Do you support public space exploration?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 01:20:08 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Do you support public space exploration?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Poll
Question: -skip-
#1
Yes, a massive commitment.
 
#2
Yes, larger commitment but no "moon shots."
 
#3
Yes, existing commitment.
 
#4
No.
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 81

Author Topic: Do you support public space exploration?  (Read 4081 times)
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: March 26, 2016, 05:31:41 PM »
« edited: March 26, 2016, 05:43:02 PM by Snowguy716 »

lol.. Antonio...'it's hard for me to support spending a lot of money for that while millions of people are going hungry" as if you can just purchase food with space money from a magical food production machine.  

And what are you talking about that American government spending is on futile sh**t?  A big chunk goes to things like preventing terrorist attacks...(arguably could be reduced)  And the rest of the money goes to paying old and disabled people transfer payments and medical care.  You're such a sniveling snob to say that.

We already produce enough food.  It's a distribution and greed problem... not a money problem.  In fact, we could produce more food but that would require, you know, plowing up conservation land.. and you probably oppose that too.  

You don't think researching and trying to grow crops on the moon or on mars might lead to breakthroughs that could increase food production here on earth?

That increased resources from mining minerals might benefit us all and to a great extent in the long terrm?

Instead you people are reactionary and small minded.  The grossest part is that you cloak it in a blanket of condescending moral superiority like the girl who you wish you hadn't started a conversation with at a party

"What do you want for Christmas Seth?  Oh.. the new iPad?  You know waht I want for Christmas, Seth?  an end to world hunger.... yeah... maybe you can google up how to stop world hunger from your new ipad, seth and do something good for a change"

You'd be the one gorging on the catch of fish while the others around you are hungry and then when one of them suggests going fishing you scream "WE NEED TO SOLVE YOUR HUNGER FIRST BEFORE WE WASTE ALL KINDS OF TIME HAVING FUN....*scoff*"

Like, seriously... what stupid ignorance.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: March 26, 2016, 05:57:44 PM »

I see your point, Antonio, but let's consider this. The wars, which were objectively terrible occurrences, had a byproduct of accelerating the scientific progress which, in turn, greatly benefited the entire humanity. Now, a public space exploration is certainly not an awful thing as war, but think about all the advancements it can create via the same process.
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: March 26, 2016, 06:01:33 PM »

I see your point, Antonio, but let's consider this. The wars, which were objectively terrible occurrences, had a byproduct of accelerating the scientific progress which, in turn, greatly benefited the entire humanity. Now, a public space exploration is certainly not an awful thing as war, but think about all the advancements it can create via the same process.
What a less reactionary, calm, and more productive way to make my point.  

Space exploration is literally pie in the sky...but I cant see how researching food production in extreme and hostile environments with utmost efficiency wouldn't also benefit us here back on earth.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,962
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: March 27, 2016, 12:53:15 AM »

Oh for f**k's sake Snowguy. I know bizarre non-sequitur is your trademark style, but come on.
Logged
politicallefty
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,200
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -9.22

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: March 27, 2016, 02:16:57 AM »

Kennedy made his pledge to put a man on the moon in an entirely military context. The Cold War was at its height: in 1957 the USSR scared the USA stiff when Sputnik beeped overhead every 90 minutes and in 1960 the USSR shot down our high altitude U2 spy plane and paraded the pilot and aircraft to show that the US was systematically invading the airspace of the USSR for espionage. Like the public support for a military response to 9/11, the public supported the space race as part of an attempt to recover military dominance atop the atmosphere.

Without a similarly compelling reason, I don't see how any president gets the public behind an all-out manned mission. I think a modest increase is the best that can be sold to the public.

I know exactly what you're saying. I am under no illusions that our space program in the 60s was nothing more than another Cold War fight against the Soviet Union. That doesn't make it any less exceptional than it was. Space exploration is one of the most vital programs we have as a species. I believe it is vital that we soon become an interplanetary species for the first time. It will happen eventually and I hope it happens soon. A multinational effort would be preferable, but I cannot say I would be opposed to withdrawing from the Outer Space Treaty and placing NASA (at least partially) under the jurisdiction of the DOD. I think we could all rest assured that under that paradigm, NASA would get all the money it could ever want.

Realistically, I think we should focus on a permanent human settlement on Mars within 10 years (by the end of the 2020s at the absolute latest). I'm certain we can do it. I support full government action as well as public-private partnerships for the effort. I think a secondary manned effort should be to establish a permanent settlement on the moon as well, although it is a lesser priority than Mars. As for unmanned missions, I believe we should continue what we are doing. However, I would like to see very rapid movement on an unmanned mission to Europa to drill beneath the surface and send a probe to its probable subsurface ocean. The possibility that we find active life on Europa would be one of the biggest days in history (second only to perhaps interacting with actual extraterrestrial intelligent life).
Logged
Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]
tsionebreicruoc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,385
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: March 29, 2016, 11:37:36 AM »

The wars, which were objectively terrible occurrences, had a byproduct of accelerating the scientific progress which, in turn, greatly benefited the entire humanity.

Greatly benefited the entire humanity like a world full of pesticides did? like nuclear and its issues on thousands of years did? like the invasion of chemy that made an invasion of cancer did? like the overpoluted atmosphere did?

It greatly benefited Humanity from a...

I love the smell of napalm in the morning

...point of view, eventually.

I know that war has very often been a way to boost technological advancement, now saying it 'greatly benefits the entire humanity' might, very eventually, lacks subtlty.

At most it greatly benefited us in showing us all the screwed up things we shouldn't do anymore.



Personally, the so huge cost of Space Exploration is part of what made me realize Money was so baseless, and at the very least belonged to pure Human decisions (while seems most people still believe we have a little amount of gold to share the best we can...).

But, Money or not Money to rule your economical system, this is not the problem, since all belongs to Human decisions as long as there isn't any concrete obstacle.

In short, as long as Humans won't find an interest (intellectual or material) in exploring Space deeper, that might not happen, no matter money.

Nowadays, apparently, only a bunch of very rich guys have such an interest, but you don't even know wether that's mostly a money interest, that wouldn't go very far, or a deeper interest.

A system without money as we know it would 'just' not submit this fancy goal to what rules money nowadays, mostly greed, but wouldn't necessarily make it easier if people don't express that wish by one way or an other.

So, 1st point, if we are not totally silly, we can have both Food and Space, and maybe even without polution and wars, woooooooooohoooooooooooooooooooo!!

And, personally, I'd plead for a quite ambitious program of exploration and even conquest, the most ambitious possible even. Grin

Other than that, for the very short term, waiting for us to be less silly, there is one thing on which I often wished we make big savings in Space exploration.

I heard that one of the stuffs that was costing the most money, was to totally sterelize what we send here and there, in order not to 'polute' other environments.

I can understand the concern, life on Earth showed how some life balances could be fragile, but heck, if we wanna seriously move ourselves into Space, we will have to deal with...life.

Other concerns about that could be about to be sure that life we find elsewhere doesn't belong to Earth originally, well, some DNA analysis might be able to sort this out.

Personally, I even sometimes wish we try to export the most life we could outside Earth, that could even be one of the great mission of Humanity, trying to export Earth Life anywhere it can.

In the end of the day, we are only one life form amongst others, the main point would be Life itself, we trying to explore, conquer, and export, would just be...Life goes on!

Space Exploration is like a necessary breath, both intellectually and concretely.

Vers l'Infini et Au-delà!!


Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,804


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: March 29, 2016, 02:13:19 PM »

Certainly. And I applaud the incredible achievements of Elon Musk.
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,468
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: March 30, 2016, 09:08:43 AM »

Yes, but with larger extend than now.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: April 02, 2016, 02:50:33 PM »

Of course -there's plenty of room for growth in NASA's budget which is currently miniscule. 
Logged
Sumner 1868
tara gilesbie
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,053
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: April 02, 2016, 03:13:40 PM »

The biggest problem I have with NASA is that it's projects are mostly concentrated in the South and California. If we were to have a "committed" space program, I would like it spread into all 50 states rather than a select few. Were that to happen, then:

Of course, and nationalize all companies that are contracted for space exploration currently.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,962
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: April 02, 2016, 03:23:42 PM »

The biggest problem I have with NASA is that it's projects are mostly concentrated in the South and California. If we were to have a "committed" space program, I would like it spread into all 50 states rather than a select few.

The closer to the Equator, the less power it takes to reach the speed necessary to pull out of Earth's gravity. It's just not convenient to do it in Alaska.
Logged
Sumner 1868
tara gilesbie
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,053
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: April 02, 2016, 03:36:45 PM »

The biggest problem I have with NASA is that it's projects are mostly concentrated in the South and California. If we were to have a "committed" space program, I would like it spread into all 50 states rather than a select few.

The closer to the Equator, the less power it takes to reach the speed necessary to pull out of Earth's gravity. It's just not convenient to do it in Alaska.

I don't mean all states need flight centers, per se, just that I like to see the manufacturing for a space program used towads revitalize struggling areas-particularly in the Rust Belt.
Logged
politicallefty
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,200
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -9.22

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: April 02, 2016, 11:18:19 PM »

I don't mean all states need flight centers, per se, just that I like to see the manufacturing for a space program used towads revitalize struggling areas-particularly in the Rust Belt.

To be fair, it does make more sense to build closer to where you're going to utilize said product. (And, if I remember correctly, Boeing has a huge production facility in Everett.) You're thinking bigger scale in terms of large public works projects and the like. I think space exploration can and should be part of that. If I had my way, NASA's budget would be something along the lines of $100-200 billion. If that involved moving some money from the DOD, so be it. To be honest, I think that could be one of the most acceptable ways to reduce the defense budget while advancing all of humanity. I'm sure many defense contractors could easily move from military-based operations to space-oriented operations.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: April 07, 2016, 08:35:15 PM »

If you want a practical reason to support public space exploration, it's a way of keeping defense contractors and the people who work for them satisfied, busy, and prepared to mobilize for an actual war without doing anything actively harmful (e.g. spending/contracting/national defense disasters like the B-2, F-22, or Zumwalt).

Not really.  There's very little commonality there, even on the rocket side of the space program.
Logged
Derpist
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 997
Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -2.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: April 08, 2016, 12:14:21 AM »

No. It's a good cause, but there are a lot of other problems we have (lack of healthcare, lack of jobs, giant deficit)
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: April 08, 2016, 10:49:07 PM »

To be fair, it does make more sense to build closer to where you're going to utilize said product. (And, if I remember correctly, Boeing has a huge production facility in Everett.) You're thinking bigger scale in terms of large public works projects and the like. I think space exploration can and should be part of that. If I had my way, NASA's budget would be something along the lines of $100-200 billion. If that involved moving some money from the DOD, so be it. To be honest, I think that could be one of the most acceptable ways to reduce the defense budget while advancing all of humanity. I'm sure many defense contractors could easily move from military-based operations to space-oriented operations.

This is really what we should be doing. Not dumping enormous sums into wasteful military programs. We could be so much further ahead if we invested like that into R&D/space.
Logged
Human
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 446
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: June 28, 2016, 04:02:24 PM »

Yes, a massive commitment.
Logged
RaphaelDLG
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,688
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: June 29, 2016, 12:18:16 AM »

If you want a practical reason to support public space exploration, it's a way of keeping defense contractors and the people who work for them satisfied, busy, and prepared to mobilize for an actual war without doing anything actively harmful (e.g. spending/contracting/national defense disasters like the B-2, F-22, or Zumwalt).

BINGO
Logged
Mercenary
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,575


Political Matrix
E: -3.94, S: -2.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: July 07, 2016, 09:29:13 PM »

Yes, it is one of the few areas I support federal dollars being spent. I would like to see a massive decrease in other areas of spending and an increase in space exploration and really all scientific research in general.
Logged
RaphaelDLG
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,688
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: July 10, 2016, 08:19:16 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-NkX86uPI0
Logged
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: July 11, 2016, 01:09:25 AM »

Yes - there's a LOT of nickel* up there. We should be colonizing and mining as soon as possible.

However, I support public funding due to the sheer mass of resources available. Were space the exclusive province of private companies, I think it would produce an even more dangerous political dynamic than exists now.

*and hydrogen, and iron, and pretty much everything we need to continue living.
Logged
anvi
anvikshiki
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,400
Netherlands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: July 24, 2016, 10:15:20 PM »

The percentage of the federal budget expended on NASA peaked at not quite 4.5% in the 1960's, has been under 2% since 1970, has only been over 1% for three years since 1975 and, between 1994 and last year, has been cut from 0.94% to under 0.5%.  So, more of a commitment.  I don't believe in manned missions anywhere in the near future, since sending people to the moon or the planets is way too much risk for mere optics.  As Ernest notes, we learn plenty from beautifully automated missions (the Mars Rover for the past few years and now Juno have given us wondrous science).  But great civilizations should support new discoveries about the universe for themselves and for posterity if they have the opportunity.  And we have the opportunity.  it costs very little in the grand scheme of things, and we can help all the people we need to if we change other much higher-cost priorities. 
Logged
Green Line
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,577
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: July 26, 2016, 04:54:40 PM »

Yes, a lot more spending is necessary.  Not to be dramatic, but the survival of our species depends on it.  Probably not in our lifetimes, or even any of our childrens childrens children, but eventually we are going to have to live off of Earth, and even this solar system (I know, thats a long long time from now)
Logged
I’m not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: November 24, 2016, 06:29:21 PM »

Yes.
Logged
ElectionsGuy
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,107
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.10, S: -7.65

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: November 24, 2016, 07:54:55 PM »

I support private space exploration. Having the government fund space travel when there's massive debt and people are in need is just plain wrong in my opinion.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.064 seconds with 14 queries.