Low-Budget Indian Satellite Launch
Geekonomical writes "On Thursday afternoon, for a mere 15 million U.S. dollars, India launched a meteorological satellite into geo-synchronous transfer orbit some 36,000 kilometres above the equator using a modified version of its highly successful space workhorse, the polar satellite launch vehicle (PSLV). The article also claims that China spends 12 times as much as this for a launch!"
If they're truly doing that for a twelfth (what a horrid word) of the cost that China spends, the what the hell is China doing wrong?! Or does China send up a system 12 times better?
A common argument in populist economics is that jobs go to the third world because of lower labor costs. Others counter this argument that it is unskilled labor, and that high-end technologically advanced labor stays within 'advanced' economies (US, Europe, Japan).
So-- is this a case that disproves the counterargument-- that even 'skilled' labor industries can skip to the third world, or is it an indictment against the regulatory pressures/infrastructure costs of trying to launch something under a US/EU umbrella?
There is clearly a glut of satellite launching capacity, yet prices have remained high because?
davejenkins.com |
You seem to suffer from several misconceptions.
Maybe you are still a teenage kid.
a) India has not signed any treaties including
the big one; the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT). Other countries that have not signed
the NPT are Pakistan and Israel.
b) India shocked no-one when they tested
nuclear weapons. Their first test (conducted
quite openly) was in 1974.
c) When you say "we", you don't include
most of the US Population unless you are an
anti-semites and/or anti-Indian's. No one is
worried about India, since it's a stable
"democracy" and has been for 50 years. In
fact, several export controls were recently removed for India and China.
d) The phrase "Third-world" was invented by
India. Look up what it means.