A reason to go to Mars

Very good points!

Admittedly ANYTHING done in a space or surface suit is difficult.

Considering the ease of deriving and then transporting extra-
planetary resources, those economic reasons may drive a larger mining
& manufactory services sector from the Belts than the planetary
marketplaces.

For now I'll stick by my 'Alaska' analogy, but you are likely very
correct even under that scenario in that settlers & prospectors will
likely become much richer, quite a bit faster among Belters.

Lunar & Martian settlers will have some advantages, and Belters will
have different advantages & challenges, but I cannot disagree with
your basic economic argument.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Combs, Mike"
>
> From: Kevin Burgess
>
> > Some things are just easier with gravity.
>
> Like moving a refrigerator? Have you ever seen videos of
astronauts on the ISS moving those enormous experiment racks into
place?
>
> We might find that a good many things are easier to do without
gravity.
>
> Very low gravity might be the best of both worlds. That's the
beauty of the spinning-for-gravity concept. For any given process or
application, we can decide which is most advantageous: full gravity,
partial gravity, or no gravity at all. And then we can arrange for
it. On planetary bodies, we're stuck with what we've got.
>
> > Only time will tell. I say build in space and on planets (&
planetoids
> > too), and let the people who do the work, economics, and nature
take
> > its course.
>
> This is of course the only right answer. But my thinking is that
those people will make their decisions based on the economics they
face, and not on the enthusiasms of us present-day space cadets.
That's why, in an attempt to make my thinking about the future more
relevant, I keep coming back to economics.