Donald Trump Thinks Going To Mars Would Be "Wonderful" But There Is a Catch

MarkWhittington writes: Donald Trump, the mercurial real estate tycoon and media personality who, much to the surprise of one and all, has become the front-runner for the Republican nomination for president opened his mind just a little about his attitude toward space exploration, according to a story in Forbes. In an answer to a question put to him about sending humans to Mars, the current focus at NASA, Trump said, "Honestly, I think it's wonderful; I want to rebuild our infrastructure first, ok? I think it's wonderful." In other words, dreams of going to Mars must take a back seat to more Earthly concerns. It is not an answer many space exploration supporters want to hear.

Comments

False dichotomy

[burtosis]

We spend next to nothing on space exploration. The tons of waste and needless pork projects in government needs to go first. If trump is half as capable at business as he claims then there should be plenty of surplus to do both without cutting funding or raising taxes.

Re:False dichotomy

[Anonymous Coward]

It's definitely *not* a false dichotomy. There's a huge difference between the things NASA does for a few billion dollars, which usually revolve around robust hardware that doesn't have to take squishy meat-bags into consideration, and starting a colony on Mars. Musk is proposing sending *millions* of people to Mars, and the lower bound is close to 200. We're talking about tons(literally) of equipment to house the people, as well as giving them the tools necessary to create the things they need from the Martian environment. They'll have to repair their own equipment, and learn to expand on their own in a relatively short amount of time. Even if they're subsistent on supplies from Earth, we're still talking about an expensive and constant barrage of goods - above and beyond what the Martians 'need' so that they have what they need when things go bad(redundant systems for *everything*).

Failure on Mars means everyone dies and the equipment falls into disrepair from weather and other bad things. Dead people and the entire thing is a sunk cost. Failure on the moon means everyone could possibly escape alive(they use escape pods to get to an orbital vehicle which can then take them back to Earth, much like the Apollo landers), and the equipment will remain more or less in the same condition as its left since there's no atmosphere. So long as a rogue meteor doesn't come marauding through hitting shit, it'll be in the same working condition when we manage to send people back up there.

So yeah, that's a 'wonderful idea' and in time it will happen. But is it the most pressing issue of our time? Definitely not. We don't even have any sort of operations set up on the moon, even though the moon offers a lot of resources(particularly helium) that could potentially be used for nuclear fusion or other interesting things here on Earth. My thinking is: if we haven't even set up some sort of sustained colony on the moon(for science, industry, etc) then we have no business trying to do the same on Mars. The moon is far lower risk, far lower cost, and our presence there is nonexistent. Mars can wait.

Re:False dichotomy

[William Baric]

A country accomplishing something exceptional returns pride for its citizens. This feeling of being proud is one of the things which contribute the most to happiness. Happy people create a better environment for everyone. Happy people will more easily build strong communities and consequently a strong country.

More importantly, accomplishing something exceptional brings respect from other populations.

I remember that morning of 86. I was going to a math class. I was late, but when I entered the class, I realized it hasn't started yet. People were gathered around the teacher and they were discussing. I then learned that Challenger exploded. Somehow, I was really affected. It was crazy, I was not American, but I certainly did have a lot of respect for the US. So anything bad happening to the US did affect me.

The US is now kind of despised by a lot of people around the world. The main reason is how the US mess with the world and how Americans are "arrogant". Yet, back in the 70 and 80, the US were messing the exact same way with the world and Americans were the same people as they are now. But here's the thing : the US also accomplished great things in the 60 and 70 in the name of humanity. So sure, the US were a bully, but they were a bully who was able to accomplish great things.

I remember that morning of 2001. I was home. I heard the news two planes crashed on the Twin Towers. I saw how reporters where depicting this event as one of the worst tragedy to ever occur, but to be honest I didn't really care. Sure, I thought it was sad 3000 people died, but people do die around the world every day because of politics or religion. How many innocent died because of the US messing with the world for their own benefits?

Respect has to be earned, but once you get this respect, the benefits you get are enormous. You gain support from everywhere in the world. Most people in the world will see you as a model to follow, not as an enemy who's trying to abuse them. They'll feel your pain almost as much as their own. They won't fight against you, they'll try to join you.

What does basic economics say about that?

Re: He's got company

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump would make a hilarious president, and at least he has a track record of getting shit done and speaks his mind, not just what he thinks the people will want to hear. Better than Hillary (oops that's a private email hehe) or Jeb (Daddy, what do I do?). Of course Sanders or Lessig would be better, but out of the few who have a chance, I'm pushing for the Donald.

Re:Trump makes sense again?

[BoRegardless]

Time to cancel way to many US Gov't programs that DON'T WORK!

Start w/the Dept. of Education. -- State & local control of schools worked just fine before Carter.

Re:He's right

[thinkwaitfast]

Can you name some scientific advances and inventions by the soviets in the space race, or only (if that) the ones made by americans. Many have argued (including Richard Feynman) that the advances of the space program were not technological, but organizational (not a trivial problem when here are hundreds of thousands of people involved)

Re: He's got company

[Quasimodem]

Just how many of his businesses has he bankrupted, again?

Re: He's got company

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Trump would make a hilarious president

If Hillary gets elected, it will be business as usual in Washington. The Democrats give a little here, the Republicans there, and they come up with a comprise, that really doesn't satisfy anyone.

The Donald, is a guy like, you do as I say, or, You're fired!". If he gets elected, he will stick a weed up Washington's ass. It will be pandemonium . . . but maybe this chaos is exactly what the American political system needs. A good shake-up.

Re:Trump makes sense again?

[JWW]

What really bothers me about "solve the problems on Earth first" logic is that if we do that we're never leaving this rock.

21 TRILLION dollars has been spent to eradicate poverty. Over 40 years on there's been very little impact of the Great Society program to actually eliminate poverty.

Imagine, just imagine what 21 TRILLION could have done if spent on space exploration. We'd likely have moonbases, footprints on Mars, asteroid bases, much quicker international travel, large space stations. 21 Trillion is a lot of fucking money. We basically wasted it trying to solve poverty with handouts. I know that sounds harsh, but the numbers don't lie. We didn't fix poverty, I believe there is no way in hell that spending that money on space exploration wouldn't have had a much much greater impact on society.

Another comment mentioned the National and World pride derived from accomplishing very difficult feats like landing on the moon. That value, while not being economically measurable is something that truly does move humanity along and make people understand that for some things, we're all in this together. And I really think that is likely a more valuable outcome that the direct spending of money on poverty.

Re:Trump makes sense again?

[fnj]

Start w/the Dept. of Education. -- State & local control of schools worked just fine before Carter.

Absodamnlutely. Run over with a bulldozer all of the departments which do nothing. The Department of Agriculture doesn't grow a damn thing, and that's none of the Feds' business anyway - 134 billion. The Department of Labor doesn't get a single person a productive job, and that's none of the Feds' business anyway - 138 billion. The Department of Education doesn't educate anybody, and that's none of the Feds' business anyway - 45 billion. The Department of Homeland Security, hmph - 40 billion. The Department of Housing and Urban Development, Great Society bilge - 40 billion.

Each of the bird-brains heading those departments actually has an assigned place in the order of Presidential succession, believe it or not, but I've identified at least 400 billion dollars a year of waste, turf-building, and make-work.

In addition, departments which actually do have a legitimate place in governance nonetheless include all kinds of disgusting pork.
* Interior, Office of International Affairs - isn't there a Department of State for that?
* Interior, Office of Native Hawaiian Relations - snort
* Interior, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization - crap
* Interior, Office of Strategic Employee and Organizational Development - better justify that one
* Interior, Office of Youth, Partnerships and Service - garbage
* Interior, everything under the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Technology, Information and Business Services - highly suspicious
* many, many more in various departments

This is by no means an exhaustive accounting of the cancer of runaway pork.

Re: He's got company

[gtall]

Bush didn't cause the recession via the war. It came about because of years, including his, of allowing Wall Street and the housing bubble to suck the life out of the U.S. economy. Also, the American people bear some of the blame, they took out second and third mortgages, were too busy to read what they were promising in loan payments, more or less lived beyond their means because, what the hell, everyone they knew was doing the same thing. The American people are fucking saints...dumb saints, but saints.

Re: He's got company

[pepty]

And the finisher: for years everyone who called the bubble a bubble underperformed the people who bet ever more recklessly. Calling a bubble too soon would just get you fired from your real estate/securities job: you would be scaring the customers and pissing off the partners. Calling it just right would still just piss off the partners at your company - unless you managed to convince them you were right in time for them to change course. Calling a bubble too late: you look just like everyone else, you'll catch no individual blame.

Re: He's got company

[swb]

I think he's too practical minded. Trump has the financial resources to turn every business dispute he has into the legal equivalent of WW III, but he hasn't, because he knows he can't win them all, even when the odds are strongly in his favor, and doing so would ultimately be extremely costly.

To the contrary, I think he might actually be better than most at diplomacy -- he knows how to negotiate and strike deals, even or especially with people who are hard to deal with. I'd be really surprised at some point if he didn't have to deal with the mafia in NYC during the course of building his real estate empire. If you've outlasted John Gotti, how hard can Putin be to deal with?

Re:He's got company

[WindBourne]

and yet, it was not the yankees that did the main damage to them. It was New Spain/Mexico that had been wiping out numerous tribes in what is today America. Had they not reduced the native American population by 3/4, then the yankees would never have controlled the area.

The Art of the Deal

[raymorris]

> To the contrary, I think he might actually be better than most at diplomacy -- he knows how to negotiate and strike deals, even or especially with people who are hard to deal with.

Yep, that's EXACTLY what he's very good at, negotiating deals. That's why his book is called The Art of the Deal.

I won't vote for him, but I will acknowledge what his strengths are. He figures out what the other side ACTUALLY wants and what he actually wants, and comes up with a way for both sides to get most of the what they want. He _might_ help negotiate through the gridlock in Congress by proposing or supporting bills which allow most people to achieve their ends.

  I say "what they ACTUALLY want" because most of the time, what people ask for isn't what they actually want. Software developers understand that. Somebody might propose a ban on SUVs when they want cleaner air, a foreign leader might make all sorts of demands when what they really want is to save face, to tell their constituents that they stood up to America. Trump's skill is to find a way to allow the foreign leader to declare victory while giving us what we want.

That said, I think his weakness is that he speaks too soon and too much, without first thinking about what he's going to say. I have a reputation which exceeds my actual skills and knowledge. The myth is that I know a LOT, that I almost always have the correct answer, that I'm virtually never wrong. The truth is that I simply keep my mouth shut when I don't know. It's not that I always have the right answer, it's that I don't often argue for an answer that's wrong. I shut up or just ask questions unless and until I have the right answer. Trump isn't like that.

Re: He's got company

[Grishnakh]

You've got to be kidding. Donald is many things, but 1) he's not religious, and 2) he seems quite pragmatic. The regular Republicans have all been clamoring for another war, this time with Iran. Donald, being a businessman, will want to run the country like a business, meaning he'll want to cut unnecessary expenditures, and certainly not spend another trillion dollars on a stupid war like Bush.

Honestly, it puzzles me why so many people try to demonize this guy so much, mainly because of his stance on illegal immigration I think, and just plain being boorish and non-diplomatic-speaking. Would I prefer him as Pres? No, I'd like Sanders. But compared to **all the other Republicans**, I'll take The Donald in a heartbeat. All the others are either religious wackos (Santorum, Huckabee) or libertarian loons (Paul). Maybe Carly is an exception, but after the way she ran HP into the ground I certainly wouldn't want her either.

Re: He's got company

[drinkypoo]

Honestly, it puzzles me why so many people try to demonize this guy so much, mainly because of his stance on illegal immigration I think, and just plain being boorish and non-diplomatic-speaking.

Well, I'm not completely sure, but I think it's because he's racist, misogynist, and prepared to shit on anyone who gets in his way. No, wait. I am completely sure that's why. Fuck Trump, fuck him right in his too fucking rich for anyone's good stupid shit hairpiece ass. Fuck him twice.