A few thoughts1. I suspect that, given the early stages of Occupy Wall St, its unlikely they've considered it2. As someone who naturally fits with that camp, and has interact with said people, attitudes are all over the map, although many are supportive of commercializing space.
Quote from: Political Hack Wannabe on 10/25/2011 08:51 pmA few thoughts1. I suspect that, given the early stages of Occupy Wall St, its unlikely they've considered it2. As someone who naturally fits with that camp, and has interact with said people, attitudes are all over the map, although many are supportive of commercializing space.I tend to think that they would support commercializing space too, but not gutting in-house expertise in space operations that some in the tea party would probably support.Hey, how about you ask some of your OWS-sympathetic people what their stances are on this?
[quote author=Political Hack Wannabe Well, I'll say this so for sure - The chief science reporter at Dailykos has not been a fan of SLS, and neither has Phil Plait of bad astronomy. And nobody ever is really for gutting in-house expertise, provided that expertise is useful (which is a topic that I know is a bit no-no)
Quote[quote author=Political Hack Wannabe Well, I'll say this so for sure - The chief science reporter at Dailykos has not been a fan of SLS, and neither has Phil Plait of bad astronomy. And nobody ever is really for gutting in-house expertise, provided that expertise is useful (which is a topic that I know is a bit no-no)The Daily Kos and Phil Plait are entitled to be wrong about NASA's future if they want to be. :-)
The point I was getting at is that, if you are expecting OWS as friends, I suspect you'll be disappointed.
I suspect that they would be more supportive of government participation in it than the Tea Party would.I think their support for it would be part of an overall larger scale dedication to basic science and technology investment by the government.
From what I can tell OWS is more about "redistributing wealth". In other words give me the money that someone worked for because we want it for free. They have no interest in the pursuit of anything grand and noble (space or not) in my opinion.I would be careful not to put Tea Party into a box where they only say "commercialize everything" or the Democrats (as I said OWS is hardly the Tea Party) into the box of "government only for space". There are definitely shades of grey, which is where reality is at. If you tie NASA to legalizing pot though I'm sure you would see OWS support increase for NASA....
QuoteFrom what I can tell OWS is more about "redistributing wealth". In other words give me the money that someone worked for because we want it for free. They have no interest in the pursuit of anything grand and noble (space or not) in my opinion.I would be careful not to put Tea Party into a box where they only say "commercialize everything" or the Democrats (as I said OWS is hardly the Tea Party) into the box of "government only for space". There are definitely shades of grey, which is where reality is at. If you tie NASA to legalizing pot though I'm sure you would see OWS support increase for NASA.... I would have thought that redistributing Defense Department "wealth" to NASA (among other science and technology agencies) would qualify for them.
Quote from: Riley1066 on 10/25/2011 09:18 pmQuoteFrom what I can tell OWS is more about "redistributing wealth". In other words give me the money that someone worked for because we want it for free. They have no interest in the pursuit of anything grand and noble (space or not) in my opinion.I would be careful not to put Tea Party into a box where they only say "commercialize everything" or the Democrats (as I said OWS is hardly the Tea Party) into the box of "government only for space". There are definitely shades of grey, which is where reality is at. If you tie NASA to legalizing pot though I'm sure you would see OWS support increase for NASA.... I would have thought that redistributing Defense Department "wealth" to NASA (among other science and technology agencies) would qualify for them. Except that, most people think we spend almost as much on NASA as we do the DOD.
The OWS in Chicago group (I suppose it would be "OC") actually prepared a list of "demands".Number 1 was to restore the Glass–Steagall Act. That's a good, common-sense idea that most people likely support. They should have stopped there but couldn't help themselves. There were 19 more "demands", which was 19 too many, IMO. Demand No. 20 was "forgive all student loans" or some-such, which was ridiculously funny.Nothing about NASA!They'll be gone soon. It'll be below freezing by the end of next week. The ultimate resolver, of course, will be jobs. Ford announced earlier this year that it will double its employment in Shanghai, so it may be awhile. - Ed Kyle
Quote from: Riley1066 on 10/25/2011 08:31 pmI suspect that they would be more supportive of government participation in it than the Tea Party would.I think their support for it would be part of an overall larger scale dedication to basic science and technology investment by the government.From what I can tell OWS is more about "redistributing wealth". In other words give me the money that someone worked for because we want it for free. They have no interest in the pursuit of anything grand and noble (space or not) in my opinion.I would be careful not to put Tea Party into a box where they only say "commercialize everything" or the Democrats (as I said OWS is hardly the Tea Party) into the box of "government only for space". There are definitely shades of grey, which is where reality is at. If you tie NASA to legalizing pot though I'm sure you would see OWS support increase for NASA....
Quote from: edkyle99 on 10/25/2011 09:11 pmThe OWS in Chicago group (I suppose it would be "OC") actually prepared a list of "demands".Number 1 was to restore the Glass–Steagall Act. That's a good, common-sense idea that most people likely support. They should have stopped there but couldn't help themselves. There were 19 more "demands", which was 19 too many, IMO. Demand No. 20 was "forgive all student loans" or some-such, which was ridiculously funny.Nothing about NASA!They'll be gone soon. It'll be below freezing by the end of next week. The ultimate resolver, of course, will be jobs. Ford announced earlier this year that it will double its employment in Shanghai, so it may be awhile. - Ed KyleI'll give our Chicago mayor some credit. At least he is having the police enforce the law. The park closes at 11pm. If you don't leave, we will arrest you. You have the right to free speech, but there isn't anyone listening to your speech after 11pm, so go home and take a shower.
Where do you come to the conclusion that people just want money "thrown at them", unless you've only been watching fox news? The main premise is that most government officials have be bought out by large transnational corporations and wealthy individuals and tailor the government to meet their needs and not the needs of the 99% of us. By adjusting the tax code to fairly reflect the wealth distributions in this country and tailoring government programs to actually help the majority of Americans instead of the privileged wealthy in this country, we might actually get things done.
Quote from: Lurker Steve on 10/25/2011 09:55 pmQuote from: edkyle99 on 10/25/2011 09:11 pmThe OWS in Chicago group (I suppose it would be "OC") actually prepared a list of "demands".Number 1 was to restore the Glass–Steagall Act. That's a good, common-sense idea that most people likely support. They should have stopped there but couldn't help themselves. There were 19 more "demands", which was 19 too many, IMO. Demand No. 20 was "forgive all student loans" or some-such, which was ridiculously funny.Nothing about NASA!They'll be gone soon. It'll be below freezing by the end of next week. The ultimate resolver, of course, will be jobs. Ford announced earlier this year that it will double its employment in Shanghai, so it may be awhile. - Ed KyleI'll give our Chicago mayor some credit. At least he is having the police enforce the law. The park closes at 11pm. If you don't leave, we will arrest you. You have the right to free speech, but there isn't anyone listening to your speech after 11pm, so go home and take a shower.The Constitution protects the right for peaceful civil disobedience.
Quote from: Khadgars on 10/25/2011 10:04 pmWhere do you come to the conclusion that people just want money "thrown at them", unless you've only been watching fox news? The main premise is that most government officials have be bought out by large transnational corporations and wealthy individuals and tailor the government to meet their needs and not the needs of the 99% of us. By adjusting the tax code to fairly reflect the wealth distributions in this country and tailoring government programs to actually help the majority of Americans instead of the privileged wealthy in this country, we might actually get things done. Typical. I get my information from a variety of news sources. Are you saying there is zero "wealth redistribution" themes, where those who do not have as much money as others do not want to see other's money handed to them in order to be "fair"? Are you saying the communist party of the USA does not suppot the "Occupy" movements? That the socialist party of the USA does not support the movements? As well as a number of other "fringe" groups that run very much counter to the principles of the United States of America. While I agree there is much to be done with the tax code, as evidenced by many candidates in the past and present, "adjustment" in the terms you just described means something completely different no doubt.