No capitalism in space?

The 1979 treaty was not ratified by the U.S., or, I believe, by any other
major space power. Therefore, it may be ignored. The 1967 treaty is in
force. However, the UN is not capable of enforcing it. Therefore, you need
to negotiate with the nation in which you develop your systems and launch,
not with the UN.

George Perkins wrote:

> Concern has been expressed by some that the UN 1967 Outer Space
> Treaty and the 1979 UN Moon Treaty both appear to mean there can be
> no capitalism in space.
>
> If true, there may be a way to approach this.
>
> If "capitalism" is impossible, than we have no choice but to do
> the "non-profit" show. We just make sure we have a big enough surplus
> (profit) to survive and expand.
>
> We need to appear to agree with the principles behind the treaties in
> question (ie. all nations must benefit) and maybe even give a
> percentage (like a tax) of any surplus to the U.N. itself( 10% or
> so?). The U.N. then becomes the responsible party as to how to split
> or budget their new found wealth.
>
> Going directly to the U.N. with such a proposal/scenario might work
> in getting their approval.
>
> But maybe not immediately.
>
> I would employ this make-a-deal-with-the-U.N. idea when it appears to
> the space initiative/company most advantageous, or necessary, to do
> so. This would probably come under "crisis management".
>
> We would just go along with our space business and start bringing
> home some goodies like it's just another day.
>
> While we go along, we observe reactions of the U.N. to see if there's
> any sign of real trouble brewing with them. We read the news, etc.
>
> We sort of test the treaty to see if it's genuine.
>
> This could be first employed as a kind of out-of-court settlement.
>
> This deal would need to be made BEFORE a conviction of a crime
> regarding international law, especially if it appears we might be
> convicted, and AFTER we have established that we are indeed a space
> initiative/company worth taking seriously. This may be when we first
> bring home stuff that appears potentially beneficial to earthers in
> the eyes of U.N. accountants.
>
> So, timing, I think, is important here.
>
> ==>
> In the meantime, we need clarification on what these treaties
> actually mean and whether there's really any meat to them.
>
> I am assuming these treaties pertain to nations and not the
> businesses and individuals within nations. Nations cannot, it's
> generally agreed, conduct business. But a business or individual
> within a nation, if the nation allows it, can. So, is our
> interpretation that there can be no capitalism in space a correct one?
>
> Also, if our interpretation is in fact a correct one, how would or
> how could the U.N. enforce it? How can they stop it? Would they send
> space troopers out to our mining colony? Boycott us? This is curious.
>
> George Perkins
>

Al Globus
aglobus@..., (650) 604-4404
http://www.nas.nasa.gov/~globus/home.html

The dinosaurs weren't spacefaring. We are. I don't think that's an accident.
Maybe we are life's taxi to the stars.

I think we should:

1. Devote half of NASA's budget ($7 billion) to reaching NASA's 2020 goal of
reducing launch costs to Low-Earth-Orbit to $220/kg with a 0.01% failure
rate.
This should enable space tourism. The resulting orbital hotels will need to
develop efficient orbital life support and other necessary technologies.

2. Build orbital space colonies. The materials in the largest asteroid are
sufficient for orbital colonies with a combined surface area about 500 times
greater than Earth's. Eros alone could make over ten thousand space colonies,

each with about about 10 square kilometers of 1g living area.

3. After a few generations of orbital living, people won't need their colony
to be near Sol. Then small groups of colonies with populations in the
tens-of-thousands can set out on multi-decade journeys to nearby stars.

Except the launch goals, none of this is even a little bit official.