what products they'd be getting from earth, since as you even pointed out, shipping just about anything is cost prohibitive). But if we accept this alternate version, we're throwing out the orignal concept of laissez-faire, and putting in this silly little idea about workers rights.

colonist · 2003-01-18 11:43:19

Actualy laissez-faire can provide for golconda v-2.0 if those organizing the colony are interested in bootstraping an independant population on Mars. Search for L. Neil Smiths speach on Mars colonisation to get an idea of the goals of these individuals.

As far as markets for martian products, information would be the most widely traded for the purposes of individual income. Precious metals and gems would be expensive, but so are works of art by people like Picasso, Renuar and DaVinci and all of these have a market. Even a limited market wil assist in building the infrastructure needed to bring down the cost of transportation. With this system, control of the colony is moot as it would never be a goal of the administrators.

The infrastructure need not be solely used for mars missions. A "rotovator" could be used to pull satalites cheaply into orbit from a moderate altitude (a modified jet liner could launch payload capsules at a low cost compared to todays space shuttle) and a geosynchronus "bolo" satalite could fling payloads anywhere in the solar system. Further savings could be realised by using a Mars orbit bolo to catch incoming ships thus saveing the need for areobrakes and heat shields (heat shields can be produced on mars in 1' to a side hexagonal sections and clipped onto an integral framework in the colonists vessel upon arrival).

As far as imports go, most of what comes to Mars will be "seed" materials. Examples of this are a metal lathe (the lathe is the only machine tool that can build the rest of the shop), food and industrial crop seeds and inteligent choices for packing materials. The landers themselves will be designed to provide the maximum resources for the colony wih the least weight (if a 5HP electric motor and an 8HP motor weigh the same, send the 8HP motor). Much of the material needed to expand the bases and steadings will come from the planet itself with only the initial machinery sent from Earth.

MarsGuy2012 · 2003-04-03 11:12:46

Responding to the original post...

I would hitch a ride with the Mormon group, but I probably couldn't stand it for too long. I'm too stupid to be let into Mariner, so I'd try to make it in Sharonov/Golconda. I like the diversity anyway.

The Mormon group would have to be renamed too - Mars Zion would be better. (Mormons don't really like being called mormons that much. It started out as a derogatory statement from nonmembers back in the 1830's.)
The Mormons would be just as successful as Golconda or more so. They are very industrious and operate in the free market system very well. They also don't like to waste time and money on things like alcohol and prostitutes. You could expect them to build the most beautiful temples. They would be a bright white contrast to the red Martian desert. The Golcondans should expect a large missionary force to come knocking on their airlocks. "Lock the doors - It's those mormons again!"

A.J.Armitage · 2003-04-13 13:08:17

Wow, actual capitalists in here now. Amazing

I see clark ended on the same inane note they'd kept up.

And, yes anyone who can afford it is welcome, but as I and others have tried to point out, Ares Corp still gets to decide who goes, or how much it will be when they get there.

Good grief, man. That's like saying "Sure, the Earth is round, but if you sail far enough you'll fall off."

I know I demanded you stick to the stipulations, but come on. If it leads to inanities like that, I'll release you. Argue against the stipulation. You'll make sense, instead of contradicting yourself. You'll probably be right. If Ares has a mine on Mars (which itself is unrealistic), they'll probably have only a few highly paid technicians to keep the machines working, and buy their food from the Mormons.

But as long as we're tossing out stipulations, it's extremely unrealistic that the first base would close. The public would demand that it turn into a colony long before anyone thought the research was complete (which wouldn't happen for a few centuries, at least).

So here's Golconda 3.0:

The U.S. builds a base on Mars near the site of a natural cavern. Even though it's civilian, it runs a lot like a military instalation. Eventually a woman gets pregnant. She refuses to have an abortion (the whole leads to a big controversy back home), and nine Terran months later, she gives birth without complication. As it becomes apparent that the baby is perfectly healthy, pressure builds up to begin colonizing. The U.S. government allows the people at the base to stay on permanently if they want, and starts sending permanent settlers. They have to fit a bunch of criteria. For example, you have to be in a childless couple willing and able to have at least four children once on Mars, and either you or your partner (preferrably both) have usable technical or scientific skills. But the government also announces that anyone able to fly out privately is welcome to settle on Mars. Some companies start developing relatively cheap transport, and eventually large numbers of immigrants are coming in any given year. Another effect of lowered transport costs is that the Mormons and the Marinerites get their settlements started.

As more settlers arrive, an economy begins to develop, which the government back homes regards as a sign of growth. The cavern is taken over for a bazaar, and new neighborhoods grow up surrounding it. Back home, most of the Mars program funding is cut because of a budget crises. Thus, having gotten things started, the U.S. government steps out of the way. Relations between Golconda and America resemble relations between the American colonies and England before the French and Indian War.

Phobos · 2003-04-13 16:59:46

I believe mass colonization will only happen once the private sector can get people into space en masse and economically. Since the Outer Space treaty prevents countries from declaring sovereignty over extra terrestrial real-estate I can't see anything more than a few science bases being setup by governments. Gov'ts are about as likely to promote the growth of colonization of outer space as they are to promote the mass colonization of Antartica (which is subject to similiar treaties at the OST.) Of course there are possibilities that science outposts could inadvertently grow into big colonies or that countries may withdraw from the treaty and stake out claims for themselves, but these seem unlikely. And I really don't see much of a difference between a company charging people tickets to ride their spacecraft to a colony and a few government commissars choosing who may and may not leave Earth. Most socialists don't want to see mankind leave Earth anyhow. They'd rather we be quarantined to Earth and have the money that would be spent on space projects be funneled into their pet social causes here on Earth.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2002-11-19 15:54:04

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

#77 2002-11-19 17:02:36

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

#78 2002-11-19 17:12:53

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

#79 2002-11-20 07:30:17

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

#80 2002-11-20 11:20:11

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

#81 2002-11-20 13:22:44

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

#82 2002-12-03 20:21:21

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

#83 2002-12-03 20:57:36

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

#84 2002-12-03 21:17:46

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

#85 2003-01-09 00:54:28

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

#86 2003-01-09 05:37:21

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

#87 2003-01-09 17:26:09

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

#88 2003-01-09 17:29:10

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

#89 2003-01-09 17:32:25

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

#90 2003-01-09 17:36:28

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

#91 2003-01-09 17:43:48

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

#92 2003-01-09 18:05:54

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

#93 2003-01-09 18:12:19

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

#94 2003-01-10 00:08:24

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

#95 2003-01-10 05:53:35

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

#96 2003-01-10 12:10:46

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

#97 2003-01-18 11:43:19

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

#98 2003-04-03 11:12:46

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

#99 2003-04-13 13:08:17

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

#100 2003-04-13 16:59:46

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

Board footer