a modest proposal
http://space4commerce.blogspot.com/2008/…
If we smeared the cost of the Phoenix Lander into a thin paste and divided it up even-steven we could buy all the poor people in the US a nice lunch at Applebees.
Too true.
On the other hand, recall that the poor people in the US (who, to a very large degree, are poor because they work drastically less per year than the rest of us) pay almost no taxes.
I suggest that we make the poor contribute to society just a little bit, by, say, taxing them on the one thing they’ve got an adequate supply of – no, not television, fast food, domestic disturbances, and lottery tickets – OK, fine, tax them on one of the many things they’ve got an adequate supply of: free time.
Make each poor person work for 80 hours, and those 37 million folks can – at minimum wage – contribute enough resources to let us send 42 Phoenixes.
…or, better yet, we take the $18 billion and spend it building an Orion.
(the real Orion, as God, Ulam and Dyson intended , not the sad sack NASA launch vehicle)
May 28th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
My mom found one of my old books (which used to be her brother’s), “By Space Ship To The Moon”, by Jack Coggins and Fletcher Pratt, foreword by Willy Ley, 1952. The illustrations are spectacular; hard-suited lunar geologists, a huge SSTO takeoff at night, gigantic boosters in their gantries, space stations being built from the boosters themselves.
The title of the very first chapter?
“Who Pays For It?”
Interestingly enough, they admitted up front that it would be staggeringly expensive, and even though valuable minerals are believed to be on the moon, a corporation would probably see it as too much risk, too little reward. They go on to say that just going to the moon isn’t of much use to a government, either. So what’s the solution? Well, since the best way to go to the moon is to build your ships in space, you’ll need a space station. And who’ll want a space station? The military! But really only as a stepping stone to military moon bases, because it’s easier to toss stuff down the gravity well than up it.
There’s a real hard-nosed practicality to the whole thing; essentially, ‘This will be really difficult, but most of these problems are, in the end, engineering details. We know how to make this work.’
May 29th, 2008 at 12:58 am
“a corporation would probably see it as too much risk, too little reward.”
Heh. I think it was Lovell who remarked that, in hindsight, he has no idea how the rattletrap that was Apollo ever made it to the moon. He said they basically threw caution to the wind and lots of things were just time bombs waiting to go off (in his case, they did). If a corporation had allowed 13 to happen, there would have been no end to the wailing and wringing of the hands. But the government let it happen, meh, them’s the breaks.
Going back to the “lies in school” post; I was in middle school when Apollo 13 hit theaters, and that was literally the first time that I’d heard about the near-tragedy. I’d been taught about 11, sure. But I guess government schools hate to talk about government failures, unless they involve the government inflicting misery on a minority group.
May 29th, 2008 at 4:54 am
I think there should be a minimum working week for everyone but the disabled. Let’s say you have to do remunerated work for 40 hours a week, or be improving yourself (in a vocational or college program). That way, poor people contribute more or are improving their ability to contribute. And rich people, well, they won’t be able to get too lazy.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:27 am
[quote comment="144364"]I think there should be a minimum working week for everyone but the disabled. Let’s say you have to do remunerated work for 40 hours a week, or be improving yourself (in a vocational or college program). That way, poor people contribute more or are improving their ability to contribute. And rich people, well, they won’t be able to get too lazy.[/quote]
I think that most disabled people can work. You’re in a wheelchair? Poor baby. Answer that customer support phone.
I also think that most rich people work fare more than 40 hours / week. Sure, there are a few heirs, but they’re the exception, not the rule.
I’d suggest that almost everyone on this list works a lot harder than I do…
May 29th, 2008 at 9:23 am
” …or, better yet, we take the $18 billion and spend it building an Orion.
(the real Orion, as God, Ulam and Dyson intended , not the sad sack NASA launch vehicle)”
Because nothin’ would get you goin’ like a few A-bombs up your butt.
May 29th, 2008 at 9:31 am
“God, Ulam and Dyson” — now there’s a trinity.
May 29th, 2008 at 11:09 am
A lot of the disabled (SSI disabled) people have made the decision NOT to work. Like the 20 year old who got pissed off because we weren’t going to sign his SSI paperwork so he physically threatened our nursing staff. Not physically able to participate in employment? More like mentally incapable.
May 29th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
I think there should be a minimum working week for everyone but the disabled.
Aw, geez. The last thing we need is yet another government program. And this one would not be a bunch of crats in an office doing paperwork in D.C. – these guys would be _everywhere_ and they’d be putting out bids for work their cheap labor pool can perform and have all kinds of power.
And this bunch would have no incentive to keep the number of poor lower – the more clients they have the better. Can you say unintended consequences?
The solution to a whole bunch of bad government ain’t more of the same.
May 29th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Brian, I’m not sure I understand what you’re trying to say. Who are “these guys” and “this bunch”? Are you saying there will be a lot of government agents (or some other group of actors?) utilizing newly mobilized cheap labor to perform work cheaply? And that “this bunch” will force people to remain poor? I’m not sure how “they” would accomplish that…
Whatever, my proposal was just an off-the-cuff what-if.
TJIC, I would say the work done by the rich is worth more than the work you and I do, in some respects. When they work even an hour less much more value is lost than when we lay off that same hour.
I can’t say who works harder. I think that’s a moot point, as it lies mostly within highly mutable definitions. My cousins all work construction. I would say they work harder than I do. They believe I work harder than I do. Who’s to say which is actually “harder.”
Compare a day laborer’s work with a multi-billionaire’s work. The laborer’s job is physically harder and his lifestyle is more variable, and the rich guy’s work is more intellectually demanding but his lifestyle is less variable. The laborer gets to leave his work at the end of the day, the billionaire is likely constantly at work in some way … “Hardness” starts getting sticky very quickly.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Who are “these guys” and “this bunch”? Are you saying there will be a lot of government agents (or some other group of actors?) utilizing newly mobilized cheap labor to perform work cheaply? And that “this bunch” will force people to remain poor? I’m not sure how “they” would accomplish that…
I understand that your proposal was off-the cuff. The implication of the proposal minimum working week for everyone but the disabledimplied a great deal more in my own head than was there, after I thought about it for a bit.
Nevermind.