Offworld real estate (was Ethicists Tell NASA...)

On 4/11/14 11:29 AM, Al Globus wrote:

> BTW: in the non-interference regime, once you stop your mining operation
> others a free to move in. Thats one big difference from ownership.
> You cant just own a bunch of the Moon, do nothing, and make money off
> people who are doing some mining.

Which is why we don't have investors lining up.

Ownership is a *good thing*, because it spurs investment. Land (or
other resource) values will fluctuate and generally converge on what
it's actually worth.

Whoever owns that section of the Moon you're mining owns it because they
took an initial risk, poured money into the Moon early on when everybody
else said they were crazy, and did what they had to do to claim it. All
you're doing is showing up with mining equipment, decades later after
that's an established industry; where's the risk in that? The owners
*deserve* the fees they charge you, to compensate for their risk; that's
why they made the initial investment in the first place. If you find
the fees too high, mine elsewhere. This is how markets work.

Some central authority setting prices and handing out "leases" or some
other "for use" scheme merely distorts those prices. A serious mismatch
between price and value can wreck a market.

Worse, it prevents early investment at all. I'm not saying anybody
should be able to visit some office, file paperwork, and claim a hunk of
the Moon -- that would be silly. The system should be set up to reward
behavior we want to see, which is economic development of cislunar
space. So, you claim a hunk of the moon by actually BEING there, either
in person or (initially) via robotic surrogates, and improving it in
some way.

This would result, very rapidly, in the economic development of cislunar
space. The amount of money private industry would pour into this would
be astounding, and we'd have all sorts of business there in short order.

Perhaps some doubt this outcome? Well, prediction is difficult,
especially about the future. But again, we've *already tried* the
alternative, which is to have no apparent method of ownership at all.
We've been trying it for fifty years. The not-at-all-surprising result:
no economic development of the Moon. At all. Zilch, zero. To suppose
that we should continue in more or less the same way, and expect to see
better results Real Soon Now, is just silly.

Best,
- Joe