Predictions for Obama admin

[wilheldp_PE]

(BTW, was going to the moon a socialist enterprise?)

No, that was a largely useless waste of taxpayer money for some **** measuring between us and Russia. Sure, there have been some convenient inventions that came out of the space program, but really, what good does it do society as a whole to know the composition of dust on the moon? And since Russia already had a head start on us, why didn't we just let them spend all the money to get there, then learn from their expenditures?

 

[Road Guy]

I guess I would be against private folks playing with uranium wihout some major big brother stuff going on, but most of the other "green" technology shouldnt involve that much of an investment.

Coming up with a decent sized car that gets 50 mpg shouldnt be the goverments job to develop.

If I ever build a house from scratch I would incorporate some solar panels and other stuff, but its just way to expensive to do a retrofit and ever see the savings.

There was a story about putting windmills out in the ocean and how much energy they could create, but the fish people were against putting them there, damned if you do, damned if you dont....

 

[Dleg]

^Good questions. I do believe there were a number of benefits from it. You can't do something like that without coming up with at least some new technologies that can then have commercial applications. But I can't think of any that couldn't also have been developed by private industry. Most of the benefit was in intangible things like national pride, inspiration for new engineers and scientists, etc.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

If I ever build a house from scratch I would incorporate some solar panels and other stuff, but its just way to expensive to do a retrofit and ever see the savings.

If I built from scratch, I wouldn't use PV cells, but I'd put in provisions for them. I'd be more interested in passive solar. Much more cost effective. I'd be tempted to go modular as well. Much more eficient means of construction.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

If I ever build a house from scratch I would incorporate some solar panels and other stuff, but its just way to expensive to do a retrofit and ever see the savings.

My Mom tells me this every time I talk to her. She always tells me that if she had to do it all over again in this day and age she would have gone to college for green energy.

I could create both in my basement (if I only had one!).

I have a half basment, we could do one of the two!

 

[Chucktown PE]

Four things I wanted to comment on

1. If green energy isn't profitable now, the only thing the government can do is manipulate the market to make it profitable (by taxation or subsidization). The bottom line is that there are some very smart people in the market place (a lot smarter than the beuracrats) and there are literally billions of dollars to be made. The amount of government subsidies that are available are dwarfed by the profit potential. If someone were to build a relatively inexpensive car that had a fuel efficiency of 100 mpg they would be billionaires overnight. In addition, in case you haven’t noticed, while the government is inefficiently spending billions of our dollars on some of this “research”, oil has dropped to below $60 per barrel, and “green” is going to become even less cost effective.

2. Nuclear power was invented for military purposes. It was gradually adopted for civilian use. There are countless examples of such, from marine propulsion to the airplane.

3. Central planning of an economy doesn’t work. It never has and it never will. Look at France, Germany, the former Soviet Union, etc. There economies are much worse off than ours. It is impossible for the government to attain the tremendous amount of specialized knowledge required to allocate SCARCE resources in a dynamic economy. Millions of individuals which do possess this knowledge are much better suited for allocating scarce resources. When each individual is morally acting in his own best interest he is also working for the good of the whole. Western capitalism operates on a three legged stool of economic freedom, political freedom, and moral restraint. Typically socialists, liberals, etc. attack the moral restraint portion of capitalism through the use of “evil businessmen” and “evil corporations”. There are civil courts set up to remedy those problems.

4. The space race was a tremendous waste of money. If there was a need to determine what moon dust felt like under one’s feet someone would have done it sans the trillion dollars NASA spent on that little 500,000 mile endeavour.

 

[benbo]

4. The space race was a tremendous waste of money. If there was a need to determine what moon dust felt like under one’s feet someone would have done it sans the trillion dollars NASA spent on that little 500,000 mile endeavour.

Hundreds of inventions and innovations used in the defense industry and the communications industry came out of the space program. THe entire satellite system was borne out of the space program. Whether it was up to government to do it is debatable, but it was certainly not a waste of time.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

^ 100% agree

 

[roadwreck]

4. The space race was a tremendous waste of money. If there was a need to determine what moon dust felt like under one’s feet someone would have done it sans the trillion dollars NASA spent on that little 500,000 mile endeavour.

whoa whoa whoa...

...slow down just a second here. Without the space race we wouldn't be blessed with space ice cream. What would the little kiddies buy at the gift shops of museums if there were no space ice cream? That right there justifies the costs of that endeavor.

 

[benbo]

whoa whoa whoa...
...slow down just a second here. Without the space race we wouldn't be blessed with space ice cream. What would the little kiddies buy at the gift shops of museums if there were no space ice cream? That right there justifies the costs of that endeavor.

Not to mention Tang. I forgot about that.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

I don't have to pay for Tang.

 

[Road Guy]

were taking the cub scouts to space camp this spring, I have told all the parents to save up for the gift shop!

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

Dammit I always wanted to do that as a kid. But nooooo, Cape Canaveral had to be in Florida instead of Long Island.

 

[wilheldp_PE]

Hundreds of inventions and innovations used in the defense industry and the communications industry came out of the space program. THe entire satellite system was borne out of the space program. Whether it was up to government to do it is debatable, but it was certainly not a waste of time.

He didn't say the space program...he specified the trip to the moon. The logistics of landing a craft on the moon, traveling while there, and getting the people off the moon necessitated the invention of several technologies and techniques that are useless except for similarly useless missions back to the moon or to Mars.

Even the space program as a whole could be accomplished more efficiently by private entities if it weren't for the anti-competitive tactics of NASA. There are already several companies that have the technology to launch satellites into orbit, but their services are usually cost prohibitive since NASA can do it with taxpayer subsidized "cheap" rates.

I think in political debates like this, people actually assign living, breathing, human characteristics to "the government". The government is nothing but a group of people like you and me. All of these inventions and technologies that you attribute to the government just means that their development was paid for by tax dollars taken out of your paycheck. If the scientists and other project team members had been hired to private sector jobs at companies with similar goals, the inventions would have been the same...they just would have been developed when there was a need for them in society (i.e. they would be profitable to develop).

 

[wilheldp_PE]

Dammit I always wanted to do that as a kid. But nooooo, Cape Canaveral had to be in Florida instead of Long Island.

Space Camp is in Huntsville, AL, at the Redstone Arsenal/US Space and Rocket Center.

 

[benbo]

He didn't say the space program...he specified the trip to the moon. The logistics of landing a craft on the moon, traveling while there, and getting the people off the moon necessitated the invention of several technologies and techniques that are useless except for similarly useless missions back to the moon or to Mars.
Even the space program as a whole could be accomplished more efficiently by private entities if it weren't for the anti-competitive tactics of NASA. There are already several companies that have the technology to launch satellites into orbit, but their services are usually cost prohibitive since NASA can do it with taxpayer subsidized "cheap" rates.

I think in political debates like this, people actually assign living, breathing, human characteristics to "the government". The government is nothing but a group of people like you and me. All of these inventions and technologies that you attribute to the government just means that their development was paid for by tax dollars taken out of your paycheck. If the scientists and other project team members had been hired to private sector jobs at companies with similar goals, the inventions would have been the same...they just would have been developed when there was a need for them in society (i.e. they would be profitable to develop).

The trip to the moon was not a "one shot" deal. Prior to that the entire space program developed launching mechanisms, communications systems, satellite (such as Surveyor) and the associated control systems, all of which are the basis of our cell phones, GPS systems, and a lot of the military technology we have today.

The private sector would have done it? When? Would they be starting now? Because I don't recall a lot of private companies working on this type of technology back in the early 1960s. Please tell me who they were, other than companies like Lockheed which were under government contract.

You keep talking about this imaginary system that has NEVER happened anywhere. If your ideas are so transcendental, how come they have never actually been put into practice in the history of mankind? Maybe "the market" decided they weren't all that great. It is hard to argue with somebody who is positing a fantasy that has never actually happened.

 

[wilheldp_PE]

The trip to the moon was not a "one shot" deal. Prior to that the entire space program developed launching mechanisms, communications systems, satellite (such as Surveyor) and the associated control systems, all of which are the basis of our cell phones, GPS systems, and a lot of the military technology we have today.
The private sector would have done it? When? Would they be starting now? Because I don't recall a lot of private companies working on this type of technology back in the early 1960s. Please tell me who they were, other than companies like Lockheed which were under government contract.

You keep talking about this imaginary system that has NEVER happened anywhere. If your ideas are so transcendental, how come they have never actually been put into practice in the history of mankind? Maybe "the market" decided they weren't all that great. It is hard to argue with somebody who is positing a fantasy that has never actually happened.

You are passionate in your defense of government...I'll give you that. Tell me, did we need the government to invent cars for us? People were happily living their lives with horses and buggies and bicycles at the time. There really wasn't demand for cars, but they were invented anyway and the rest is history. Same deal with trains.

The fact of the matter is that government IS a corporation. It's just the most inefficient corporation in the world because it has a captive customer base and no competition. There is no motivation for the government to find a better or cheaper way to do something...if it costs too much, they'll either take more money from us or create it out of thin air. If you take away that ability, then it forces the government/corporation to become efficient.

Here's a, perhaps, less drastic analogy for you. Say the government were to provide their services a la carte. Everybody pays a base tax that covers things that cannot be broken out (national defense, welfare, etc.). But if you own a car, you pay a little bit more for access to the roads. If you have a child in public education, you pay more taxes. This way, competition would cause the public schools to either get better or shut down completely. If you can afford the extra taxes for public education, then you may be able to afford private education. If private offers better quality, then public will cease to exist. And before I hear about how unfair this is to poor people, please show me the Article or Amendment in the Constitution that says "A persons right to an education shall not be infringed.".

 

[FLBuff PE]

You are passionate in your defense of government...I'll give you that. Tell me, did we need the government to invent cars for us? People were happily living their lives with horses and buggies and bicycles at the time. There really wasn't demand for cars, but they were invented anyway and the rest is history. Same deal with trains.
The fact of the matter is that government IS a corporation. It's just the most inefficient corporation in the world because it has a captive customer base and no competition. There is no motivation for the government to find a better or cheaper way to do something...if it costs too much, they'll either take more money from us or create it out of thin air. If you take away that ability, then it forces the government/corporation to become efficient.

Here's a, perhaps, less drastic analogy for you. Say the government were to provide their services a la carte. Everybody pays a base tax that covers things that cannot be broken out (national defense, welfare, etc.). But if you own a car, you pay a little bit more for access to the roads. If you have a child in public education, you pay more taxes. This way, competition would cause the public schools to either get better or shut down completely. If you can afford the extra taxes for public education, then you may be able to afford private education. If private offers better quality, then public will cease to exist. And before I hear about how unfair this is to poor people, please show me the Article or Amendment in the Constitution that says "A persons right to an education shall not be infringed.".

While not part of the US Constitution, it is a recognized right of the UN, which the US is a part of. From Wikipedia:

Right to education

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The right to education is recognised as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 26, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 14.

The realisation of the right to education on a national level may be achieved through compulsory education, or more specifically free compulsory primary education, as stated in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

The right to education may also include the right to freedom of education.

 

[wilheldp_PE]

While not part of the US Constitution, it is a recognized right of the UN, which the US is a part of. From Wikipedia:
Right to education

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The right to education is recognised as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 26, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 14.

The realisation of the right to education on a national level may be achieved through compulsory education, or more specifically free compulsory primary education, as stated in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

The right to education may also include the right to freedom of education.

I disagree with the bold part whole-heartedly. First, because if someone doesn't wish to be educated, they should not be forced into compulsory education. Second, public education is FAR from free. Tax paying citizens are forced to pay more than the value of the education their children receive in order to provide the same education to the lower classes for free.

 

[Chucktown PE]

The trip to the moon was not a "one shot" deal. Prior to that the entire space program developed launching mechanisms, communications systems, satellite (such as Surveyor) and the associated control systems, all of which are the basis of our cell phones, GPS systems, and a lot of the military technology we have today.
The private sector would have done it? When? Would they be starting now? Because I don't recall a lot of private companies working on this type of technology back in the early 1960s. Please tell me who they were, other than companies like Lockheed which were under government contract.

You keep talking about this imaginary system that has NEVER happened anywhere. If your ideas are so transcendental, how come they have never actually been put into practice in the history of mankind? Maybe "the market" decided they weren't all that great. It is hard to argue with somebody who is positing a fantasy that has never actually happened.

The point I am trying to make is that those things shouldn't have happened. They were a tremendous waste of resources. If something needs to be invented, it will be invented and that has happened throughout the history of mankind. Some government official decided we should get into a pissing contest with the USSR for national morale, hence we spent billions upon billions (independent analysts now say this was over a trillion in 2008 dollars). That money would have been put to better use were it left in the pocket of the taxpayers. Maybe it would have been devoted to a cure for disease, inventing a more efficient automobile, the development of a computer, etc. And since that system has NEVER happened anywhere, please tell me where everything you use in your everyday life came from, it certainly wasn't the government. The guy who invented the telephone, the radio, the car, the PC, software, electricity, the light bulb, even your freaking watch was invented, manufactured, exported, imported, distributed, marketed, delivered, and sold to you buy a series of individuals with one goal in mind, to provide a product to you, the consumer and make a profit doing it. The most remarkable thing, is that they did it without a government subsidy, or a handout, or welfare, or someone telling them to do it for the good of society.