Split - Politics of space exploration

[idkew]

Originally posted by mactastic
Sigh... Income tax is not the complete tax burden. Sadly this comes up time and again.

for the sake of simplicity i use income tax. sorry that i can not make you happy and figure in every tax dollar.

 

[McToast]

Originally posted by Thanatoast

McToast, the reason (I can only really speak for myself, of course) we try to be politcally correct is that name-calling and insults gets threads shut down. See: NRA Madness, last page.

It's okay I'm done with this thread anyway...*shrug*

 

[mactastic]

Originally posted by Frohickey
To get this debate back on track, and to pacify the NATIONAL HEALTHCARE people, I think the democratic way to do this are checkboxes on everyone's income tax returns...

Ok, but I'm taking the extra printing costs for the 10 billion little checkboxes for each and every government spending program out of your tax return first. 😉

And I'm gonna tell everyone that it's your fault they spent the first two weeks of April getting carpal tunnel checking little boxes!

 

[Frohickey]

Originally posted by McToast
You're not a conservative, you're a libertarian.

NEWSFLASH: Your taxes pay for the roads and highways you use and (through property taxes) firestations and police and schools already, as well as many other things.

Did I call you a name? YES and you deserved it. You don't even deserve to be called human. Words cannot even express the depth and breadth of disgust I have for you. Others on here can be politically correct, but I won't be. You're a sick sick sick individual.

Bwahahaha...
You are the one on the side of liberalism and you are calling me politically correct? Bwahahahaha!!!!

I know full well what my taxes are paying for. I also know which items my taxes pay for that I approve of. Universal healthcare is not one of them.

 

[mactastic]

He didn't call you politically correct. He said all of us who don't call you name are being politically correct.

 

[Frohickey]

Originally posted by Thanatoast
See: Drug War; War on Terror

McToast, the reason (I can only really speak for myself, of course) we try to be politcally correct is that name-calling and insults gets threads shut down. See: NRA Madness, last page.


Except that's not how the system works. I wouldn't be directly handing you a hundred bucks a month no strings attached. My tax money would be divvied up and part of it would go to pay your medical expenses should you be unable to do it yourself. If my money goes towards war in Iraq, or keeping Americans healthy, I'm choosing keeping Americans healthly. Note: I do not support the reform bill recently passed that enriches insurance and drug companies.

Actually, what we try to be is civil, not politically correct. I think that I have been civil in my posts, up until the point that someone else wasn't civil with me.

Yeah. The NRA madness thread started getting contentious, but my posts were civil enough.

The main issue here is that some think that government is the solution for every problem. Lack of adequate health care, government is the solution. Old age retirement, govt is the solution. While others, like me, think that government is the solution for only some specific problems, such as defense, post offices and post roads, courts, civil rights protection, etc.

 

[mactastic]

I've been civil as well. Even try to keep a sense of humor when I can. 😉

I'm not saying government is the answer to every problem, but for things like education and health care I think government is necessary because having profits drive medical decisions or educational ones doesn't work.

I've tried to start this little discussion before, but I think access to health care is a civil right. It stems from the right to live. I know you think poor people should die, but I don't. And I'm willing to pony up a little to make sure it doesn't happen.

So.. Do humans only have the rights spelled out in the US constitution? Life Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness, and RKBA? Are there others? Or is that it?

 

[Frohickey]

Originally posted by mactastic
He didn't call you politically correct. He said all of us who don't call you name are being politically correct.

Please.

Don't be politically correct. Just be civil and argue your point in a logical fashion. That is how we eliminate the extraneous stuff that blurs and distorts the core of the issue. There are issues where people can't see past their emotional blinders and that leads to mistrust and misunderstanding of the other viewpoint.

I tend to be able to get past the emotional aspects. Must have watched Star Trek and admired Spock. You must be Dr. McCoys. 😛

Here is an article about Political Correctness

 

[mactastic]

Originally posted by Frohickey
Please.

Don't be politically correct. Just be civil and argue your point in a logical fashion.

Please. I do. All I did was clarify your mistake. If you don't like it, tough. I'm more logical than you give me credit for.

 

[Frohickey]

Originally posted by mactastic
I've tried to start this little discussion before, but I think access to health care is a civil right. It stems from the right to live. I know you think poor people should die, but I don't. And I'm willing to pony up a little to make sure it doesn't happen.

So.. Do humans only have the rights spelled out in the US constitution? Life Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness, and RKBA? Are there others? Or is that it?

Hate to tell you, but everyone dies. Not only poor people.

As to rights that humans have. Your rights ends where mine begins, and vice versa. If your right to have adequate health care starts to infringe upon my right to private property and just compensation, then you don't have that right to that extent.

I can't seem to find the url to a website comparing a final exam given to students in 19th century school vs one of the more modern final exams, but those 19th century school exam questions are difficult.

 

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by idkew
...example: my gf pays $600 a year for her employer provided hc...

Well, actually, she pays more than that, as she would be getting paid more than she is if her employer didn't have to pay for her hc. At going rates, I'd guess she'd get about $1000 more per year, plus her $600 that she wouldn't have to pay anymore.

As an aside, I'd like to put forward the idea that we should distinguish between basic healthcare and healthcare. I'd guess that many employers would still contract with insurance companies to get additional coverage for their employees. This would make it a true benefit. Basic health care, on the other hand, would be just that, basic. It wouldn't be designed to be a catch all.

As a contrast, right now ERs are required by law to provide medical service to people who come through their doors in need. Where do you think the money to pay for that service comes from? That's right, taxes. So, right now our taxes go toward paying the emergency medical costs of people without insurance, whereas if they had had proper treatment earlier the total cost to the rest of us would have been, by some estimates, less than one tenth the amount. So, how is it inconveniencing anyone if it would actually lower nation wide net medical cost per person? And lower the health care burden on the tax base?

 

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by mactastic
I'm not saying government is the answer to every problem, but for things like education and health care I think government is necessary because having profits drive medical decisions or educational ones doesn't work.

I'm inclined to agree. Making decisions about health care based strictly on financial outcome leads to things like HMOs. Also, it ultimately backfires. In other countries around the world where there is a basic national health care system they have lower per person national health care costs. Go figure...

But we've gotten off topic again. I really want to discuss space...

 

[idkew]

Originally posted by Snowy_River
But we've gotten off topic again. I really want to discuss space...

i'm up for it, but we have had no "discussing" of space. throw something out to discuss. everyone is polarized right now. we have no opposition with which to carry on a discussion.

 

[idkew]

Originally posted by Snowy_River
Well, actually, she pays more than that, as she would be getting paid more than she is if her employer didn't have to pay for her hc. At going rates, I'd guess she'd get about $1000 more per year, plus her $600 that she wouldn't have to pay anymore.

this is an optional plan. therefore, her business is not subsidizing her plan. if she decides to drop it, she can. she does not get a raise of $1,000

 

[Thanatoast]

The Mars Trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson is an excellent series that talks, in the realistic near future, about the colonization of Mars. I highly recommend it. It's a science fiction story based more on science than fiction, and is as much about the people and the society they create as it is the technology. In other words, it's got a story worth reading, not just flash.

Robinson visualizes a permanent colony of 100 people as the first mission to Mars. He figures that a return journey is the most difficult part, and that if we're gonna go, we should go to stay.

 

[Frohickey]

Need to find water on Mars... that would make for fuel for any return trip, that is for a conventional engine.

Nuclear propulsion or ion propulsion could work, but that should only be used in the middle part of the trip where the radiation doesn't hurt anything but rocks that are hot with radiation already.

Now, how to do this. Make a railgun to shoot nuclear material at the moon. Then when the spacecraft is built, it can go to the moon to pick up some fuel and everytime it makes a trip to Mars, it leaves what it doesn't need for the lunar trip.

The problem is that we would have nuclear material unsecured on the moon. What if al Qaeda decides to steal some? 😛

 

[2jaded2care]

Water on Mars would be great.

Evidence of past or present life on Mars (any kind of life) would seal the deal. Don't see how any rational, open-minded person could resist that temptation.

It could happen next week for all we know and change the entire scenario.

Here's praying...

 

[Frohickey]

You know, if that past life on Mars turned out to be dead dinosaurs and oil is found there, watch out NASA... Texaco is on its way 😛

2008 robotic mission to Mars
2010 finish the ISS
2020 manned Mars mission

All of these sound do-able.

That, and a permanent presence on the Moon is a good idea. Is Martin Landau still around?

 

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by 2jaded2care
Water on Mars would be great.

There is every reason to believe that there is water ice on Mars, if only in the form of perma-frost. It's a necessary part of any planned colonization of Mars, and not for fuel. We'll need it to get the oxygen out of it.

Another good book about people on Mars is 'Birth of Fire' by Jerry Pournelle.

 

[2jaded2care]

Hopefully the pictures from Spirit and Opportunity (fingers crossed here) will help excite people, especially the young'uns.

Gotta download that Maestro soon...

 

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by 2jaded2care
Hopefully the pictures from Spirit and Opportunity (fingers crossed here) will help excite people, especially the young'uns.

Gotta download that Maestro soon...

I think that the pictures are somewhat exciting. But the real excitement is to think about the possibility of really going there, at least for me. I've always dreamed of going into space, walking on another world. But, the truth is, I probably won't do it. Not in my lifetime, not with how the space program has stagnated.

 

[Stelliform]

I found this article about worl

I found this article about some editorial reactions around the world for President Bush's announcement.

BBC Link

Is everyone buying into George W Bush's intrepid vision of a manned mission to Mars? Some of the world's newspapers this week were clearly behaving like spoilsports.


"The US is preparing for the invasion of Mars and other planets," wrote the Palestinian daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadidah.

What I find amusing is that in all of the countries trying to belittle US space exploration, none of them can send a Person to space without either the U.S., Russia, or China's help.

 

[idkew]

sorry to get off topic again, but this comment is the exact reason there has never been, and probably never will be, peace in the mideast. their mindset over there says it all.

"The US is preparing for the invasion of Mars and other planets," wrote the Palestinian daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadidah.

 

[wwworry]

put a billion in the Philadelphia school system and it would lead to great discoveries.
Put 1.5 billion in and see how many stable marriages result from increased prospects.

It would truely be a great voyage.

(isn't Mars the god of war?)

 

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by idkew
sorry to get off topic again, but this comment is the exact reason there has never been, and probably never will be, peace in the mideast. their mindset over there says it all.

I'm not sure whether or not to take you seriously. Certainly you can see that this comment was meant as a political tongue-in-cheek criticism of Bush policy elsewhere on this planet, can't you?