How about silver, which projections have shown that we will be OUT OF in twenty years? How about any number of other raw materials, where we can put the environmental disaster out into space where it won't do any damage, and allow the Earth to become a clean, green paradise? How about rather than trying to centrally plan a colony on an asteroid before we get there, we just let people go out there and mine whatever is profitable, and form their own colonies?
And you don't NEED to "break ties" with Earth. It's called trade, and it built the world we know out of a world or primitive barbarism..
A space elevator here would allow us to have daily launches to Mars, the asteroids, and beyond, using basically no fuel (using the Earth's angular momentum). SImilar space elevators could be built on the Moon, Mars, and Jupiter's moons, meaning we could then use them to fling material back to Earth. Multiple elevators==dozens or hundreds of launches per day, and with a properly designed elevator, literally no fuel expended (ie one that unfurls continuously from the ground--this will be possible with new methods of mass production of graphene coming online now that are controlled by air flow, and can thus be made continuously).
Christ, you sound like a Jester in the court of Isabella making fun of Columbus for wanting to go to an empty continent. Even empty, it is a giant virgin mine waiting to be tapped. Colonies will form there quickly enough with regular travel established.
And debris at LEO are no problem, any more than they are for current ships. You will need to maneuver the ribbon around the debris while a lifter is going up. The rest of the time, they can just be allowed to impact the ribbon, as it is basically bulletproof.
You can't legislate purchasing power into people's pockets, only out of them. If you want human "rights", then you need to get out of the way and let a capital base develop, while protecting workers from abuses like theft, assault, and murder. That is the only logical role of a government in any economy. Setting wages does nothing but destroy jobs and lock out the poor from the cycle of advancement. If workers are free to leave, then they will if they think they have a better opportunity elsewhere. Which they will, once they have accumulated money and experience from their current job.
lol, so in your world, a brand new worker owns an equal share of the business to a worker who has been there for three decades, and helped to build the business from the ground up? So the person who worked elsewhere and saved money to invest in said company, but no longer works there himself gets nothing? The worker who does nothing gets an equal share as the one who works in a dangerous part of the business?
Socialists have the shallowest thought processes of any group of people on the planet.
Ri~ight, so the transition from feudal society to modern society had nothing to do with capitalism. It just so happens that every country that experienced the transition just happened to have free market capitalism in place during the transition.
Cause and effect have no impact on the mind of a socialist, apparently.
Under communism, the people starve while party members feast. More than likely, the only people getting cell phones are party members and perhaps foreign contractors.
This is what happens when you don't allow people to think for themselves, and try to centrally plan things.
Not being allowed to enter an area is different from not being able to leave. Or do you think you are a slave because you aren't allowed to camp out on the White House lawn?
Funny, because conservatives all call me a commie douchebag. Such is the life of a libertarian--ie someone who just wants to be left alone and to be allowed to keep what they earn.
And you are totally ignorant of slavery. Slaves have ALWAYS spent a certain amount of time working for their masters, and a certain amount of time working for themselves. Whether it was in trade, as in the Northern colonies/states prior to abolition there, or time spent in their own fields in the South.
For comparison purposes, Medieval serfs paid 20% of their income to their "noble" masters. But they were tied to the land. The Chinese aren't.
The only freedom we have is to choose not to work for pay, ie subsistence farming. Pretty shitty, honestly.
If someone came here and was making that much, it would be because he is providing that much or more value. You guys sure are a bunch of jealous assholes. Hard work and savings seem to mean nothing to you. You just want something for nothing.
Hey, don't blame me if you don't know the definition of slavery.
Those people are perfectly free to leave their jobs. Slaves are not. The fact is that they are taxed less than us by half. Indeed, our tax rate is so high, we turn over just 5% less of our total economic production to our masters than black slaves in the US did in the 1800's. Sure, we have a lot more capital to work with, so we are fairly comfortable, but is living as a slave in a cage of gold really better than being temporarily poor and free?
Why can't you compare them? One becomes the other, and in doing so, improves their life. You also fail to note that the factory improved working conditions based on the bad press, meaning things got better without government interference.
Or do you think that industrialization happens overnight, and people can just go from being totally unskilled to super high paid without any capital overnight? You think a government can just step in and say "pay your workers more" when they aren't productive enough to support that level of pay?
This is what an industrial revolution looks like. Things look bad, but the truth is that they are doing nothing but improving their lives. In a generation, they will a GDP per capital like that of the US.
Yeah, God forbid the best and brightest get in, rather than EVERYONE.
Wait, that's what it was like in the US during our golden age? WTF!? Didn't they know that we can fix any problem by just throwing tuition money at it to the point that colleges feel the need to build waterparks with lazy rivers an every campus?
Yeah, video games will be reduced to the level of modern "art".
Expect to see a million "Moon Master" remakes by people who use these grants to draw a salary for doing basically nothing. The equivalent of putting Ketchup on a pile of dog shit and call it art.
Uhhh, no, I can't, because the laws and regulations that "forbid" water and AIR pollution set out certain conditions that must be met, with no thought given to unintended consequences. The only thing regulations can do is shut down the practice entirely, which is not a good solution either. If a company does damages, they shouldn't be able to hide behind regulatory compliance and be free from paying the piper.
You don't understand reality. The reality is that we have a system of regulatory capture. The little guy can't win in a situation like this. They have a chance in court when the laws aren't stacked against them.
I'm not sure why you are so against libertarianism when the current model is leading to these terrible outcomes, and despite huge amounts of effort, time and money invested, the situation never seems to improve.
No, you have rented your apartment, which includes use of everything there. If he wanted to charge you for breathing, he would never get any renters, because he is a crazy person. But if some big coal plant is built next door, he sure as shit has a right to sue them because the pollution has made him lose money, and you have the right to sue because they have done damage to your body.
If you don't like having an altitude limit, take it up with the government. They are the ones who set that rule. Further, a person only really owns what he can defend, including areas with improvements, fences, etc. Your exclusive right to the space above your land can not be enforced against things you can't see, or that pass by so fast you can't catch them, or prevent them from entering. If you wanted to build a space elevator, however, you would certainly be entitled to keeping people out of your airspace, and it would, in fact, become both practical and vital. Similarly, you can't keep people off of unimproved property. You can put up no trespassing signs, or a fence, just like you could float a blimp saying "keep out of my airspace", or build a space elevator or very tall tower, but without those things, it doesn't really make any sense.
That's the problem with laws and regulations. They provide cover for the corporations doing the damage. Remove the laws and regulations, and allow damages to be settled in court. The settlement will include shipping in water in perpetuity plus monetary damages plus punitive damages. All this lost money will factor into the company's decision on whether or not this is worth it. Remember, making money means you are providing a service. A few polluted wells is a small price to pay for cheap natural gas, which heats the homes of pensioners. The ebb and flow of money is what determines maximum efficient use of resources. But not when corporations are give a free pass to pollute through statute.
You just said that regulation is a problem, but you want more of it. What makes you think the little guy will win this time? At best all your are going to do is force the drillers to get into bed with another set of regulators.
The person who owns the land owns the sky above it, up to a certain altitude. If the air above your land is polluted, you have a right to sue for damages.
Yes, regulation is bad. However, the homeowners who were screwed by these guys have every right to sue the living shit out of them, and force them to ship in water for them and their farms, and pay punitive damages.
When everything is owned by someone with a genuine economic interest, there are no externalities.
Slashdot Mirror
How about silver, which projections have shown that we will be OUT OF in twenty years? How about any number of other raw materials, where we can put the environmental disaster out into space where it won't do any damage, and allow the Earth to become a clean, green paradise? How about rather than trying to centrally plan a colony on an asteroid before we get there, we just let people go out there and mine whatever is profitable, and form their own colonies?
And you don't NEED to "break ties" with Earth. It's called trade, and it built the world we know out of a world or primitive barbarism..
Wow, you really don't know much, do you?
A space elevator here would allow us to have daily launches to Mars, the asteroids, and beyond, using basically no fuel (using the Earth's angular momentum). SImilar space elevators could be built on the Moon, Mars, and Jupiter's moons, meaning we could then use them to fling material back to Earth. Multiple elevators==dozens or hundreds of launches per day, and with a properly designed elevator, literally no fuel expended (ie one that unfurls continuously from the ground--this will be possible with new methods of mass production of graphene coming online now that are controlled by air flow, and can thus be made continuously).
Christ, you sound like a Jester in the court of Isabella making fun of Columbus for wanting to go to an empty continent. Even empty, it is a giant virgin mine waiting to be tapped. Colonies will form there quickly enough with regular travel established.
And debris at LEO are no problem, any more than they are for current ships. You will need to maneuver the ribbon around the debris while a lifter is going up. The rest of the time, they can just be allowed to impact the ribbon, as it is basically bulletproof.
HURP, DERES NUTTIN OUT DERE!
You can't legislate purchasing power into people's pockets, only out of them. If you want human "rights", then you need to get out of the way and let a capital base develop, while protecting workers from abuses like theft, assault, and murder. That is the only logical role of a government in any economy. Setting wages does nothing but destroy jobs and lock out the poor from the cycle of advancement. If workers are free to leave, then they will if they think they have a better opportunity elsewhere. Which they will, once they have accumulated money and experience from their current job.
lol, so in your world, a brand new worker owns an equal share of the business to a worker who has been there for three decades, and helped to build the business from the ground up? So the person who worked elsewhere and saved money to invest in said company, but no longer works there himself gets nothing? The worker who does nothing gets an equal share as the one who works in a dangerous part of the business?
Socialists have the shallowest thought processes of any group of people on the planet.
Ri~ight, so the transition from feudal society to modern society had nothing to do with capitalism. It just so happens that every country that experienced the transition just happened to have free market capitalism in place during the transition.
Cause and effect have no impact on the mind of a socialist, apparently.
Under communism, the people starve while party members feast. More than likely, the only people getting cell phones are party members and perhaps foreign contractors.
This is what happens when you don't allow people to think for themselves, and try to centrally plan things.
Not being allowed to enter an area is different from not being able to leave. Or do you think you are a slave because you aren't allowed to camp out on the White House lawn?
You keep thinking that, like a GOOD slave.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjgE8Lw5YaQ&feature=related
Funny, because conservatives all call me a commie douchebag. Such is the life of a libertarian--ie someone who just wants to be left alone and to be allowed to keep what they earn.
And you are totally ignorant of slavery. Slaves have ALWAYS spent a certain amount of time working for their masters, and a certain amount of time working for themselves. Whether it was in trade, as in the Northern colonies/states prior to abolition there, or time spent in their own fields in the South.
For comparison purposes, Medieval serfs paid 20% of their income to their "noble" masters. But they were tied to the land. The Chinese aren't.
The only freedom we have is to choose not to work for pay, ie subsistence farming. Pretty shitty, honestly.
If someone came here and was making that much, it would be because he is providing that much or more value. You guys sure are a bunch of jealous assholes. Hard work and savings seem to mean nothing to you. You just want something for nothing.
No wonder America is falling apart at the seams.
Hey, don't blame me if you don't know the definition of slavery.
Those people are perfectly free to leave their jobs. Slaves are not. The fact is that they are taxed less than us by half. Indeed, our tax rate is so high, we turn over just 5% less of our total economic production to our masters than black slaves in the US did in the 1800's. Sure, we have a lot more capital to work with, so we are fairly comfortable, but is living as a slave in a cage of gold really better than being temporarily poor and free?
Why can't you compare them? One becomes the other, and in doing so, improves their life. You also fail to note that the factory improved working conditions based on the bad press, meaning things got better without government interference.
Or do you think that industrialization happens overnight, and people can just go from being totally unskilled to super high paid without any capital overnight? You think a government can just step in and say "pay your workers more" when they aren't productive enough to support that level of pay?
This is what an industrial revolution looks like. Things look bad, but the truth is that they are doing nothing but improving their lives. In a generation, they will a GDP per capital like that of the US.
Yeah, God forbid the best and brightest get in, rather than EVERYONE.
Wait, that's what it was like in the US during our golden age? WTF!? Didn't they know that we can fix any problem by just throwing tuition money at it to the point that colleges feel the need to build waterparks with lazy rivers an every campus?
Yeah, those guys are slaves, with their no regulations and income tax rate half of ours.
Those evil exploitative bastards!
Yeah, video games will be reduced to the level of modern "art".
Expect to see a million "Moon Master" remakes by people who use these grants to draw a salary for doing basically nothing. The equivalent of putting Ketchup on a pile of dog shit and call it art.
But no Mac version, eh?
LOL
Yeah, and French Fries are from France. FRANCE I SAY!
And Salisbury steak is from England! And pizza is from Pisa!
Or people with those nationalities immigrated here and named their inventions after their hometowns in order to drum up sales of the "exotic" food.
Uhhh, no, I can't, because the laws and regulations that "forbid" water and AIR pollution set out certain conditions that must be met, with no thought given to unintended consequences. The only thing regulations can do is shut down the practice entirely, which is not a good solution either. If a company does damages, they shouldn't be able to hide behind regulatory compliance and be free from paying the piper.
You don't understand reality. The reality is that we have a system of regulatory capture. The little guy can't win in a situation like this. They have a chance in court when the laws aren't stacked against them.
I'm not sure why you are so against libertarianism when the current model is leading to these terrible outcomes, and despite huge amounts of effort, time and money invested, the situation never seems to improve.
I'm fairly certain the government will have something to say about that.
You keep acting like I'm a crazy person for wanting to be able to sue people for doing damage to people's health and property. What is wrong with you?
No, you have rented your apartment, which includes use of everything there. If he wanted to charge you for breathing, he would never get any renters, because he is a crazy person. But if some big coal plant is built next door, he sure as shit has a right to sue them because the pollution has made him lose money, and you have the right to sue because they have done damage to your body.
If you don't like having an altitude limit, take it up with the government. They are the ones who set that rule. Further, a person only really owns what he can defend, including areas with improvements, fences, etc. Your exclusive right to the space above your land can not be enforced against things you can't see, or that pass by so fast you can't catch them, or prevent them from entering. If you wanted to build a space elevator, however, you would certainly be entitled to keeping people out of your airspace, and it would, in fact, become both practical and vital. Similarly, you can't keep people off of unimproved property. You can put up no trespassing signs, or a fence, just like you could float a blimp saying "keep out of my airspace", or build a space elevator or very tall tower, but without those things, it doesn't really make any sense.
That's the problem with laws and regulations. They provide cover for the corporations doing the damage. Remove the laws and regulations, and allow damages to be settled in court. The settlement will include shipping in water in perpetuity plus monetary damages plus punitive damages. All this lost money will factor into the company's decision on whether or not this is worth it. Remember, making money means you are providing a service. A few polluted wells is a small price to pay for cheap natural gas, which heats the homes of pensioners. The ebb and flow of money is what determines maximum efficient use of resources. But not when corporations are give a free pass to pollute through statute.
You just said that regulation is a problem, but you want more of it. What makes you think the little guy will win this time? At best all your are going to do is force the drillers to get into bed with another set of regulators.
The person who owns the land owns the sky above it, up to a certain altitude. If the air above your land is polluted, you have a right to sue for damages.
Yes, regulation is bad. However, the homeowners who were screwed by these guys have every right to sue the living shit out of them, and force them to ship in water for them and their farms, and pay punitive damages.
When everything is owned by someone with a genuine economic interest, there are no externalities.
Because no-one, and I mean NO-ONE can spoof an IP address.
The ONLY appropriately named police organization in our Orwellian society.