U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Space
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Will humans go to Mars?
Yes, but not in our lifetimes 8 40.00%
Yes, probably in the next few decades 9 45.00%
No, there is no public will and the risks/costs are too high 3 15.00%
Voters: 20. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-10-2012, 10:17 PM
 
16,308 posts, read 25,270,527 times
Reputation: 8302

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by orogenicman View Post
Well, I believe that we could afford to fix our roads and bridges if we'd just stop invading everyone who looks at us cross-eyed. Imagine the roads and bridges (and the schools) we could have built had we not bought into Bush's lies.
but that money is spent and gone, and we may never recover.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cjg5 View Post
Let's take away welfare and give all those on it the paying jobs they lack instead... to build roads and bridges, and much more. Makes more sense to me to be paying people for hard work, than to be giving it to them for free. Doing this would actually kill multiple birds, with a single stone.
Construction jobs to rebuild are short term, and seasonal, and many are not qualified or physically able to work in the construction industry. Construction is for the young and physically capable. It will put those in the industry back to work, but what about the other 70, 80, or 90% of the unemployed from other industries and skills?

What is needed is real, long time jobs that have a future, are not seasonal, and won't end in a year or so when the project is complete.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-11-2012, 08:39 AM
 
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,683 posts, read 46,368,173 times
Reputation: 11862
If we re-learn how to dream, we will. It's hard to say, there are so many variables. I don't see it happening in the next 20-30 years, due to other concerns, but if there is enough impetus, other than that pure, unfettered instinct for exploration, then I think it will happen in the next 50 years. I think it should be an initiative of a combined international space program.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2012, 10:57 AM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
18,114 posts, read 20,180,784 times
Reputation: 14051
Going to Mars is will create a massive number of jobs and probably whole new industries devoted to solving issues that have never been dealt with. This is because millions of people the world over will likely be involved directly or indirectly in such a venture.

This is not science fiction. There are real life problems that need to be solved. Like what if an astronaut develops a serious condition during the 3-year journey which requires special medical attention or surgery? They will be hundreds of millions of miles from earth. Do we take doctors along? And who will treat them if they become seriously ill?

And remember this will be on a planet that has no life which we know of, or air which is breathable for humans. Pretty daunting, isn't it?

Last edited by BigCityDreamer; 01-11-2012 at 11:58 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2012, 02:55 PM
 
16,308 posts, read 25,270,527 times
Reputation: 8302
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
Going to Mars is will create a massive number of jobs and probably whole new industries devoted to solving issues that have never been dealt with. This is because millions of people the world over will likely be involved directly or indirectly in such a venture.

This is not science fiction. There are real life problems that need to be solved. Like what if an astronaut develops a serious condition during the 3-year journey which requires special medical attention or surgery? They will be hundreds of millions of miles from earth. Do we take doctors along? And who will treat them if they become seriously ill?

And remember this will be on a planet that has no life which we know of, or air which is breathable for humans. Pretty daunting, isn't it?
It will create jobs, it will not create massive jobs.

But what is the return, i.e. the profit margin. The tax payers will pay dearly, so collectively we have bragging rights. We may also have some unique new products, such as the Tempredic Foam Mattress, or another ball point pen that will write upside down.

And who pays for this, for it will not be self supporting, and while there will be returns as witnessed by the current space program, it will only be a very very small percentage of the investment.. So who is funding this?............ Oh yea, me and you and every taxpayer, and we will still see our roads crumble and our bridges crumble into the river below.

And we are likely to simply give the jobs any advances gleaned away. Go out and buy an HDTV (an American invention by the way) made by an American, or a cell phone, or a computer. You can't............
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2012, 07:12 PM
 
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,683 posts, read 46,368,173 times
Reputation: 11862
If we had to justify everything we did in terms of profit/practical return we would have never gone to the moon. It was, to be honest, mostly about showing up the Soviets. I think going to Mars definitely goes behind dollars and cents (and arguably, sense). Probably a mix of human endeavor and human ego.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2012, 07:44 PM
 
32,531 posts, read 31,246,893 times
Reputation: 32379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trimac20 View Post
It was, to be honest, mostly about showing up the Soviets.
Ummm... The U.S. space program wasn't "just" about going to the moon. And I don't think the nuclear arms race was all about "showing up the Soviets".

Last edited by DewDropInn; 01-11-2012 at 08:06 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2012, 08:56 PM
 
Location: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
10,959 posts, read 23,505,130 times
Reputation: 5321
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
Ummm... The U.S. space program wasn't "just" about going to the moon. And I don't think the nuclear arms race was all about "showing up the Soviets".
that is true it was for both showing up and blowing up the Soviets during the height of the Cold War where a having a nuclear ICBM exchange was a very possible situation..But alot of good came from it such as the the space race and we were smart enough to not blow Ourselfs up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2012, 09:11 PM
 
16,308 posts, read 25,270,527 times
Reputation: 8302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trimac20 View Post
If we had to justify everything we did in terms of profit/practical return we would have never gone to the moon. It was, to be honest, mostly about showing up the Soviets. I think going to Mars definitely goes behind dollars and cents (and arguably, sense). Probably a mix of human endeavor and human ego.
There is nothing wrong with things that cannot be justified (economically) when you can afford it.

You don't go out and buy a high-end luxury car, or take an expensive vacation, when it means you can't pay your bills or feed your family.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2012, 10:04 PM
 
Location: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
10,959 posts, read 23,505,130 times
Reputation: 5321

Nasa shuttle launch Atlantis high definition 1280x720 - YouTube
This make me damn proud of the positive things the US has done and advanced mankind to soar to things never thought possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2012, 10:25 PM
 
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,683 posts, read 46,368,173 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
Ummm... The U.S. space program wasn't "just" about going to the moon. And I don't think the nuclear arms race was all about "showing up the Soviets".
Never said it was just about that, but I think Kennedy's big speech about sending a man to the moon was largely fueled by competitiveness. Face it, competition breeds progress and if it wasn't for that I don't think the space program would have progressed as quickly as it did. I'm not saying it's a bad thing at all and I think the Moon landings were great achievements for humankind as a whole, American or Russian, and everyone else.

The Americans weren't solely responsible. It took thousands of years of technological know-how, from many cultures, that went into the development of that rocket and everything else needed so Mr. Armstrong could set foot on that lunar surface.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Space
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:43 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top