The rest is an interesting argument that I’m not ready to sign on to yet, but certainly deserves thought. I’m more inclined to look at developing a trade in oxygen, which I think is the mostly likely early resource to be used on, and later exported from, the moon. However, this resource probably is widely spread over much of the surface, so it’s hard to see how trading land grants would work. That said, the volcanic glass beads found in a lava flow by Apollo-17 are rich in oxygen, which could probably be extracted with simple heating, leaving another useful resource, glass. This _may_ be both concentrated and rare — nobody knows today — so I could see that being a resource that could encourage trading of land grants in advance — and also strategic competition.

But, we need at least a theoretical market for oxygen, first, and someone willing to consider the moon as a source. I think the Space Station (or whatever replaces it) is that market, but only after there are firm is regular transportation to the moon (or firm plans) that an investor could count on over the long haul.

— Donald

Otherwise known as United States service men and woman, soldiers and ‘troops’, sucking the US treasury dry, destroying our wold class reputation.

Frag em if they can’t take a Dick Cheney joke.

Better yet, be happy with 1/2 of your current budget, because that’s what it’s going to be in another 2-3 years.

Face it, you’re a dinosaur clinging to a paradigm conceived by a German rocket promoter from the middle part of the last century. Time to move on, folks, and get with the national priorities.

this “$3.00 for a gallon of gas”
and
this “We are at war,”
are related, and if we had spent
this “We are at war,” money on
this “nasa employees” we would not have
this “, a recession.” or
this “losing their damn homes.” because more people would be doing
this “Shut up and get back to work.” so while you do
this “Shut up” and
this “suck it up.” we will get back to
this “do with what you have.” and try for
this “more money.”

Suck it up for a while and do with what you have. This nation is hurting. The last thing we need is a bunch of snot nosed whining titty babies suckin off the tit of the government wanting more milk.

Shut up and get back to work.

Well that was what my main point was, the only thing stopping america from going to mars was political will AND money NOT technology. I stated in another thread and predicated these statements to dovetail with those is when we go, do we go in a canoe or a carrack. People have crossed the atlantic with modern 30′ boats and equipment, and even smaller. They WEIGH EVERYTHING down to the ounce. Every piece of equipment of the most lightest, strongest and technical advanced materials. If we go to mars with the same mindset, I see it as a stunt, the same as sailing across the atlantic in a 16′ boat, You can do it, but you can not do much when you get there and cant bring nothing back. Versus using 50-80 ton carracks.

Okay with that point settled the second was I predicated my statement on that fact it would be a “manhatten project” historicaly, doesnt matter if it building the great wall, the pyramids, railroads from sea to shining sea these manhatten style projects take place REGARDLESS of cost. If you ask how many support NASA 90%, how many want to support NASA with their POCKET BOOK? “whoa! You want to spend HOW MUCH to goto mars?”
suddenly that support falls away. Why? Because it is in no one’s ECONOMIC interest to support it. There is only ONE WAY you can make it an individual’s economic interest to goto the moon or mars, as mentioned above the land grants and corporate charters is what convienced people to goto the new world, William Penn got a country sized chunk of land and immediately started selling it off to finance his ventures. If someone got 10 MILLION acres to land on the moon you HONESTLY believe a group of billionaires would not make a play for it?

So we can do it technically, we can afford to do it, so it is the politial will and the economics of it. My state of North Dakota has 800 years of coal deposits, mineral mining rights attached to the land have been selling for over 100 years here. There are tracts of land with coal deposits have been bought and sold for 100 years and not ONE TON of coal has ever been mined from it. One company adds a tract to their portfolio, hold it for 20 years sell it to another company, etc. this happens all over the planet for gold, silver, copper, titanium, etc etc etc etc. Mineral rights claims that get bought and sold over and over without ever being mined.

That is what will happen on the moon FIRST, that speculation stage and asset determination. Land claims with be bought and sold electonically as as any other commodity. So just by SELLING off the moon and mars you AUTOMATICALLY include them into the economy and economic activity IMMEDIATALLY takes place. If some astronaut lands 1 mile away from my claim, finds a rock that sparkles brings it home and sells it on EBAY for 5 million what would happen to MY land claim? On the margin, I am sure mine would increase in value. And with each successive landing ANYWHERE on the moon, land values would change, some increase some decrease, BUT it would ECONOMIC activity. Asset valuations would allow loans and IPO’s to take place ( IPO Intial public offering) how much could a lunar diamond raise? 100 billion like google? Or would the market go speculation crazy and 10-20 companies financed as everyone trys to grab the richest resource land plots available?

So the techology is there, the money is there, but no political will to order a manhatten style project and no bottom up economic support because it is not in your individual economic best interest to invest in it because there isnt any PROPERTY RIGHTS.

If the USA and the planet as a whole said the moon is open for business you would NOW see HARD CORE LOBBYING from groups pursueing their OWN economic self interests by arm bending politians to jump on the band wagon and start a manhatten project.

Here is a site that details alot of the chinese navy http://www.1421.tv/
lots of good maps too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poul_Anderson

While he wrote pot-boiler adventure stories for boys with politically conservative themes, and even at the time I had trouble with some of his social theories, his stories were always acurately based on the astronomy of their time. In the sense that he had a far better understanding of just how vast space is (even if you did have some kind of faster than light drive) than any of his contemporaries, in his extended “future history,” I think he came closer than anyone else in the 1950s and 1960s to immagining in a big-picture sort of way how a solar-system wide, and later interstallar, culture might grow, evolve, and function. If you can stand the 1950s boy’s book writing style, his ideas are worth checking out. . . .

— Donald

I can’t point to a specific reference off hand. However, I recall that this issue is covered in many books and tracts on Mercantilism and the rise of Capitalism.