It is definitely not playing Santa Clause to a group of orphans.

That ownership is what Bigelow etc. want are clear by this statement.

They cite in particular Bigelow Aerospace’s interest in establishing a lunar base and utilizing lunar resources. “Fortunately, what’s needed to drive private investment isn’t the right to own a plot of land on the Moon or resell it to raise capital,” Szoka and Dunstan write. “It’s the rights sought by Bigelow: to extract, use and profit from extraterrestrial resources without interference.”

They want ownership of the resources extracted. The “without interference” bit means they want legal control of an area of land similar to that of ownership. If they cannot have full ownership of the area they may settle for being made Lord of the Manor.

My point was that taxes would likely be one of the top factors on the property rights issue.

My thoughts on the U.N. are more, my hope is they are not the place where it gets decided. There are only a few major players in space and I would not like to see 140+ non space country’s deciding it.

“Personally I do not want it to be in the hands of the U.N.”

As far as I know they don’t tax anything today, so that would have to be a new responsibility they are voted. But that is VERY unlikely to happen, since no country wants to give up their own revenue streams.

“The ownership of the “ground” under structures needs to be determine. It could be a long term lease”

If they lease the ground, build a facility, and start leaving human’s natural leavings and all the modern technology and the better living through modern chemistry remains, who is responsible for that pile of mess once the lease is up?