New Member

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Combs, Mike"
> From: Richard [mailto:rabrooks@g...]
>
> > North Korea? Get serious. NK has a dictator, doesn't
> > permit immigration. It is a closed society.
>
> It's true that much of North Korea's problems can be attributed to its
> leaders, and to the disadvantages of Communism. But at least a portion
> of N. Korea's problems stem from lack of trade with others, which I
> think was the point.
>
> > What is there about Mars that you find so upsetting that
> > you must deny the possibility that anybody but scientists
> > would want to go there?
>
> I think the only thing we might get upset by is the notion that space
> advocates, in clinging to Mars so strongly, might be overlooking other
> non-intuitive possibilities with much shorter payback, and much greater
> long-term benefits.
>
> > And how is that different from Space Habitats? They
> > are not going to become self-supporting overnight.
>
> True. They may continue to buy things from Earth for many decades. But
> the difference is that there might be something they can sell back to
> Earth (orbital solar power stations). This means the flow of capital to
> HEO might be one half of a balance trade, rather than a subsidy.
>
> > Moving off Earth is going to suck wealth away from Earth for
> > generations no matter how we do it.
>
> Successful colonization is the kind that CREATES vast amounts of new
> wealth.
>
> > We won't realize all the benefits of Space Habitats until we
> > build and use quite a few. Ditto the benefits of developing
> > Mars.
>
> The difference is that we can at least tentatively posit a market served
> by the space habitats before we start. You're asking us to take Mars on
> faith that something will come up later.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike Combs