Quote from: CitizenSpace on 04/29/2014 11:04 amQuote from: high road on 04/29/2014 10:13 amIt's a matter of the willingness to spend said money. So it's a question of money. There's 72 trillion dollars going around worldwide. 45 trillion of that goes around in countries with an active space programme (I'm only counting the US, China, India, Russia and Europe). The world spends several times more on any single one of the big sports than it does on space. A few billion per year to support a moon base, or even a few times more to support a mars base is nothing. Quatar spends more on organizing the next olympics than the ISS has cost in its entire existence. But why would Joe Sixpack spend that on space exploration, if even most of the people (including me) on this forum, all interested in space exploration, don't pay for L2 membership, or support other space initiatives?Your argument struck me hard. Makes a lot more sense when you put it that way. So it is a question of money, but really more of a question on how said money is used and the willingness to use it. By the way, how the heck are you all so good at arguing a point with so much information? Is google implanted in your head or something? We've been at it for quite a while, that helps. Although my numbers might be outdated sometimes. And this forum is kind of my outlet for my urge to discuss things. People I know usually get bored pretty quickly or start using defending unsubstantiated opinions that can't even be true at the same time.As for the 90 years old: I'm hoping so as well. I'm also still in my twenties. Once we've proven people can survive a little further from earth, I'm hoping for a snowball effect where more and more people become interested, more money is spent, so more technology is developed more quickly, resulting in new capabilities, improved safety and more comfort. Which means even more people become interested. But that is a hope, not a substantiated opinion. Which often gets to be called 'unsubstatiated, not viable, OT' over here. But it is why I advocate setting the bar low: concentrate on nearby destinations, incrementaly maturing technology to a point where we can safely operate for months/years without assistance from earth. All the while costs are dropping and more ventures become profitable. Later missions to further locations can profit from improved safety, lower costs and bigger budgets.
Quote from: high road on 04/29/2014 10:13 amIt's a matter of the willingness to spend said money. So it's a question of money. There's 72 trillion dollars going around worldwide. 45 trillion of that goes around in countries with an active space programme (I'm only counting the US, China, India, Russia and Europe). The world spends several times more on any single one of the big sports than it does on space. A few billion per year to support a moon base, or even a few times more to support a mars base is nothing. Quatar spends more on organizing the next olympics than the ISS has cost in its entire existence. But why would Joe Sixpack spend that on space exploration, if even most of the people (including me) on this forum, all interested in space exploration, don't pay for L2 membership, or support other space initiatives?Your argument struck me hard. Makes a lot more sense when you put it that way. So it is a question of money, but really more of a question on how said money is used and the willingness to use it. By the way, how the heck are you all so good at arguing a point with so much information? Is google implanted in your head or something?
It's a matter of the willingness to spend said money. So it's a question of money. There's 72 trillion dollars going around worldwide. 45 trillion of that goes around in countries with an active space programme (I'm only counting the US, China, India, Russia and Europe). The world spends several times more on any single one of the big sports than it does on space. A few billion per year to support a moon base, or even a few times more to support a mars base is nothing. Quatar spends more on organizing the next olympics than the ISS has cost in its entire existence. But why would Joe Sixpack spend that on space exploration, if even most of the people (including me) on this forum, all interested in space exploration, don't pay for L2 membership, or support other space initiatives?