Slashdot Mirror
Space Travel For the 1%: Virgin Galactic's $250,000 Tickets Haunt New Mexico Town
The Real Dr John writes: The Guardian has an article about Virgin Galactic's proposed launch site, Spaceport America, which broke ground in southern New Mexico's high desert in 2009 with almost a quarter of a billion dollars from taxpayers, $76m of which came from the two local counties. Truth or Consequences, population 6,000 and home to the Spaceport America Visitor Center, is one of the poorest places in the state. The increased taxes, adopted across impoverished Sierra County, contributed to about $5m as of 2014. Since 2009, state school budgets have been cut and an estimated $26m in necessary repairs to the town's water system has been put on hold. There's no more money to pay for it. The average annual income of residents is just $15,000 per year, one third of residents live below the poverty line, and just 20% over the age of 25 have obtained a bachelor's degree.
But then again that should have been obvious to everyone long ago. Shame too many people think the government is some sort of magic purse.
"Private Space", private this, that, or the other.... all looking to the public trough when it comes to building the infrastructure they expect to use for pennies on the dollar, if that. At least these folks weren't asked to host an NFL facility for the tune of nearly a billion.
and promises
We'll call it Consequences
This is how crony America works. They took our jerbs
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Stop the presses, we got a hot one here.
Shame too many people think the government is some sort of magic purse.
Unless you're a corporate "person" in which case it most certainly IS a magic purse.
Why build it in New Mexico? Why not build it in Dubai? Dubai government would have paid to have it built, and Dubai would have tons of ultra wealthy able to buy the tickets, and people could go to Dubai, go to space, and have their wives spend just as much money on jewelry and such while their nerd spouses spent a quarter million on an amusement park ride.
I don't get it...
So they're being nice and giving them jobs to build the spaceport. They're paying them in the dollars they stole from them.
These people don't want a spaceport and they'll derive absolutely zero value from it. It'll likely close within a year when the 1%ers get bored and want their $10mil jetpacks. This site will turn into a superfund site and they'll likely source the funding to decommission it and clean up the leached toxic fuel from the same state coffers. What's more the medical nightmare spawned from that superfund site will leave civilian casualties, spikes in cancers, growth problems and an all-manner of maladies. Those medical cases will have the local hospitals grubbing even more money out of the underemployed population.
So, basically: If's a fuck-you, followed by a fooled-you, followed by a sucks-to-be-you, followed by a fuck-you-and-die.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it./quote
Everyone in charge of what? And what money?
It's okay to be a nutjob, but as anyone can see by reading his manifesto the Unabomber has raised the bar for this kind of talk. Gone are the days of vague threats of violence and social justice. You need content, not just posturing. Where's your content?
lucm, indeed.
If you kill the people in charge there is no money. No, really. There will be no money. There will be assets but the money will just be paper at that point. It's an important concept.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Yup, we sure enjoy those private interstates and private drinking water companies and private sewers and private police forces!
It most definitely is a magic purse for Elon Musk & co.
thegodmovie.com - watch it
According to the Massachusetts State Police they are a private mercenary army that isn't responsible to the people of MA..so maybe.
But then again that should have been obvious to everyone long ago. Shame too many people think the government is some sort of magic purse.
There was a TED talk not long ago, given by Jonathan Haidt, highlighting his research into the liberal vs the conservative mind. The findings was quite interesting and go some way towards explaining the motivations behind liberal and conservative social policy preferences. Basically, he identifies five cross-cultral foundations of morality:
A balance of all five was found to be a necessary condition for what many people would consider to be a good society. Now here is where it gets interesting. People who characterize themselves as conservative tend to base their moral compass on a combination of all five values. Some valued more than others but all of them at least considered. However, people who characterize themselves as liberal tend to value the first three characteristics quite highly, but authority/respect and purity/sanctity little or not at all. This comports well with liberal policy preferences and social movements in recent memory which have sought to deliver results quickly, but without much interest in conserving existing social structures or regard to existing authorities. Anyone else remember "Question Authority"?
So, because liberals are not concerned with conserving existing social structures, laws or institutions and don't place much value in them beyond the immediate utility they may provide in service of the first three characteristics, they're willing to support and advocate for policies which may have the effect of damaging or even destroying these institutions or authorities in pursuit of quick results or "social justice". This tends to breed impatience among liberals for "good things" to be done quickly and thus a desire to see more government spending, even reckless spending, to advance that agenda right now.
As you said, it should have been obvious to everyone a long time ago, but it wasn't and isn't because not everybody thinks like you or I do. Conservatives are at least able to understand and recognize what motivates liberal positions, even if they don't agree with them, but many liberals seem to be quite incapable of properly understanding or ascribing conservative motives for policy preferences, particularly as they relate to authority/respect or purity/sanctity. The result is often ridiculous conspiracy theories, false dichotomies, or silly accusations of "mean spiritedness" against conservatives as liberals struggle and ultimately fail to understand why somebody could possibly disagree with them without being an idiot or a psychopath.
These are the counties that ran fiber optics lines hundreds of miles through deserted scrub land to serve 15-20 isolated ranches in the Gila National Forest. They spent over $1M per site so the ranch hands can read Fark. They obviously have WAYYYYY to much money in this area.
----- There are two kinds of people in this world, my friend; those with loaded guns, and those who dig.
We should maybe aspire to something greater than a 3000 year old model?
I don't know, maybe? This is the website that caters to the "latest and greatest" crowd? The crowd that throws away computers older than 2 years and phones older than 6 months may as well be trash?
Odd how you cling to millennia-old ways of organizing society though, all the while being raped by the few people that benefit from it. And you hold their cocks and apologize for your rectum being too cold.
TFA doesn't explain or link as to how VG caused the citizens to vote a tax increase upon themselves. If that was the deal, I would have recommended against it. Especially the part about the schools and water system.
You know, I bet that wasn't the deal. I bet that closer to the truth, is that the town, county, and state fell all over themselves offering all kinds of crazy shit. Those people gambled, and they lost.
Sort of like Virgin Galactic lost their ship, momentum, place in the space race, shit tons of cash; and so on. I believe one of their people actually died. All those townspeople lost was their self respect, and maybe some money, that their elected officials spent. I don't think VG has made any sort of profit on this town.
So to make out like the evil corporation took advantage of the ignorant little podunk town is really stretching the truth here.
Spending money is one thing. Giving money to corporations in return for vague promises of jobs is entirely another.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Most people are too stupid to know there's a functional difference so it really won't matter at all.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
the flight takes you up to about 110 km, which is barely enough to see curvature of the earth.
what virgin are doing is going to make for a spectacular flight but space flight it is not.
We should maybe aspire to something greater than a 3000 year old model?
Sadly, most people think the big government they keep voting for is there to help them, not to help those who buy the politicians they vote for. With enemies like the left, the 1% don't need friends.
Your "private space" fantasies are being exposed for the delusional nonsense they always were, and shown to be yet another billionaire cash grab at the expense of the poor. All the while you socially-clueless maladjusted sci-fi misanthropes masturbated yourselves raw over space posters from the 1960s.
QA was right, you are fools, no one is going anywhere. Just suborbital hops in tin cans are beyond the reach of our current social organization, but keep cheering on the thieves, crooks, and liars that are robbing you blind while distracting you with pretty PR and CGI nonsense.
One of the many targets of Leftist hatred.
They should re-evaluate this number closer to 0.01% but they cannot visualize it as well.
Yep. Nothing mean-spirited about letting people starve, go without medical care, or having knowledge of sexuality, not to mention the actuality of birth control, withheld from them. Not a thing. Nothing mean-spirited about trying to force your religion on the entire body politic, either. Nope. Nothing mean spirited about wasting all your time in congress on a futile task while there is actual work to be done. Nothing mean spirited about trying to shut down the government, either. Nothing mean spirited about lying, then bombing the living shit out of a country that doesn't pose a threat to us (well, they had oil, so I guess it was a work of charity for your fellow conservatives, deeply invested in oil, yes?) Nothing mean spirited about denying people social security, medicare, food stamps, and so on -- that is purely a saintly act from beginning to end. Nothing mean spirited about handing "free speech" to corporations, while herding the dissenters into "free speech zones", amirite?
Psychopath? Psychopath??? Oh hell no. Conservatives are the living incarnation of angels, each and every one.
Thank the Lord of Hosts that we have conservatives to save us from ourselves.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
This is exactly the kind of bullshit that newspapers like The Guardian usually promote: massive government spending on so-called infrastructure. Heck, the local town residents were even willing to vote tax increases for this.
For a "spaceport", The Guardian recognizes the absurdity of it only out of their general hostility to science and engineering. But California high speed rail, sports stadiums, schools, urban renewal, and a lot of other "infrastructure projects" are just the same kind of boondoggle.
Woah, dude. Go look up liturgies (leitourgiai), including trierarchies and the choregoi. In ancient Athens the rich were socially compelled to spend their own fortunes on defending the state, performing rituals, and entertaining the poor. Imagine Soros and the Koch brothers and all the wealthy of either party building and equipping their own aircraft carriers at their own expense as a public benefit. Imagine the same people sponsoring ad-free television channels to keep people entertained as a public benefit.
That's how things were in ancient Athens.
His posturing is his content. It's a zen thing. You have to meta your meta into the metaverse to get it. You should probably give up now, or someone will figure out how fast you're going at the same time they know where you are, and poof, you'll disintegrate into random quantum particles.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
NM voted for the Democrats in five of the last six Presidential elections. In the last gubernatorial election, the Democratic candidate received 44% more votes than the Republican. You're blaming the wrong group.
When this thing started, the governor was democrat, the senators were democrat, the secretary of state was democrat, the attorney general was democrat, and the president was democrat.
So yeah, let's blame the republicans.
lucm, indeed.
Yes, it is important to keep in mind. Kill *HALF* of the people in charge and the other half will become more reasonable.
As it has been since ancient Greece.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it./quote
Those who can correctly close a <quote>quote block</quote> (or, alternatively, possess reading comprehension that covers the "Preview" button) are "condemned" to appear at least marginally intelligent.
That is probably true, unfortunately. I realized that there was at least one person who didn't understand the difference so I figured I'd mention it.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Cute. "KKKorporations sit there in their... in their KKKorporation buildings, and... and, and see, they're all KKKorporation-y... and they make money."
Nice try switching the conversation to "corporations", but the truth is, most Americans now receive government benefits of some kind. You and your kind may think, this is marvellous, but the situation does not benefit the country — the primary beneficiaries are the vast body of government employees paid for confiscating the monies (the IRS) and handing some of it out...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
We should maybe aspire to something greater than a 3000 year old model?
Sadly, most people think the big government they keep voting for is there to help them, not to help those who buy the politicians they vote for. With enemies like the left, the 1% don't need friends.
The average person cannot be fat, stupid, oblivious, trusting of advertising (and paid studies and other obviously biased sources), saturated in meaningless tabloid bullshit, and view non-job-related thought as tedium to be avoided or offloaded ... and then expect to have a truly representative government. It's never happened before and it's not happening today.
You may be surprised at how effective 3000 year old tactics still are. Bread-and-circus has many forms and it's at least that old. Oh yeah, speaking of the Roman empire? One of the major souces of corruption involved their equivalent of defense contracts. They had their own version of the military-industrial complex.
As a 1%-er (it only takes a dual engineering income) there's not a chance in hell this would be affordable. Can we stop with this stupid label? I expect it from the OWS crowd and others lacking in critical thinking skills. I don't expect it at a site that claims to be for nerds.
According to the Massachusetts State Police they are a private mercenary army that isn't responsible to the people of MA..so maybe.
Considering that they derive their police powers from being part of the state, wouldn't that stance make them a criminal organization?
While I'm opposed to violence, as a general rule, I suspect you might be right. The government should be afraid of the populace. If it is the other way around then you're doing it wrong. Currently, it is the other way around. While I am not, by any means, advocating a revolution (I think we should exhaust all other options and there should be a rising organically - even if people are too stupid) as a means to an end at this point in time, I do feel it is important to send those in power a reminder that we are ruled by consent.
Things like this (there's an interesting documentary about Space City being built that shows the impending doom for the area albeit betwixt the lines) and an earlier story about TPP being completed are just today's examples of reasons why we might want to consider being truly outraged. I'm all for private space access. I'm not a fan of you paying for my ride, however. Believe it or not, I'm pretty sure I can already pay for a ride to space if I want. It's expensive but I can pay for it and have the means to pay for it. There's no reason for you to be burdened for my amusement. With today's story about the TPP, I'm forced to think and realize that I've not yet seen a single, nary a one, bit of evidence that there's a single good thing about it for the average citizen. Not one single thing...
I am tired so I'm sure the above reads like it was written by a drunken monkey (I also have an attractive female, nearly forty years my junior, who's tiring me out but no - probably not like you may be thinking) but I hope it's still able to be parsed. It's high time they learn that we, the citizens, have the power. What's funny (sad, actually) is that there are so many people in favor of disarming the populace. I'm too tired to get into it so let it suffice to say that I simply can not comprehend the thinking process that leads otherwise rational people to reach conclusions such as those.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Maybe or too lazy to care.
As you said, it should have been obvious to everyone a long time ago, but it wasn't and isn't because not everybody thinks like you or I do. Conservatives are at least able to understand and recognize what motivates liberal positions, even if they don't agree with them, but many liberals seem to be quite incapable of properly understanding or ascribing conservative motives for policy preferences, particularly as they relate to authority/respect or purity/sanctity. The result is often ridiculous conspiracy theories, false dichotomies, or silly accusations of "mean spiritedness" against conservatives as liberals struggle and ultimately fail to understand why somebody could possibly disagree with them without being an idiot or a psychopath.
Sure, in the same way that a small child might think the parent is "being mean" by not letting them eat candy or ice cream for dinner. This does make a lot of sense, if you accept the liberal/conservative spectrum model. Of course a spectrum is represented by a line because it is literally one-dimensional thinking.
What doesn't make sense is to accept this liberal/conservative left/right false dichotomy as though it were determined by reality. It's not. It's determined by suggestion and some very skillful debate framing. The Democrat/Republican duopoly is to politics what the trade guilds of old were to commerce. It exists for the purpose of raising the barriers to entry for new players. Only instead of money alone, now the prize is both money (and access to money) and power. Sharing power and knowing that you and your people will always maintain a piece of it is preferable to getting too greedy, losing your power entirely, and becoming irrelevant.
It was for similar reasons that (in my opinion) all the major cellphone carriers in the US all overcharged for texting, even when the carrier bore no additional cost to provide it (i.e. GSM). They made the smart business decision. They each independently realized that trying to undercut each other would mean that everyone has very thin margins, and that each one of them should continue to overcharge because it's "what the market will bear", and all of them are individually better off not being the one to rock the boat. This requires no outright conspiracy among them, just a shrewd and ruthless business sense that thinks about the long-term. This same corporate culture is why these companies are major players to begin with, right or wrong.
If anything, the people trying to get power have better advisors and PR than the people trying to make money.
Wrong. This is the fault of the Republicans. They are the 1%, and are not buying tickets.
Spending money is one thing. Giving money to corporations in return for vague promises of jobs is entirely another.
Amen. If it's really a matter of some kind of consideration, like "do this for us and we'll make this concession to you", that's precisely the sort of situation for which the concept of written contracts exists.
Instead of trying to stop them why not focus on getting something for the rest of us? Or are you actually naive enough to think anything short of a strong central government has a chance against a modern mega corp...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The choices come down to the Republican flavor of big government or the Democratic version. There is no option that isn't big government.
Learn to love Alaska
I beg to differ on this being an unfortunate thing. This effectively means that business and life can continue as per usual for the most part, at least long enough for the new leaders to have some appreciable amount of time to rebuild basic global economic links.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Imagine Soros and the Koch brothers and all the wealthy of either party building and equipping their own aircraft carriers at their own expense as a public benefit. Imagine the same people sponsoring ad-free television channels to keep people entertained as a public benefit.
And they do. You wouldn't hear about Soros and the Koch brothers otherwise. They just didn't consult you first on what they should be spending their money on any more than those ancient Greeks did.
Fiorina shafts vendor to senate campaign
Bread-and-circus has many forms and it's at least that old.
Seems like this town is too poor to have either bread or a circus. Perhaps they can eat cake.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Musk's government money is a drop in the bucket compared to what gas, energy, military industrial, etc companies receive. In Musk's case, taxpayers are getting a good deal. The half billion loan Tesla received is already paid back with interest, and it accelerated production of the model s and created many jobs. If you look up the details of other government money his companies received, you will see it's quite reasonable.
Vote from the rooftops.
I also prefer a non-violent solution. My fear is that the current 'leaders' will not understand until they are personally in danger. I would like to see a measured violence though. Next demonstration, it would be nice to see when the cops break out the tear gas if they get gassed even harder themselves. Even better if they end up tasered and zip tied to lamp posts.
Let's see... I have a 4 year old phone (it was free), a 3 year old notebook computer (it was expensive!) and a lot of other old devices. Nothing is ever thrown away - things are either sold, given away or disassembled for spare parts.
I have a number of 8, 16 and 32 bit (Acorn Archimedes) home computers. I have a 70's minicomputer (still working).
I know of people fitting your description however they would never go to slashdot. Maybe you made a mistake and thought you were posting on another site?
They are CELLPHONE CARRIERS. They can't talk to each other?
The issue is that people can't see past step one. They want to end all suffering even when that suffering is a direct response to a persons choices. Let's take hungry children. In the old days when someone got pregnant without being married they were considered irresponsible. Society gave them two choices. Either they would get married or give the child up for adoption to a married couple. We know a child will be much more successful in life if they are raised by a mother and father. This worked out because some couples can't have kids.
Today what we do is tax the responsible people and give that money to the irresponsible people to raise their kids. Despite all evidence that a single mom (or dad) is a strong indicator of poor future outcomes. The liberal feels bad for the girl that gets pregnant without being married. What they don't feel bad for are the responsible couples that are so heavily taxed they put off childbirth until they are so old they need medical intervention to get pregnant. Meanwhile the single moms raise children that are a drain on society.
This is what happens in all types of situations due to the liberal mind. They can't stand any suffering and they are willing to destroy everything to alleviate responsibility for their actions.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
" In ancient Athens the rich were socially compelled to spend their own fortunes on defending the state, performing rituals, and entertaining the poor. Imagine Soros and the Koch brothers and all the wealthy of either party building and equipping their own aircraft carriers at their own expense as a public benefit."
But the Koch brothers _do_ spend millions on entertaining the poor with funny actors, it's called the Republican Primaries.
Seriously, the butthurt SJW submitters need to get over themselves. ZOMG a crappy town was promised money for a big business venture that could help them not be so crappy. Business venture doesn't go through, crappy town stays crappy. Cue violins on Slashdot. Really? Life is tough; get an education and/or move to a non-crappy town. "Boo hoo, the big company didn't follow through on a bunch of money we were supposed to get because their business plans didn't work out, boo hoo." Get over your entitlement.
Democrats get suckered by big business. Republican's don't get suckered, they're in on the take.
Why is Snark Required?
There is, I'm told, such a thing as a coffee enema.
Typical story. Some developer (as in land, not software) comes to a pudunk rural town and talks up a big plan to make something new and big and famous, and have money for new schools ("Hey that old 1950's school... wouldn't you like a nice new one? With me you can have it and more!") but he wants something from the locals, and well, it's fine if they don't want to be a part of it, he'll understand and talk to another town that is interested. And you, the developer says, the first ones to jump on this will make a fortune! Think about it!
And the locals hem and haw and debate about finally getting a shot at being something and they stretch real hard and throw in their pennies and agree to it.
Great, the developer says! We'll break ground immediately. And then something happens or it takes too long but oh well, to the developer it's merely one of many deals and he moves on. The town cannot move on. It chased a load of promises and dreams and pays dearly for it.
Branson doesn't have a great track record with successful projects. People hear about the airlines and things but not so much about the abject flops. But he's so good at promoting his brand, which is himself, nobody notices. He and Donald Trump are very similar. They both talk big and quietly bury their failures.
Sig for hire.
The average person cannot be fat, stupid, oblivious, trusting of advertising (and paid studies and other obviously biased sources), saturated in meaningless tabloid bullshit, and view non-job-related thought as tedium to be avoided or offloaded
That's not the average person. The average person is permanently angry, and blames everyone else for all the problems they see. If only everyone else was just like them, eyes open, took the red pill etc. everything would be so much better.
Many of them watch Fox News, but there are equivalents for all predispositions. They all give you the same thing though - hatred of all the other sheeple ruining your life, and the feeling that you are powerless against the hoards of mindless idiots who watch the other channels.
https://xkcd.com/1386/
https://xkcd.com/603/
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
hoards of mindless idiots
That would be hordes, unless you are referring to some kind of Strategic Idiot Reserve.
The average annual income of residents is just $15,000 per year
We can't build Mos Eisley because the (undocumented) Sand People are poor.
So, let's instead spend the money building a border wall, raising the average annual income of residents: problem solved!
America^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H The Republic is so screwed.
False. I present you with the State of New Jersey: Chris Christie, Governor.
They are CELLPHONE CARRIERS. They can't talk to each other?
They are businesses competing in the same market, a market that has extremely high barriers to entry. In this market they have little incentive to undercut each other or otherwise actually compete. That was the point. I wasn't commenting one way or the other about their ability to send and receive communications. Perhaps you could obtain some remedial reading comprehension tutoring?
What's funny (sad, actually) is that there are so many people in favor of disarming the populace. I'm too tired to get into it so let it suffice to say that I simply can not comprehend the thinking process that leads otherwise rational people to reach conclusions such as those.
It's not a thinking process. It's fear. It doesn't help that when a citizen with a legal gun stops a crime, the media says something like "the suspect was subdued until police arrived" (and only that), but when a nutjob goes apeshit and shoots random people they put every gory detail on the front page for days or weeks. If the average person is a moron it's because they don't consider the tremendous incentive the media has to manipulate what they will and won't show, the great power (unelected, unchecked) represented by the ability to do this.
The exact opposite of a thinking process reinforced by numbers of the like-minded parroting each other is where this idea comes from. They seem not to notice that mass shootings overwhelmingly tend to happen in "gun free zones".
The concept of what space IS anyway has been cheapened by considering low Earth orbit is outer space anyway. It's not. The ISS is as close to me as the next major city. It's not even far away.
That's like arguing that a supertanker isn't in the Atlantic ocean because I can see it from shore. It's irrelevant to the discussion of whether it is in the ocean or not. Space is defined by the general absence of matter in close proximity. On Earth it is typically presumed to be the area outside our atmosphere. On other planets the boundary will be different though just as arbitrary. Some without atmospheres will have space start at the surface. Since there isn't an obvious boundary to an atmosphere like a shoreline they have to choose an arbitrarily selected one. You can pick a slightly different one if it makes you happy but once you are in a hard vacuum or a good approximation of one and not touching a planetary body, you are in space by definition. Whether that starts at 60km, 100km, 200km or 1000km is not really particularly important.
Even going to the moon, which is as far as we have ever gone, should be considered near space since it is still gravitationally bound to the Earth.
Absurd logic. Whether something is in space or not has nothing to do with what it is orbiting nor does it have anything specifically to do with Earth. Gravitation exists between every bit of matter in the universe so it's not a useful means of defining space. If you are on the surface of Mars you aren't in space but you certainly aren't gravitationally bound to Earth either. Nobody is going to agree with you that the ISS is not in space. It meets every commonly accepted definition of outer space.
was as good as "Monorail!"
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
I understand your sentiment, but there's a difference between the government fearing its populace and the government remembering that they rule by consent.
I heard an interesting theory once: that a monarchy or similar only works as long as the ruler does not fear the populace. The idea is that if the king feels secure, he'll actually govern the country (for better or for worse), but if he feels insecure he'll spend all his time shoring up his rule through whatever means necessary. It's possible he's a lousy king either way, but he's more likely to rule well if he's secure as his attention doesn't have to be on himself all the time.
This could be applied to representative democracies as well, in that fear also misdirects our representatives. If our legislators feel insecure in their positions, for instance, they'll spend all their time campaigning to win more votes and working on spying laws to raise internal security. Maybe if the populace actually showed some trust in their elected representatives, those representatives would spend more time actually governing. There's also more room for the government and the people to cooperate if the relationship is based on trust rather than fear.
Of course, I can't say our reps have done much to earn our trust...
So what is it all about? Seriously. TFA is tl;dr
Ok, Virgin Galactic offers $250k space trips for the rich and poor people are poor. But the rest is a jumble of facts with little relationship between them. It looks like the goal is to create an emotional response by contrasting the luxury of space tourism vs the poor conditions some people live in. But what is the underlying story (or non-story)?
My guess is that some poor town invested in that spaceport in an attempt to build an economy around it (tourism, service, etc...) but the returns are less than expected and the town struggles making up for it. Is that it?
Sierra, which is where TorC is, Dona Ana, which is where Las Cruces and New Mexico State is, and at one point Otero, which has Alamogordo and both part of White Sands and Holloman AFB. The increase of a gross receipts tax increase (effectively a sales tax, but on services as well as goods) was required to be approved by the voters and was, back in 2008. The biggest economic drivers in those counties are NMSU/Las Cruces and the various Federal installations like Holloman AFB, White Sands Missile Range, Ft. Bliss (though that's more in El Paso), and so on. I had no problem with the idea and voted for it at the time. I still don't think it's a terrible idea if launches actually get started--outside money from Virgin Galactic, outside money from tourists and passengers, and possible use of it for other launches. There is simply not much of an economic driver in TorC or all of Sierra County, unless you want to spend the night in a little hotel with a hot spring fed directly into your bathtub. There's some beautiful country in the county, but that's not going to drive lots of tourism. I'm sure I've driven past TorC on I-25 far more than I ever stopped there. I have no problem with more state funding going to it. Eventually, the plug might have to be pulled if it really never happens, but big ideas are a risk and governmental funds should be used.
We should maybe aspire to something greater than a 3000 year old model?
Sadly, most people think the big government they keep voting for is there to help them, not to help those who buy the politicians they vote for. With enemies like the left, the 1% don't need friends.
It's not Left or Right. It's money or no money. The Left/Right paradigm is used to distract from class warfare being waged by the .1%.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
The idea is that if you get one company other will follow. It can work but frankly manned spaceflight is one of those not for profit endeavors that is best left to the government.
Rocket powered ballistic joy rides are just super rollercoaster for the rich.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
That is an interesting theory. Maybe there should be a healthy respect on both sides? I don't see that happening but we're talking hypotheticals here.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I am not sure if it has reached that level, at this time. At this point I'd like to see more non-typical politicians taking actions to serve their fellow citizens and I'd like to see more informed voters given the incentive to help others learn. The current process is a lazy sideline show that is more akin to team sports fans than a system of governance. I'd like to try that before we get violent. If that doesn't work, and it needs to be on a larger scale, then I'm willing to accept violence as a solution.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
From Wikipedia:
Truth or Consequences, New Mexico changed its name from Hot Springs in 1950, after the host of the television show Truth or Consequences promised free publicity to any town willing to change its name to that of the show.
From the summary:
"one of the poorest places in the state."
That explains it, I guess.
Yes, I think a "healthy respect" is a good way of putting it. We don't want either our leaders or the voters to become complacent, but they do need to cooperate.
I wish I had an idea of how to get us to that point.
But then again that should have been obvious to everyone long ago. Shame too many people think the government is some sort of magic purse.
There was a TED talk not long ago, given by Jonathan Haidt, highlighting his research into the liberal vs the conservative mind. The findings was quite interesting and go some way towards explaining the motivations behind liberal and conservative social policy preferences. Basically, he identifies five cross-cultral foundations of morality:
A balance of all five was found to be a necessary condition for what many people would consider to be a good society. Now here is where it gets interesting. People who characterize themselves as conservative tend to base their moral compass on a combination of all five values. Some valued more than others but all of them at least considered. However, people who characterize themselves as liberal tend to value the first three characteristics quite highly, but authority/respect and purity/sanctity little or not at all. This comports well with liberal policy preferences and social movements in recent memory which have sought to deliver results quickly, but without much interest in conserving existing social structures or regard to existing authorities. Anyone else remember "Question Authority"?
Is there a citation for "People who characterize themselves as conservative tend to base their moral compass on a combination of all five values. Some valued more than others but all of them at least considered. However, people who characterize themselves as liberal tend to value the first three characteristics quite highly, but authority/respect and purity/sanctity little or not at all"? Sorry, I can't watch the TED talk at work. But I'm wondering where this information comes from.
In my experience those who identify as Conservative place an inordinate value on tribalism, authority and purity. We certainly see that in the Tea Party movement, which seems to be constantly dissatisfied with office holders being not sufficiently Conservative. They only seem to apply the first two values, care and fairness, within the context of the tribe; i.e. those outside of the tribe are not deemed worthy of care or fairness. We see this in jingoistic foreign policy attitudes and dividing society into "makers" and "takers". We also see it in the persistent racism coming from some corners of the political Right. Basically Black people are not-White (outside the tribe) which takes primacy over their being Americans (inside the tribe). So I'm curious as to where from the idea comes that Conservatives consider all five aspects of morality whereas Liberals only consider three. It doesn't really look that way from my perspective, as someone who identifies as neither Liberal nor Conservative.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
You're going to have a bad time
We're small voices in a very large crowd.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
$400K/year is the kind of salary that strat getting a high investment/expense ratio. Also the kind of salary that eventually buy $200,000 cars.
I have family members and friends that have make that kind of salary. (doctor's, lawyers, private equity, etc) Even in a location with low cost of living, it's not nearly enough for most to justify buying $200K vehicles and very, very few do. $400K becomes about half to two-thirds of that once taxes are taken out. Comfortable to be sure but not enough to start acting like a rap star. I assure you that very few people making that kind of salary are driving around in vehicles that cost anywhere near $200K. Just go look in the doctor's parking lot at any hospital if you don't believe me. You aren't going to see a lot of Ferrari's there. It's not that they can't eventually do it but the people who buy $200K cars tend to be folks that either come from money or who make close to seven figure incomes.
So a once in a lifetime $250,000 expense is not necessarily out of the question.
VERY different statement. Yes someone making $400K/year who is reasonably thrifty could drop $250K on a trip to space if they wanted. Most won't but it's possible.
In the old days when someone got pregnant without being married they were considered irresponsible. Society gave them two choices. Either they would get married or give the child up for adoption to a married couple.
Yeah, it didn't really work that way a lot of the time. Single parents and pregnant teens have always been a thing since the dawn of mankind. You really shouldn't get your opinions about how the real world works from 1950s sitcoms.
We know a child will be much more successful in life if they are raised by a mother and father.
No we don't "know" that because it isn't actually true. Most studies of this sort of thing badly confuse correlation with causation and fail to control for other factors. Having a mother and a father can help but the relationship between success (which you conveniently didn't define) and living in a traditional Norman Rockwell family is a weak one. What matters is having parents and guardians and family that are involved. Whether they are married or not is irrelevant.
Today what we do is tax the responsible people and give that money to the irresponsible people to raise their kids.
Even if that were true (and it mostly isn't) the VAST majority of the money we tax goes to the military and medicare and social security. I'll start worrying about a few folks taking advantage of my tax dollars once we stop spending trillions on fighter jets we don't need and wars in the middle east that we can't afford.
The liberal feels bad for the girl that gets pregnant without being married.
Why should I feel bad for that person unless they are underage? I don't care at all. What I do care about is whether society helps that person or not. Sounds like your attitude is to tell them to fuck off and then complain about the bad results after you couldn't be bothered to help a fellow human.
Meanwhile the single moms raise children that are a drain on society.
As someone who was raised by a single mom allow me to give a hearty FUCK YOU to you and your ignorant opinion of single moms. You have NO idea what you are talking about. The real world isn't an episode of Leave It To Beaver and there are millions of single parents who are doing a damn fine job raising their children to be fine productive members of society. I'll be happy to introduce you to some and you can tell them what a drain they and their children are to their face.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's the old corporate welfare thing.
Corporations are against welfare except when it benefits them. Then it's "economic development!"
See subject: ...On hosts adding speed, security, reliability & anonymity - doing so using LESS yet doing FAR MORE than weak slow usermode messagepassing, RAM, & CPU overuse overheads (vs. hosts in kernelmode, native to your system vs. "bolting on 'MoAr'")
FACT:
It can't be done & you know it - Plus, YOU downmodding this same post TWICE before http://slashdot.org/comments.p... AND http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & running from a fair challenge says it all for me, weasel - you "talk big" on discussion, but you can't face that one, now can you? NOPE! You fail...
You pitiful wannabe guru little do-nothing trolls are WEAK, & mere "users" of others' work, creating NOTHING OF VALUE of your own... just a lot of blowhard windbag "hot air" & nothing more (& you know that too, now don't you? Prove otherwise!)
* You wannabes make me sick... you're disgusting.
APK
P.S.=> You wanted opinions on my program? Ok, here's a couple:
"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)
+
"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)
Where's YOUR PROGRAM (it's not) that others like & find effective that YOU created, hmmm?
See subject: ...On hosts adding speed, security, reliability & anonymity - doing so using LESS yet doing FAR MORE than weak slow usermode messagepassing, RAM, & CPU overuse overheads (vs. hosts in kernelmode, native to your system vs. "bolting on 'MoAr'")
FACT:
It can't be done & you know it - Plus, YOU downmodding this same post TWICE before http://slashdot.org/comments.p... AND http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & running from a fair challenge says it all for me, weasel - you "talk big" on discussion, but you can't face that one, now can you? NOPE! You fail...
You pitiful wannabe guru little do-nothing trolls are WEAK, & mere "users" of others' work, creating NOTHING OF VALUE of your own... just a lot of blowhard windbag "hot air" & nothing more (& you know that too, now don't you? Prove otherwise!)
* You wannabes make me sick... you're disgusting.
APK
P.S.=> You wanted opinions on my program? Ok, here's a couple:
"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)
+
"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)
Where's YOUR PROGRAM (it's not) that others like & find effective that YOU created, hmmm?
This is just like Tesla in releasing a $130,000 electric SUV that only the 1% can afford. Most people in America make between $15k - about $26K if their lucky. They can even afford basic necessities at that level, but yet corporations like Tesla and Virgin continue to build crap for the 1% that makes headlines. I myself are one of those people that make about 20K a year. and that's actually decent where I live now which is very sad. I will NEVER be able to afford a new car, a house (that won't be foreclosed on me), or medical insurance. Unless someone takes action is this country and gets rid of Capitalism, this country will continue to build a 1% class that stands on the backs of the poor. Just the way it is. :-(
You need ID and a rooftop voting permit to do that.
[Citation Needed] - because that isn't true for all the conservatives I talk to. If you think it is, you probably don't understand some of our positions, and are saying that conservatives understand the liberal positions you understand.
This is true, by my observation. I haven't noticed that either the left or the right are short on ideologues and idiots. Allowing for the fact that I am a leftist, and therefore have to compensate (I tend to notice people who are wrong for bad reasons more than people who are right for bad reasons), I haven't noticed a big difference between liberals and conservatives here.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Please don't lump all conservatives in with the Tea Party. That's like saying that all progressives are eco-crazies.
As for the talk, presumably this guy did his research which, if done correctly, should be more scientific than your (or my) anecdotal evidence.
That said, it is clear that there are people who value some things more than others. I could believe that what he said is true, if you look at progressive vs. conservative labelled programs and platforms.
In no way would life continue as normal if the financial system collapsed.
The only chance it wouldn't be as much of a disaster is if the leaders were very fast and very pragmatic about it.
Chances are, you'd be looking at anarchy or martial law or both.
Locally, you might be able to work out a deal by which you could still get produce to people, but long range transportation, with all the risks that this entails requires the ability to invest in ventures with less certain outcomes. And we require a lot of things that are now shipped very long distances.
"the great power (unelected, unchecked) represented by the ability to do this.
Not sure if my comment is a nitpick or not, but the media is largely one and the same as the government and is - to a degree - elected and checked by the few mechanisms available to us (one might argue that the government is unchecked, unelected largely).
The means of control include the FCC and limiting the access to airwaves. One of my favorite examples is a small town with no cable or fiber or even DSL. We are surrounded by emptiness and no way to get even a good cell phone signal. The arbitrer of the airwaves won't let the 500 households spread over a 100 square mile footprint use the g-damn EM spectrum. CB radio isn't even permited to do data (possibly for good reasons).
So the government controls the number of channels and prohibits use of even empty ones so we can't talk to each other.
And they do. You wouldn't hear about Soros and the Koch brothers otherwise.
Please name ONE *public good* that Soros/Koch has given the country. Because that's the definition of the terms used by GP.
I'm not exactly sure what your objection is to what I said, other than implying I'm some kind of elitist.
The obesity statistics are easily found and show that most Americans are indeed fat (particularly, check the morbid obesity rate). The effectiveness of advertising on the general population is well documented. That the public school system does not teach students how to recognize propaganda techniques (such as the bandwagon appeal, debate framing, lying by omission, the attachment of emotional imagery to what should be factual content, etc) is easy to verify. That the antics of the Kardashians and others like them routinely receive mainstream news coverage is easy to verity; so is the motive - it sells.
Since you would be unable to disagree with my assessment on any sort of factual basis, you are instead implying that I'm some sort of bad person. This is a very weak argument. Nowhere did I say everyone else should be like anything (although I did imply that people should get their shit together and think for themselves by learning how to reject bought-and-paid-for information). You also mention "hatred", which is odd considering that I stuck to easily verified factual observations. I didn't attach this kind of intense emotional feeling to anything I said. Also, Fox News is like most mainstream media outlets: they are capitalizing on the way most people have become and they simply appeal to a particular flavor of it.
I think I should come up with a name for what you're doing. It's like a form of loser's anger. You don't like what I said but you realize you cannot refute it. Personally, whenever I am in that situation, I adjust my worldview until it's consistent with the facts of the matter. My feelings about them are irrelevant - facts are facts and only by acknowledging them can I deal with them properly. But that takes a kind of courage you don't appear to have. So fueled by this disdain of yours, you must find some way to unfavorably characterize the speaker rather than deal with what was spoken.
This is what petty, small-minded people tend to do. They must make everything personal. Aren't you capable of better than this?
" In ancient Athens the rich were socially compelled to spend their own fortunes on defending the state, performing rituals, and entertaining the poor. Imagine Soros and the Koch brothers and all the wealthy of either party building and equipping their own aircraft carriers at their own expense as a public benefit."
But the Koch brothers _do_ spend millions on entertaining the poor with funny actors, it's called the Republican Primaries.
Relatively recently, something like this was done in the USA. During the War Between the States (and prior conflicts), much of the artillery used by the military was privately owned. Of course, these were things like cannons and grapeshot, not things like aircraft carriers.
Please name ONE *public good* that Soros/Koch has given the country.
Their political advocacy for starters. For example, they have funded quite a number of NGOs. Now, it sounds like you might disagree with them on the value of those public goods, but so would a number of people disagree with those ancient wealthy Athenians on the value of their respective public goods too.
Their political advocacy for starters.
Sad. You fail at basic economics. "Public Good" is defined as a material that satisfies human wants where consumption of it by one individual does not actually or potentially reduce the amount available to be consumed by another individual. (Wikipedia)
For example, they have funded quite a number of NGOs. Now, it sounds like you might disagree with them on the value of those public goods, but so would a number of people disagree with those ancient wealthy Athenians on the value of their respective public goods too.
Ugh. If you really want to continue to display your ignorance about what constitutes a public good, keep posting.
I'm not contesting obesity statistics, I'm saying that the "stupid majority" you blame for so many problems includes you yourself. The idea that the world would be great if it wasn't for all the idiots is just another way to turn you into a compliant, powerless subject of a corporate state.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
"Public Good" is defined as a material that satisfies human wants where consumption of it by one individual does not actually or potentially reduce the amount available to be consumed by another individual. (Wikipedia)
To be fair, if you read further in the wiki, it says (bold emphasis mine) "Public goods include fresh air, knowledge, public infrastructure, national security, education, common language(s), widespread and high public literacy levels, flood control systems, lighthouses, and street lighting. "
Even the most biased propaganda is a form of knowledge and education. And that's exactly what both camps do.
Paying for their messages to appear in media (they could even control the media companies)
"Think tanks" that promote certain ideas
Funding political candidates that promote certain ideas (or if you're more cynical, pay those candidates to promote certain ideas)
That said, even though khallow is correct, he still loses, because if he is correct, then he is just as screwed as everybody else. Unless of course, he's on either Soros' or Koch's payroll (if you are, khallow, please tell me how to get in on that?)
My concern is that if 'the powers that be' don't soon learn that keeping the lid on the pressure cooker by suppressing protest is a losing strategy, it will explode soon (if it's not already too late for that). I would rather see a measured response where cops end up in handcuffs than one where cops end up dead. Yje lesson in humility might also be helpful.
Also, that would be the sort of moral victory that could get people motivated to vote for unconventional candidates with some hope they might win.
I think that if it does explode it's going to go big. Thus I'm hoping an informed and active populace would make better choices but, you know, that's not exactly likely. I can hope though, can't I?
Posting as AC to keep a lower post count. /. got grouchy and said I'd hit the threshold. I'm not sure why they have such a policy. It's pretty dumb and I'm at the highest level of karma that one can reach. Ah well...
KGIII - if you want then thread a reply up above and I'll see it. AC posts don't get notification and I may miss it.
That said, even though khallow is correct, he still loses, because if he is correct, then he is just as screwed as everybody else.
And just as not screwed. If I were to assert that the Koch brothers or Soros are equivalent to Nobel-level physicists because they are rich, I'd be laughed off of the internet again. But somehow it's ok to suppose that they're spooky good propagandists.
I really don't see that. I think the lot of them are throwing money on a bonfire. Turns out that I don't really think much of the value of their public goods either.
Elysium was a good movie.
See subject: ...On hosts adding speed, security, reliability & anonymity - doing so using LESS yet doing FAR MORE than weak slow usermode messagepassing, RAM, & CPU overuse overheads (vs. hosts in kernelmode, native to your system vs. "bolting on 'MoAr'")
FACT:
It can't be done & you know it - Plus, YOU downmodding this same post TWICE before http://slashdot.org/comments.p... AND http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & running from a fair challenge says it all for me, weasel - you "talk big" on discussion, but you can't face that one, now can you? NOPE! You fail...
APK
P.S.=> You wanted opinions on my program? Ok, here's a couple:
"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)
+
"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)
Where's YOUR PROGRAM (it's not) that others like & find effective that YOU created, hmmm?
Replying to AC post: Of course, it is hard to make good choices through the massive cloud of lies and the carefully pruned options made available to choose from.
Unfortunately, we can't outlaw lying. Politicians, for the most part, seem keen on lying. To be honest, I have no idea why. I don't find it endearing nor do I think others do. I can't assume they, the average voter, believe them. I can't assume they like them. I'm not sure why they vote for them or don't actually run to take their place. I've had people crawling out of the woodwork to get my to take their money since saying that I'd run for the State Senate. I imagine others would find the same to be true.
I don't take the money, by the way. I don't want to be beholden to anyone. I also have no need for it. I can afford it on my own, thanks. They can use that money to put up signs, to buy commercials on my behalf (something I have no choice but to accept), or just use give it to a charity. I'm already beholden to my (potential) constituents. I'll not be more obligated to one over the other.
There is so much that I still do not understand. I get how Obama won the first election - he had a good message and is charismatic and all that. I have no idea how he won the second time. I don't assume momentum works like it does in physics but it seems like there's a potential "law" there. I don't understand why we vote for people who are going to harm us - we can vote for a third party (and I do 99.999% of the time).
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
It's not just the candidates doing the lying. The talking heads don't seem fond of the truth either.
Lying has long been a part of politics. One readily finds references to it in the 19th century. It's the magnitude that seems changed.
I can't help but think that part of the problem is parents not having enough free time to teach their children important skills such as critical thinking. Schools don't do it either, so the result in about 20 years is an adult voter who isn't well prepared to evaluate the claims of the candidates and pundits.
I wonder if it is the magnitude that has changed or if it is the available communication, the ubiquity if you will, and that we're able to see it (and confirm it) more readily? I don't even begin to know what to look for if I wanted to compile data on the subject. An interesting aside is the history of yellow journalism. Anyhow, I've no solutions other than to suggest that people who are interested take the time and make the effort to run for office.
Honestly, I don't want to be in office. I've got more interesting things to do with my time. I will not run for a second term. I will help someone follow me when that time comes. I won't even be keeping my salary. That will get donated to a local charity - in the district that I represent. The only good thing that I can think of is that I can intentionally be a little late for an open session and drive as fast as I want to get there and the cops are unable to stop me. (The movement to an open session by a legislator shall not be hindered or infringed. Something like that.) No, that's an attempt at a joke. I won't really go speeding to an open session.
Another thing is, there seem to be some very well informed voters. I've been talking to them - lots of them. Some of them are far more aware of the problems and have fine insights that I'd never have. Then there are others who simply vote the way they do because that's what they were taught. So, where does the blame lie and where can we find solutions?
Schools no longer teach critical thinking, they don't even teach civics but call a watered down version "Social Studies." Parents probably have the time, they just don't seem interested. They can stop watching a few hours of television every night and work with their children. They don't even help with homework all that much. It's kind of sad.
Now this is WILDLY off topic but this is a good place to put it... You (generic you) think you're smarter than those a generation or three ago. Theoretically this is possible but in reality is is unlikely. What? Well, a few generations ago you had to know how to do everything from welding to fixing your own automobile. Today we can get away with knowing less because we're large enough to support specialists. This is only true for a relatively short time frame. It was not that long ago that one needed to be adept with things like agriculture, hunting, animal husbandry, medicine, mechanics, engineering, and whatnot.
I was watching an interesting documentary that brought this up in a short manner and have since been pondering it. We're dumber than we've ever been in our history. I'm still processing the idea and the verbiage but it seems true. Our test metrics are bogus and make all sorts of assumptions. We're higher level animals but not nearly as good as we think. Let's see you walk around, without fire, and survive in a jungle. You don't have the skills or stamina. Yet a lowly sloth does it just fine.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
You are quite right about lost knowledge. I grew up in the '60s and '70s in the south. In that time and place, real men fixed their own car. I cannot think of even one man I met as a child who didn't know how to fix a car. I know there are households that don't have so much as a screwdriver, but it still seems very strange to me.
Even more fundamentally, more and more households have nobody that even knows the basics of cooking. Everything they eat comes in a box that goes in the microwave. That seems even more strange to me. Considering we all have to eat every day, I would think that knowledge would be important to people.