The Daily Mail says that I said that billionaires could buy up other planets and rip up the space treaties.
[Update a while later]
Here’s a much better piece from Rebecca Boyle at Popular Science.
19 thoughts on “Yes, That’s Exactly What I Said”
Comments are closed.
Relax, Rand. It’s a newspaper; it’s not like facts are important.
I left a comment about a couple of their factual problems, like that UK is also not a signatory to the Moon Treaty, and the Outer Space Treaty doesn’t specify a ban on individual claims.
…companies should be able to buy land on The Moon or other planets…
At least they didn’t wait to get it wrong. This is the first sentence. Which leads to this brilliant observation from – Jean, Sussex UK
Who will they buy the planets from?
See, people are not so stupid. But because there is such idiocy surrounding this issue it’s important to get back to first principles.
Unclaimed territory has always been claimed and defended by possession which establishes a legal right to title. Disputes are mitigated when people agree to an organized process of reasonable claims by agreed upon rules.
I call this a settlement charter.
No Ken, you’re wrong. Everyone learns in grade school that men in pointy hats land their row boats to plant a flag, names it, and claim the land for a royal who then “grants” the land to the little people, sometimes even charging them money for it! That’s how land titles are created, by royal decree! Everyone knows this, you’re obviously just some sort of right wing anarchist!
For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13RhSc-DaOI
Ya got me there Trent. I stand corrected. 😉
It is a shame that people don’t understand something so fundamental.
I posted a comment. What idiots.
If any ” billionaires could buy up other planets” at this point they are likely to be Chinese billionaires anyway, so who cares.
Space treaties?
Will be ignored by States the moment it’s convenient.
It amuses me how seriously the institutional commentariat takes toothless treaties with no enforcement mechanism and nobody with military (or even economic) force backing them up.
Paper is worthless the moment the gains from ignoring it exceed the penalties; and there aren’t any penalties here that I can see.
Keep in mind that bureaucrats can choose to follow the letter of the law or they can expedite the process. I imagine that’s why this law was lauded rather than the valid approaches of changing or dropping the treaty. It controls perceived enemies, unpopular (and theoretical) billionaires
“billionaires could buy up other planets and rip up the space treaties.”
They say that as if it were a bad thing.
Even if it were true.
And what’s wrong with letting billionaires have nice things? People who oppose space property, have some remarkably petty reasons for doing so.
It’s the Daily Mail. They give tabloid rags a bad name. Don’t sweat it.
I think the loopy leftists are ‘assuming’ space is a socialist enclave, full of altruism and intergalactic unicorns, and it can neither be bought nor sold.
That’s the way they show it on all the space TV shows and movies.
(except the movies or shows where there are giant space squids, or giant space aliens or semi-giant space creatures, or normal sized alien overlords…wait…space isn’t socialist or uber-friendly at ALL)
The EU can’t barely project military force inside Europe’s own borders, much less to Mars. Their opinion on a land claim would have about as much influence as the Sultan of Tripoli’s opinion on the settlement of the Oklahoma territory.
Reminds me of the late Charles Sheffield’s science fiction short story “The Man Who Stole the Moon”, published in his short story collection “Hidden Variables” link to the story: http://www.baenebooks.com/chapters/9781618240606/9781618240606___2.htm
Very funny story that makes you understand why law abiding people find it easy to become law breakers where otherwise they wouldn’t even consider doing so.
My respect for authority starts with me. I consider myself the best authority regarding my life and don’t see any other authority as being superior to me. Unless they’re not human. Haven’t encountered that yet. Even then, they’d have to convince me of their superiority in just those qualities that matter. A Gorn might be able to catch and eat me, but that doesn’t mean I’ll be following their rules any time soon.
The government has threat of force. My response is, “go ahead and shoot me.” Otherwise, feel free to supply me with room and board. Cops have stopped writing me traffic tickets for years. I do obey the laws but occasionally I’ll be driving a bit too fast. When they ask for my address (or if the address on my license is correct) I tell them I’m homeless. That right there stops most of them.
I went to jail once for refusing to sign the ticket. Once in front of the judge I got him to give a lecture to the officer regarding rule of law (I made them conform which included them waiting while I thoroughly read the documents they wanted me to sign.) The officer got a bit annoyed, but the judge made him wait.
Consent of the governed is a fiction. It does not give anyone authority over my life. I don’t care if everyone in the universe disagrees and has the force to make me conform. I retain my inalienable right to choose.
What’s makes the Mail piece as well as resultant comments so silly is, if you asked these people if they had any personal interest in space, or they thought money could be made out there, they would answer “No” to both questions. If true, then there is absolutely no actual benefit to them if commercial space development were to not be allowed. In other words, there is no legitimate reason to oppose private property in space.
Correct. But they don’t want to own any, so you can’t either.
That’s my point. They are quite silly and brain-dead.
On a somewhat related note, this post at WUWT shows that California has no respect for private property in their own state. They used code enforcement BS to force rural residents to dismantle and abandon their homes to make way for a massive solar installation that was backed by hundreds of millions in government loan guarantees. The abuse and corruption are outrageous.