Building Our Space Infrastructure

Well, where to start. First and foremost I want to commend you for even attempting to this. Creating this robust space program is something I have also championed and I think it is the single greatest avenue towards real answers to many of America's continuing problems. I would love to help you define and refine your ideas to that end. America's future is a journey we should all endeavor to take part in.

So, I want to help you make this idea move from the page to reality. The first point I would make is that I like your use of the Interstate system as an example of something that truly changed America. But I would also include the negatives when speaking about it. It has freed up massive amounts of transportation possibilities which in turn has opened up avenues that would not have been available otherwise, but it has also had some negative effects on the country also. These negatives range from modest impacts like noise all the way to real and dangerous impacts like vehicle accidents and crime rates along interstate corridors. As any debate moves forward we need to be ready for all aspects of the conversation so I think it's important to really get a 360 degree view of anything you mention in your article.

You've done a great job of touching on many topics and issues and yet managed to keep your article short and readable. One could write volumes about the Interstate's pros and cons and could easily get lost in doing so. Another program that would be interesting for similar reasons is the Tennessee Valley Authority. The TVA dramatically helped economic development (among other things) in an area of the country particularly hard hit by the Great Depression. So, like the Interstate system I think it would lend itself to the idea of creating a robust space program that creates millions of jobs around the country. But the TVA also has it's negatives, such as a great many dams along rivers. Dams are good for electricity production but there are environmental issues to account for.

Wikipedia puts it this way; "TVA was envisioned not only as a provider, but also as a regional economic development agency that would use federal experts and electricity to rapidly modernize the region's economy and society." Similarly I would like to think of the space program as involving millions of people all over the country thus spurring a modernizing of many regions economies and society as a whole.

Personally, I choose the space program as a vehicle for this issue because it's a peaceful initiative that the whole of humanity could be involved in. NASA's space program has indeed benefited the world over and one could only imagine what the result would be if there were even greater emphasis on getting more and more people involved. Imagine an America in which a NASA research and/or development center was in every small town. The shear amount of science being done would be unparalleled in Earth's history. The issue then becomes funding.

I'm right there with you about funding issues. It seems so simple to me, but budgetary politics is anything but simple. Any fiscally responsible person (in my opinion) could sit down and balance the national budget. But in our country that's not how it works. Things must be voted on and agreed upon (or in our current case disagreed upon). One would think a balanced budget would be easy to get since pert near everyone agrees that America should be fiscally solvent. No one wants to rely on other nations to pay our bills. I don't know anyone that is happy that other countries own so much of our debt. Regardless of party politics I truly believe that EVERYONE wants what is best for America; there are just different ideas about how to go about it.

I only bring this up because of the assertion in your article that paying for the investment in the space program would be simple. As an idea it is simple. Like balancing the budget, it's a simple idea. Achieving the reality is much tougher with so many interested parties. And reducing military spending is going to be even more difficult. You recognize the importance of NOT cutting pay to our military service members, but if we reduce military spending to levels seen prior to 9/11 then we'd simply need to cut the numbers of military enlisted to levels we haven't seen since before the September eleventh attacks. And that means cutting of livelihoods of many people who don't know anything except for how to be in the military. They are knowledgeable folks for sure, but we can't just go haphazardly hacking down the military without respect to the individuals involved.

As with anything this grand and sweeping people are the key. The big idea behind this big idea is to put people back to work. America can do anything we set our collective mind to but we need to take into account as much as we can. I'm sure I'll continue to think about this idea and give you more feedback. For now though, I want you to know that I greatly appreciate what you're doing and I sincerely hope you continue with your efforts.

Great article! I think what we really need right now are some "Proof of concept" projects.

Send a miniaturized robotic "factory" to the Moon and/or Mars, touch it down with a few now empty fuel tanks. Have it collect water, crack the water into oxygen and hydrogen with power from solar panels, fill the tanks with oxygen and rocket fuel. We now have tanks of supplies ready to go for human use.

In situ resource collection to extend manned missions is what we need to do. If it's already there waiting for us, and we know we can do it, all the more reason to move humanity forward.

Hey brokinarrow!

First I just want to make sure you know that I'm a huge supporter of the idea and been advocating such a rationale for some time now.

But to offer some constructive criticism I will also point out that cutting the budget isn't so simple. The military is used as a scapegoat a lot of the time and people just say cutting it's budget solves all the world's problems. It doesn't nor is it that simple.

We are in a global society now, for better or for worse. This means that events happening across the world can and do affect us. Unfortunately since WWII there has been a extreme reluctance of other countries to enter into conflict with other entities. This sort of leaves the US and perhaps Russia and China to do most of the work(so to speak). Regardless of the reason why we're in Iraq and Afghanistan, to simple pull out of the region now before stabilizing them is foolhardy. To point out an excellent example of what can go wrong in doing so I give you post WWI Germany. (A lot of people forget their history, the western countries left Germany in a complete mess and basically were of the opinion that since they were the reason for it, that it was their mess to deal with and not theirs. It didn't work out too well.)

Also as Mob pointed out, the logistics of shutting down bases and discharging personal isn't so clear cut either. Perhaps part of your plan could include transitioning enlisted personal with the appropriate and needed skills into your program. Instead of just going to the general public for hiring, give first preference to military personal. A true ramp up in building infrastructure will require skills and knowledge across the board and a lot of people. Keep in mind that as a group, the military has a higher percentage of college educated people than the general populace.

However, given that our deficit runs well over a trillion now, even if you save 600 billion from the DoD, you still need to find at least another 600-700 billion or so from other places just to get to the break even point to say nothing of actually paying down the debt. So even if they were to suddenly reduce spending in the DoD on the premise of being fiscally responsible, you'd have a very hard sell in asking for nearly 10% of reduction to give to NASA.

And perhaps that might be most of the problem, that NASA has a rather specific connotation in the general population. Maybe it's time to create a new agency with the specific goal of bringing industries into space, be it manufacturing, biotech, mining, tourism, or whatever else. Since this is a new agency, you aren't fighting any previous stigma, which would then facilitate an easier understanding and acceptance by the general public that this is a good thing to do since it's specifically designed to help and grow our economy, provide jobs and perhaps even help out in our trade deficit with other countries, regardless of the fact that it will work hand in hand with NASA. And if a little bit of science happens along the way, bonus!

From a more practical point of view NASA is doing both commercial projects and general research and it's probably getting to the point now where the two interests are just competing too much with each other for funding and priority and perhaps it's time that to split the two. So instead of one jack-of-all-trades, you have 2 specialized agencies. Though it may cost more due to added redundancy, I'm willing to bet that you will have significant amount of added stability and clear direction from congress throughout the years that it will offset those costs.

It's getting late so I'll post this much, but I'll give it more thought and hopefully come up with more. :)

Mitchell

Hi guys

Thank you all for your time in writing something that is based on facts. Google's science page, on Nasa's new/purposed Space Launch System is a tough sale. Most of the comments there are the same old "contempt prior to investigation" or the blame game. I was pleasantly surprised to see the comments that a number of you had posted.

Humans need to be in space. We need a stronger space program. It's very disappointing ,in the fact we don't have this SLS up and running ,prior to the shuttle programs end. I can go on about this , but you guys have most of my rant in writing already.

Our government (as you all know) is broken.

Brokinarrow's comment "doing the same thing over,and over again, and expecting a different result". Is a very (sadly) accurate depiction of the insanity, our current and past leaders/government.

I would be happy to sign my name to your letter Brokinarrow. Perhaps if you got enough people to sign, and post your proposal, it will go viral.

I once had a boss who wouldn't use any idea that wasn't his own. The only way I could get him to accept my idea, is to make it his idea. So id present the problem to him, and help him come up with my solution to the problem. He got the credit, I got something that worked.

I haven't looked into it, but i wonder what/how the space communities around the world are funded.

Thanks again

Respectively

Robert McClain

Hey Everyone - Great comments. I am a huge believer in the value and benefits of the peaceful exploration of space. Unfortunately, too many people get tied up in thinking "What's in it for me?", or "That money should be spent here on Earth", or they simply don't know the reason for space exploration.

Not only should we be discussing the financial and scientific values for space exploration, we should be giving valid philosophical and theological reasons for space exploration. Carl Sagen had a wonderful outlook of life on Earth when he wrote the book "Pale Blue Dot". in his book, we showed a picture of Earth taken by the Voyager1 spacecraft as it was 6 Billion Kilometers away from Earth. In describing this picture, Dr. Sagen noted that everyone who had ever lived, everyone who had ever died, and everyone living today were all located on just this single, solitary pale blue dot in the picture.

Profoundly moving stuff.

I think in order to push a society towards a thing, we must first establish a universal, over riding reason why we need to pursue this goal. Sometimes exploration for the sake of exploration is not enough. I have been trying to put together a philosophical reason that would appeal even to the people who care little for technology or science. How do you win THOSE people over to your cause.

In my articles listed below, I'm engaged in a back-and-forth discussion with people as I attempt to build the philosophy/theology needed to inspire the human race to whole heartily aspire to explore the cosmos. Just as Brokenarrow requested, thoughts comments, suggestions, additions to the framework of these discussions are gladly accepted. Thanks!

http://logicandreason63.newsvine.com/_news/2011/09/19/7842309-in-search-of-god-the-church-of-expansionism

http://logicandreason63.newsvine.com/_news/2011/09/22/7906500-the-church-of-expansionism-science-technology-and-companies-to-watch

Think of my articles as a "Manifest Destiny" of Space Exploration!