"I say to Mr. Obama: Let's get on with it. Let's invest in the future."

[Brett327]

Moon? Ha...been there done that!! Got the flag to prove it!!


The space program did cause the development of micro-computers and Integrated circuits (IC's) which, in turn, have developed everything we use today. Cell phones, GPS units in your cars, microcontrollers (used in all sorts of useless crap that we use everyday), and numerous others that I need not list.

Let's not be dense, people. Nobody is arguing that space exploration was devoid of technological benefit, only that it isn't some kind of technological panacea. Necessity is indeed the mother of invention, but the argument goes to just what constitutes a necessity during lean times. There are other ways for technology to evolve.

Contention: The military has been responsible for many more technological wonders than the space program ever could have dreamed - discuss.

Brett

 

[mmx1]

WWII caused the development of the jet engine, which, in turn, have developed to power every sort of military aircraft and most civil aircraft today.

The correlation is about as accurate. The space program placed a demand for IC's and accelerated their demand (a few billion dollars - 5% of the budget - will do that), but it certainly didn't singlehandedly create them out of thin air. The Minuteman missile, a contemporary of the Apollo computer, was also one of the first implementations of IC's.

 

[revan1013]

I just want to be that guy who gets to land on Mars. The practical benefits are nice, but come on... who hasn't dreamed of being an astronaut and pulling another Apollo 11?

 

[nzachman]

I personally do not think the technological advances of space exploration, like Brett has pointed out, have been that great. Instead, a goal like going to Mars withing 15 years motivates a lot of young people to go beyond themselves and strive every day to be better. I believe that the motivational factor of a goal to go to Mars far outweighs the benefits achieved through advanced technologies. In this day and age with 9/11, Katrina, Economy, the middle and high schoolers need something positive to motivate them; going to Mars could do that.

I know that my point was not well stated, but I hope you can get the picture.

 

[Bevo16]

I would prefer a goal like "Pay off the national debt in 15 years."

My wife would really like to take a 3 week trip to Europe. If we decided to to it, new clothes for the weather over there would be a "necessity". We can't fucking afford it so we are not going.

Why a bankrupt nation would even contemplate blowing billions of dollars on a trip to Mars is beyond me. This kind of government spending is nothing more than welfare for nerds.

 

[picklesuit]

I, personally, think we need to go to Mars. For several reasons.

1. We need to be there first to claim the property rights...including all of the mine-able/usable assets that we will find there.

2. We need to establish our squatters rights early, so we can be sure to own the good parts of the planet and not get left with the arid (unlivable) areas.

3. We will run out of room on this planet. Not in my lifetime, not in my kids lifetime, but it WILL happen. We need to be established elsewhere sooner, not later, when we start colonizing the next "New World."

4. We need something to get this country back to the forefront of engineering, science, and business. We are losing all of our talent to India, China, and Brazil; all of the innovators/thinkers/hard workers are coming here for our education and taking it with them back to their home country. The brain drain is ridiculous. Ever been in a graduate level class in any of the sciences/engineering/math? It is 90% foreigners.

We have become a lazy, service industry oriented society. We need to get back to the days of inventing shit, marketing it, and making other people pay for it. (Buy American! etc.)

I believe that the move to Mars will not even be pioneered by the government. Some private company will make the move first, and then have the sole proprietorship to the raw materials on another planet, as well as the means to get there. We need to be the country that has that company, and then we need to be sure to not tax/regulate/nationalize them into insolvency like we do to every other good company in this country.

That's my two cents, but I'm just an Animal Science major who flies planes for a living, so take it for what you will.

Read Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Trilogy (Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars) for a great idea of how the colonization of Mars will happen.

Pickle

 

[SkywardET]

Mars would rock, and Bevo's concern of debt is invalid. How do you have the largest budget deficit in history during quasi-peacetime? By not caring about budgets! That's why our current fiscal budgetary plan is, as the Vice POTUS said, "To spend money to keep from going bankrupt."

As in all cases in past history, the property rights of Mars will be entirely political, though the advantage goes to those who can get there first. However, what exactly is there to claim on Mars? I was under the impression it's virtually worthless and mineral-poor.

Such an endeavor would be about prestige more than technology. It would be about human profit, not material profit. While we still are the largest source of innovation on the planet, it wouldn't be bad to give such innovation a boost. Therefore, it just might be worth it.

 

[picklesuit]

Mars would rock, and Bevo's concern of debt is invalid. How do you have the largest budget deficit in history during quasi-peacetime? By not caring about budgets! That's why our current fiscal budgetary plan is, as the Vice POTUS said, "To spend money to keep from going bankrupt."

As in all cases in past history, the property rights of Mars will be entirely political, though the advantage goes to those who can get there first. However, what exactly is there to claim on Mars? I was under the impression it's virtually worthless and mineral-poor.

Such an endeavor would be about prestige more than technology. It would be about human profit, not material profit. While we still are the largest source of innovation on the planet, it wouldn't be bad to give such innovation a boost. Therefore, it just might be worth it.

Right, because if we found something we are going to tell everyone else "Hey guys, this place is lacquered in fucking gold and iron...come and get it!" I'm pretty sure whatever is on, and more importantly, in, the red planet can be used. We may have to invent new metallurgical processes, but You can hardly call the few missions we have sent there comprehensive enough to declare the planet "worthless".

 

[Bevo16]

Mars would rock, and Bevo's concern of debt is invalid....and more words

Invalid? Check yourself. Better yet, open a dictionary.

"Not giving a fuck" is a hell of a lot different than "invalid". Going for a swim and pretending that there are no are no sharks in the water does not make the ones that you can't see any less valid. When you get bit by one, they are pretty fucking valid. The billions of tax dollars that we have to pay to service our existing debt is plenty fucking valid.

Is this the kind of bullshit economics that is getting taught at Oklahoma these days? How about an analogy that you will understand:

A group of OU drop-outs are cooking meth in their trailer. They are plenty aware of their friends who have gotten arrested, fried their brains on the drug, or burned themselves beyond recognition, but they didn't consider those concerns "valid" because nothing bad had happened to them yet. Then, Jethro gets a little to drunk while he is manning the cook pot and he kicks it over and his buddies who are all passed out in the other room burn to death as the trailer goes up in smoke. Just because they didn't consider the very real concerns "valid" does not mean Jethro, Bubba and Duke get their lives back.

Just because a bunch of dumbasses in Washington don't consider budget concerns "valid" does not mean that we can stop paying taxes to service the debt. China is not going to forgive our loans and start over from scratch, and nobody is going to cut the taxpayer a refund for payments made to service debt. It's money that is just gone.

Every time you hear about some grand government idea or program you need to remember that this is your money. Better yet, it's your debt. When you are fucking broke, you gotta fix broke first. Hyperinflation and or an economic depression (or both) is going to happen if our debt is not handled. There is no other possible option (other than a massive war with China where we tell them to stick the loans up their asses).

 

[mmx1]

Mars would rock, and Bevo's concern of debt is invalid. How do you have the largest budget deficit in history during quasi-peacetime? By not caring about budgets! That's why our current fiscal budgetary plan is, as the Vice POTUS said, "To spend money to keep from going bankrupt."

Aren't you the one bemoaning our inability to pay off the deficit?

 

[Random8145]

The debt is serviceable still, and a national debt that is reasonable can be a good thing. The key is to manage it will. The bad thing is when it gets to be too large.

Ours is around I think 65% or so of GDP right now. Japan's is like 200%, and the European nations on average have larger debts too.

As for space, I'd say I think the private sector will be the ones to take us there. One key is to get a much more affordable rocket for launching stuff into space (Elon Musk is attempting this, don't know if he'll succeed though), and one that is also safer. Some more affordable and safer rocket designs have been proposed within NASA, but were killed due to politics and bureaucracy in NASA and Washington.

For example, I believe the only reason they still use the solid rocket boosters on the space shuttle is because of politics. A much safer liquid methane-fueled rocket was proposed, but was killed.

Solid rockets are dangerous because once they start burning, you can't turn them off.

Also ROBOTS. As robotics technology becomes more advanced and cheaper, we can explore space via robotics a lot more I think, especially in the private sector, and then this can make way for industrializing space and also sending humans up.

For example, it used to be bipedal robots were only science fiction. Then Honda and Sony created bipedal robots. Now there are bidepal robot kits in the thousands and hundreds of dollars even. Amazing to think where the technology will get to over another twenty years, especially with tinkerers and hobbyists.

Maybe today's robot tinkerers will be the entrepreneurs of a coming "robot revolution," in which every home will have a personal robot. Perhaps you could then send humanoid robots that can walk and utilize tools to Mars, to do things traditionally only humans could do. Much safer that way.

Or a human could go to Mars themselves, but with a group of robot aids. Google right now has an award up for whoever can launch a robot to the Moon and then drive it around and broadcast the video on Youtube.

Sending humans to Mars presents ENORMOUS problems though, in terms of psychology (how to put multiple people into a small space together for months and not have them murder each other), the fact that the Earth from Mars is just a blue dot and not a huge globe in the sky like from the Moon, the fact that spending months in zero gravity causes huge atrophy of bone and muscle tissue, so how to prevent this...?

And so forth. So while I hope we can do this someday, until then, robots I think can present a cheaper and safer alternative.

 

[mmx1]

For example, I believe the only reason they still use the solid rocket boosters on the space shuttle is because of politics. A much safer liquid methane-fueled rocket was proposed, but was killed.

Solid rockets are dangerous because once they start burning, you can't turn them off.

At least at the time of design, the decision came down to having a longer track record in SRB's than pressure-fed liquid fueled rockets, and that the liquid fueled would have been larger and not transportable by rail.

http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Aeronauti...885JFall-2005/LectureNotes/detail/embed01.htm

 

[SkywardET]

Internet sarcasm still requires the obligatory emoticon. Got it, sir. (In other words, I was joking about it!)

But in a semi-serious note, the administration is trying to pay for massive economy-ruining carbon controls, force everyone in the country to get health insurance while the costs be damned, and expand or maintain two "overseas contingency operations" simultaneously. Why not hook up Mars to this gravy train to hell?

 

[Bevo16]

Well, in that case...

Thanks for providing such an outstanding opportunity to poke fun at OU in a non-football thread. Those are always fun.

 

[SkywardET]

I'm at OU for the Aerospace Engineering program. So far it seems pretty decent, but I'm learning economics on my own accord. I don't think any of the big-name schools teach real economics, but they all teach a type of "Voodoo" that has the same vocabulary (capital, investments, flows of goods, etc.).

(In all seriousness, I'm pretty sure you could learn more from a day spent on watching lectures from the Mises Institute than you could getting a Master's in Economics from most schools. Just a guess, though, because I haven't done the latter nor would I.)