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.
How many people would be willing to ride a rocket into space if the owner of the rocket wasn't willing to?
While this may not have been strictly speaking a scientific endeavor, it was a hell of a marketing strategy. Remember, the ultimate goal is commercial space travel.
What would commercial space travel look like, what would be the purpose and how would it be profitable.
What would commercial space travel look like, what would be the purpose and how would it be profitable.
Tourism, payload deployment, fast travel just to name a few....
For example, imagine traveling from NYC to Shanghai in 40 minutes instead of 10+ hours.
As with most technology, early adoptions of the technology will only be available to the few that can afford it... but as the technology matures, unforeseeable applications for the technology emerge and it becomes more common/affordable. Most new ventures only need to tap into a new market for funding... in this case tourism as it seems.
In this era where the Left constantly push their Liberal Agenda on the rest of us - the launch of Blue Origin highlights the absolute hypocrisy of the Left:
1. having soooo much money that you can build your own spacecraft for a simple joyride while not paying your warehouse workers minimum wage or even allowing them to go to the toilet!
2. preaching the Green Deal to combat Global Warming while flying in a rocketship that spews out tons of toxic chemicals into the atmosphere!
3. pledging support to Black Lives Matter only to invite rich white folks to their events
4. ignoring COVID safety measures while enforcing it on everyone else
Please fell free to add to this list.
Blue Origin and Amazon are two separate companies. Bezos is common to both, but they are totally separate companies. Your first point blew any credibility you might have had. I stopped reading.
I think people don't think much of Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg, because these guys do not provide tangible goods.
Andrew Carnegie provided steel, Ford manufactured cars, Rockefeller refined oil. But Jeff Bezos only peddled other people's wares. He's a middleman, that's why there is disrespect for how he built his wealth.
I would say that Bezos has enabled more people to legally and ethically become wealthy in this century than anyone I can think of. (I'm sure I'm missing someone, but he still stands out.)
It cracks me up that Righties are suddenly vilifying hard work and big rewards when it suits their agenda. Bezos not only got rich by being an Entrepreneur, he not only created a framework to allow others to get rich, he made a business that saves millions of Americans money and time, and allowed them to pursue other opportunities.
Being rich is not a crime. Could Amazon (not affiliated with Blue Origin) do better? Sure. But they are definitely doing more good than harm.
It seems to me, he's just an easy target for someone (OP) who didn't achieve as much.
EDIT: I quoted you, but your observation is probably correct. I really am speaking to the OP and others who are vilifying Bezos. I did not see that in your post. (Just saying)
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by k350
Have no idea if hypocritical or not, but I certainly do not want to hear from those silent about this, blast me for daring to expend a little greenhouse gas for my pleasure.
Brings me back to Al Gore, and his fanatical, world is ending climate scare, but then he pollutes more in one year than I do in 20, and his and everyone's answer is to tax me more because of it.
As for Bezos, he has made a large, multi billion dollar donation towards battling against climate change, but, if it was such a dire issue, then why would someone (he in this instance), engage in an absolutely non needed, luxury event like this? If you thought a lake was polluted, and donated billions to clean it, would you dump oil in the water for fun?
What makes it non needed?
Should man just abandon the idea of exploring the universe he lives in?
Location: Free State of Florida, Support our police
5,860 posts, read 3,298,444 times
Reputation: 9146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bungalove
So what? Show me a rocket that doesn't look like that, including those launched by the government.
Oh jeeze please take a joke. In a world where we argue on city data can't we agree to have a few moments of light heartiness? Not everything is so dam serious.
Bezos is only a liberal in the sense he did not like Trump.
The richest man in the world can't really be a liberal no matter how hard he tries.
Bit of all the things he could be wasting his money on, Blue Origin is not the worst thing. There could be better things, but there is also a lot worse.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
This wasn’t science it was a stunt for the wealthy.
Wilbur, you and your brother oughta stop wasting your time and $$$ on that contraption, it'll never amount to anything.
Jeff, you oughta stop wasting your time and $$$ on that contraption, it'll never amount to anything.
The more things change, the more they remain the same.
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.
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.
