Boys and Girls in Space

In a message dated 6/26/2006 1:20:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
dehammer@... writes:

> Thanks for the complement. Unfortunately, the contract is only as
> good as the enforcement, on both sides.

This is true and that is why we have to do as much due diligence as we can to
assure that there will never be any question about enforcement for the first
wave of people going out. Later settlers will not have to be screened as
heavily as necessary to be able to establish our presence out there.
The real deal killer in this whole scenario would be anarchy or a major
disaster that kills many because someone did not do due diligence. This will be
like walking on eggs for a long time but we can do it.

> > Well, in that particular sentence I forgot to add the rejoinder:
> > Except in self defense. An opposition to a violation of the contract
> > would considered self defense. This is why we always have
> > someone read over everything we write. This type of error
> > could be very costly.
>
> There would also have to be some for of court that was not in the
> station, and not obligated to either side. They would have the final
> determination over who was the one that did not live up to contract.
> but you are very right about how costly this could get: life or death
> is not out of the question.

While that would be nice it will not be practical for a long time to come.
More likely we will be either self governed like the "Laws of the Sea"
(Thank you George for posting those links.)

> > Again I understand your reasoning but actually I would not care. I
> > would give them a chance to survive if they were as good and
>
> >Smart as they thought they were. They would be able to live a
> > natural life span floating around in space as long as they wanted
> > to take care of the equipment they were given. There are a lot of
> > ways to say it. You Play - You Pay, or If you cannot do the time --
> > do not do the crime.
>
> again, there is the problem of determining if there is actually a
> crime. what do you do about someone that becomes disabled due to the
> station having flaws. or cancer. or one of many genetic problems that
> would not show up before they arrived. then when it hits they can't do
> much of the work they were supposed to do. having sunk every penny
> they could hope to scrap together, plus mortgaged their future to the
> hilt, there is no way they can afford to buy their way home. By the
> standards you have stated, this makes them criminals and by the
> contracts, executable by slow boat.

I would like to believe that we have become civilized enough so that these
situations would not be questioned as to what would be done. I do believe that
there should be something in writing to address these things, just in case.
Rebellion against a contract holder in such cases that were not handled in a
civilized manner would be justified.

> > I do not know why you are fixated on slumlords. They provide a good
> > service to people who do not deserve service of any kind. I agree
> > that the world would be better off without the slums but it would also be
>
> > better off without the people in them. People stay in slums because
> > they want to. No one forces them to do that. Every person in every
> > slum that I have ever been in has always had a way out. They do not
> > want to get out by their own effort. They want you to give them a way
> > out and then they make the new place a slum as bad as the old one.
> > To boot all slums are created with the help of the local government and
> > generally the property owners have no control with what happens.
> > 40% of all slum buildings are abandoned by their owners because the city
> will
> > not allow them to be fixed up.
>
> Sorry, but this is sooooooo wrong that it hurts. As someone that once
> lived in a slum, I can tell you that ppl that live there don't do so
> by choice. It takes money to get out and if your family is all in the
> same boat, who gets out. on very rare occasion you will see someone
> that gets out on a scholarship, or though some manner of combination
> of both luck and extremely hard work. luck is not something that
> everyone has, nor is the ability to do that kind of work. for some
> the military is a way out, but not for most.
>
> Most of the abandon buildings are abandoned not because the city will
> not let them, but because the slum lords don't want to spend the money
> the city demands they spend to get the building up to the level that
> it would be safe for someone to live there. In space there are no
> city authorities to demand that building codes are met.

We will just have to look at this differently. Space will be a much different
place and it will be a long time before there are any slums there.

> > I disagree with this strongly. You have a lower estimate of humans
> > than I do and most of them are better than you picture here.
>
> The estimate I have for some is the result of what I have seen, and
> have experience. I will agree that the majority are better, but
> unfortunately, as long as we are humans (as we know us), we will
> always have the dark side of human nature. as long as it exist, there
> will be those who choose to give in to the dark side (sorry i had to
> say that)

I have been working in some form of the public service industry since I was
10 years old. Before that I lived in a swamp in central Florida. I think I have
seen a lot including almost all of the forms of "mans inhumanity to man" one
can see.
I still have faith in the basic human desire to do what is right.

John Wayne