Commercialization and use of SMR, if well regulated, will produce considerable economics gains but also raises distributive and equity questions, as many countries, especially from the Global South, will be left out from this new field.
This passage is the reason you don’t want these people anywhere near a decision making process.
So the socialist economic idiots don’t like these resources being developed and enriching some, because others (suffering under the thumb of their stupidity) won’t be much enriched in the short term. The Envy is strong with them.
With SpaceX and Bigelow, these countries don’t have to be left out. They may not be on the forefront but there isn’t any reason they can’t participate if they choose to do so. Maybe taking advantage of the resources in space, is their way out of poverty.
Prisons are filled with people who are there because they didn’t want to work or pay for what they want. The criminal mentality and the government mentality are very similar. Both criminals and politicians would rather take what they want than work for it or pay for it, even in cases where working for it would be easier and safer.
Don’t expect any amount of rational argument to change that. If you own anything of value, there will always be a government or criminal element that would like to take it away from you.
Even though the Outer Space Treaty prohibits claims of national sovereignty, many nations want to exert the power to tax and control companies (presumably, but not necessarily, American) outside of their sovereign territory. There is no excuse for this but greed.
Here are some points which the diplomats overlook:
1) There has never been a successful human society without private property.
2) Private property rights are not created by government, but by private individuals (or groups of individuals) who mix their labor with previously unowned natural resources (land or minerals) to produce something of value. The legitimate role of government is to *protect* private property rights. For this purpose, we have the military and police.
3) if the government does not protect private property rights, someone else will. There will be military and police forces in space, regardless of what the peaceniks think.
4) When private property rights are not clear, it leads to conflict. When such conflicts cannot be settled peacefully in court, the result is violence and, ultimately, war.
5) Some people think they can prevent war in space by banning “space weapons.” They are wrong. There are weapons in space right now. Weapons are not limited to guns and bombs. Harry Stine defined a weapon as any system capable of having a physical, chemical, biological, or psychological effect on an enemy or his assets. The primary difference between a tool and a weapon is the matter of intent. Space settlements will have a wide variety of tools at their disposal. Their ability to turn those tools into weapons will be limited only by their creativity. (Imagine direct-broadcast satellites being used against the government of China, for example, or an astronaut with wire clippers cutting a connection on a military satellite.)
6) if space settlers have to declare independence to protect their property rights, they will eventually do so. History has shown this time and time again. The governments who desire to profit from those settlements (without investing any of their own money in them) will not like that.
7) For these reasons, the failure of the United States and other earthbound governments to protect property rights in space will eventually lead to war. That will surprise the diplomats who now oppose private property rights, most of whom are passionately opposed to what they call “the mlitarization” of space and all of whom think they are in the business of preventing wars. But there’s an old saying: “Diplomats start wars. Soldiers end them.”
“There will be military and police forces in space, regardless of what the peaceniks think. ”
Yep. It’ll be Pinkerton’s or the Mafia, but there will be some form of security forces.
So to avoid war we need to establish solid property rights before these idiots think they are in charge. It doesn’t matter if they think it now. It matters when people can defend those rights.
If my plan doesn’t work (yeah, it’s a stretch!) we need to come up with one that does. Elon’s plan does not work regardless of how low he gets his ticket price. Mars One’s plan will eventually work but on a much longer timeline than they expect. Both need modification. Musk will kill a lower percentage but higher number.
Those that go need to understand natural rights and be prepared to defend them. The fact that not even here do people seem to get that claiming property is a moral imperative, that doesn’t require government blessings, is troubling.
Commercialization and use of SMR, if well regulated, will produce considerable economics gains but also raises distributive and equity questions, as many countries, especially from the Global South, will be left out from this new field.
This passage is the reason you don’t want these people anywhere near a decision making process.
So the socialist economic idiots don’t like these resources being developed and enriching some, because others (suffering under the thumb of their stupidity) won’t be much enriched in the short term. The Envy is strong with them.
With SpaceX and Bigelow, these countries don’t have to be left out. They may not be on the forefront but there isn’t any reason they can’t participate if they choose to do so. Maybe taking advantage of the resources in space, is their way out of poverty.
Prisons are filled with people who are there because they didn’t want to work or pay for what they want. The criminal mentality and the government mentality are very similar. Both criminals and politicians would rather take what they want than work for it or pay for it, even in cases where working for it would be easier and safer.
Don’t expect any amount of rational argument to change that. If you own anything of value, there will always be a government or criminal element that would like to take it away from you.
Even though the Outer Space Treaty prohibits claims of national sovereignty, many nations want to exert the power to tax and control companies (presumably, but not necessarily, American) outside of their sovereign territory. There is no excuse for this but greed.
Here are some points which the diplomats overlook:
1) There has never been a successful human society without private property.
2) Private property rights are not created by government, but by private individuals (or groups of individuals) who mix their labor with previously unowned natural resources (land or minerals) to produce something of value. The legitimate role of government is to *protect* private property rights. For this purpose, we have the military and police.
3) if the government does not protect private property rights, someone else will. There will be military and police forces in space, regardless of what the peaceniks think.
4) When private property rights are not clear, it leads to conflict. When such conflicts cannot be settled peacefully in court, the result is violence and, ultimately, war.
5) Some people think they can prevent war in space by banning “space weapons.” They are wrong. There are weapons in space right now. Weapons are not limited to guns and bombs. Harry Stine defined a weapon as any system capable of having a physical, chemical, biological, or psychological effect on an enemy or his assets. The primary difference between a tool and a weapon is the matter of intent. Space settlements will have a wide variety of tools at their disposal. Their ability to turn those tools into weapons will be limited only by their creativity. (Imagine direct-broadcast satellites being used against the government of China, for example, or an astronaut with wire clippers cutting a connection on a military satellite.)
6) if space settlers have to declare independence to protect their property rights, they will eventually do so. History has shown this time and time again. The governments who desire to profit from those settlements (without investing any of their own money in them) will not like that.
7) For these reasons, the failure of the United States and other earthbound governments to protect property rights in space will eventually lead to war. That will surprise the diplomats who now oppose private property rights, most of whom are passionately opposed to what they call “the mlitarization” of space and all of whom think they are in the business of preventing wars. But there’s an old saying: “Diplomats start wars. Soldiers end them.”
“There will be military and police forces in space, regardless of what the peaceniks think. ”
Yep. It’ll be Pinkerton’s or the Mafia, but there will be some form of security forces.
So to avoid war we need to establish solid property rights before these idiots think they are in charge. It doesn’t matter if they think it now. It matters when people can defend those rights.
If my plan doesn’t work (yeah, it’s a stretch!) we need to come up with one that does. Elon’s plan does not work regardless of how low he gets his ticket price. Mars One’s plan will eventually work but on a much longer timeline than they expect. Both need modification. Musk will kill a lower percentage but higher number.
Those that go need to understand natural rights and be prepared to defend them. The fact that not even here do people seem to get that claiming property is a moral imperative, that doesn’t require government blessings, is troubling.