Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Johonny

(20,833 posts)
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 11:30 AM Jan 2012

Newt and the Magic Moonbase

Sorry if I also don't get really fired up about a moonbase. I was promised a mission to Mars by Bush the younger and how did that work out. The fact is building a real moonbase would cost mega $$$. Do I think a man that had trouble funding the rather small space station in low Earth Orbit while in congress, is going to push through a huge increase in NASA's budget at the expense of the military. No. On top of this he's promising to cut taxes and cut the debt. He's going to balance the budget! He's going to do that and build a moonbase? No.

On the scientific side when I here a politician say I'm gonna build a moonbase or I'm gonna live on Mars, I don't think "wow that's totally inspiring". I think "wow there's a politician so lazy he can't talk to the American people in an honest intelligent way about Americas role in space". The thing is America does have a vast space infrastructure. We have weather satellites, communication satellites, GPS amd those magical others that get Bin Laden dead. This infrastructure has slowly been build up while American politicians talked to us about moonbases, space stations and living on Mars. The entire fleet of Americas Launch vehicles almost never gets talked about in the press or by our politicians. When we set a record for exploratory spacecraft in orbit around other solar system objects, do people like Newt say word one? So I don't get that excited by talk of moonbases. People like Newt or Bush have no fucking clue what America actually does in space. They don't want to know. They don't really give a shit about science, infrastructure or even peoples dreams. It's a quick line in a campaign that they are never going to fund. Moonbase, you're lucky if Newt buys you a moon pie.

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Newt and the Magic Moonbase (Original Post) Johonny Jan 2012 OP
Reminds me of a Dave Chappelle skit CatWoman Jan 2012 #1
MARS, a tax! WingDinger Jan 2012 #2
Newt is no fan of Government spending, so I don't think that's what he means. NinetySix Jan 2012 #3
Sort of Johonny Jan 2012 #6
Michaud's "Reaching for the High Frontier" is a good history MisterP Jan 2012 #4
A resort for the aging rich? Spike89 Jan 2012 #5
"The moon is a superior planet to the earth'' Ichingcarpenter Jan 2012 #7
Newt was just jealous of Mittens magic undies. sarcasmo Jan 2012 #8
 

NinetySix

(1,301 posts)
3. Newt is no fan of Government spending, so I don't think that's what he means.
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 12:15 PM
Jan 2012

Surely he's calling for private investment to fully fund a permanent moon base.

With all of the trillions that the most well-off in the U.S. have amassed, perhaps he believes that the ultra-wealthy will have no more compunction about spending the trillion dollars or so that such a massive undertaking would require than they did stealing it in the first place.

I'm sure that in order to assuage their collective conscience, the very rich will line up to sacrifice that extra 20,000 square-foot summer home or the additional 120-foot luxury yacht in order to build this symbol of prestige on behalf of this country of ours (theirs) that they so love.

The rest of us, lacking the equivalent resources to devote to the project, can assist in two ways: first, forgoing our sense of entitlement, along with the Medicare and Social Security benefits we've paid for during the entire course of our working lives, thus minimizing the resulting deficit; and second, willingly heading overseas to fight in the next foreign war for resources, and the next, and the next....

So it turns out it IS feasible. So much for you naysayers.

Johonny

(20,833 posts)
6. Sort of
Sat Jan 28, 2012, 11:49 AM
Jan 2012

When Newt was house speaker we went to what is called "acquisition reform" in the space industry. NASA called it faster, better, cheaper. You usually can do 2 of these three easy The idea was to run the space industry more like say our oil industry. Little regulations and the companies basically self regulated. You the government buy a ride on their rocket and trust it works. If there is a problem trust they have the people to fix it. This is not how the industry is now and both NASA and the USAF have independent laboratories to verify space vehicles are operational. This adds cost, but the stakes are high. You can't recall a rocket or a satellite like you can your car.

The result of acquisition reform in the 1990's was a mess for the US space infrastructure. A mess we are still digging out of. Think of the way offshore oil drillers self regulated themselves and when problems come up the Federal government turned to the same vary companies to solve it. That's Newt's vision of the space industry. The US tried it once. It didn't work anymore than it worked for offshore oil drilling. It turns out you need places like JPL and NASA to have space success.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
4. Michaud's "Reaching for the High Frontier" is a good history
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 03:55 PM
Jan 2012

on the late-70s surge in "make Murka great" rhetoric that wanted military and other-planetary activities instead of hippie CO2-measuring satellites; it was part of the rhetoric that saw space travel as following in Columbus and Cabot's footsteps--rather than Weddell and Hilary's

Spike89

(1,569 posts)
5. A resort for the aging rich?
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 04:28 PM
Jan 2012

Although there are some problems with getting the frail old 1% into orbit, once there or even on the moon, they'd have it sweet! No panhandling 99%ers, no property taxes, government regulation, and no real natural environment to protect (no EPA to enforce it anyway).
Seriously though, lower gravity could be an extreme life-extending environment. The rich could potentially hold onto their money and power for a few more years.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Newt and the Magic Moonba...