Prickly City by Scott Stantis for July 20, 2009

Come to think of it that was a mighty big footprint to a 5 year old

Yep, and I miss all the really cool space stuff you got when mom & dad bought “Tang”. (The Astronauts took it to the moon.”)

No, it’s not time to go back and leave some more. We can’t afford it.

We’ve a got an economy in the toilet, 2 wars to pay for, and a whole bunch of people who don’t have health insurance.

Maybe after we get those things taken care of we can think about leaving a whole bunch of money on the moon, but not before then.

Yeah, Tang and that comment about what a sandy surface it was before steppin’ out.

I would love to see the Earthrise from the moon. Pure science should always be funded, not everything must generate a financial profit.

Jack_Alope said, No, it’s not time to go back and leave some more. We can’t afford it.

completely ignoring the fact that most of the technology that is the backbone for the advancements of the previous 40 years was developed for the moon landing.

but don’t worry the chinese are going to put a man on the moon long before we get a replacement for the space shuttle, but that is the reason why they are a production economy and we are a service economy.

If we really wanted to save money: cut NASA’s budget. Sorry, I grew up with the space program, but reality must step in some time. NASA gets about 17 billion a year.

wndrwrthg, We agree for once. One of NASA’s biggest problems is priorities change every time we get a new president. For political reasons, Clinton invited Russia to join the Space Station team. Turned out to be one of the smartest moves ever made. If it were not for the Russians, we would have no Space Station.

NASA–$17 Billion/yr Pentagon–$539 Billion/yr ( not including the wars) Which one is BETTER? We could cut the Defense budget in half, defend our country and pay for heath care, NASA and more –easily– but we are an insane nation in perpetual war footing–when will we stop the insanity?

WE should have been to Mars and beyond by now! The budget to do that is very, very small compared to the obomination of national spending we’re going through now!

the space station should look more like 2001(a c clark)than a tree house. More space, less war.

I doubt it.

Shouldn’t we clean up our act here first? I am a devout trekkie (especially TNG) but we must learn to cherish this planet and respect one another before we spread our bad habits to space. (Otherwise’ we risk being assimilated by a superior civilization that will turn us into mindless drones…oh, wait, TV is allready doing that)

The moon is for tourists. There is nothing to mine there, so it’s not a logical spot for a base. Mars on the other hand may have resources.

Itis amazing. We have ceased being a nation of dreamers and doers to a nation of timidity and bean counters. The same arguments were made in 1958 when the space program started and in the early 60’s with Mercury and Apollo and even upi to the moment when the landing happned 40 years ago. But there were very few who wondered if it was worth it when Armstrong put that foot down.

We can STILL do anything we want to because we are Americans and we can. But we don’t want to.

It is sad what we have become.

the manned space program was a total waste of money from day 1. should never have been started. but it’s nonsense like don paschal’s machismo which started it and which maintain it.

Space. There sure is a lot of it out there. Let’s fill it up with us.

Jack-Alope, maybe what we need to spur the economy is such a project. You won’t spur the econmoy by saving and hoarding money, you have to get it into the system, get it moving. You go iut to dinner, workers get paid, they spend their money, those places pay their employees, money flows, the economy moves. This is supply side economics, and it works every time it’s applied.

We do need to go to space. We need to expand to the stars. We need to grow beyond earth. That is the future and I hope we do. That being said responsibility to freedom need be our first and foremost goal. Stopping the out of control group of people who want to become the new aristocracy comes first.

Best Regards

Some of the controversies here can be solved by opening the heavenly bodies to private ownership in the style of the 19th century Homestead Act. Divide the moon, Mars, etc., into defined tracts that can be owned by the first to reach it, develop it, and register a claim. No taxpayer money needed, and private investors will do it only when there is a viable reason. (Don’t bother to bombard me with the issues and problems; they are all soluble with the necessary will.)

But they’d better start their projects soon, because I intend to see a manned Mars landing before I’m done.