Things I Take For Granted: Part I

[RI]

I always find it interesting how unpopular the Apollo program was in opinion polling in previous decades. For example, in 1961, investing in the moon program was underwater 33-58 nationally. The program was still underwater 34-54 in 1967. In 1979, a decade after the landing, only 41% nationally said landing a man on the moon was worth the cost.

[Torie]

No, destiny is far too much like a random walk (I got that bon mot from elsewhere), to posit any such thing. I also question its wisdom, but wisdom and destiny are not the same thing I admit. I also question the "science" of it being practicable until going faster than the speed of light becomes as prosaic as breaking the sound barrier. And then the issue of does it "pencil." LOL.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Life is precious and you never know when you are gonna die I was close to my mom but my dad died around no one he was mean spirited, and he thought he had a long life due to his boss was 81 and he didn't get the: COVID shot, if you are the sole survivor and have no kids just cuz then it's okay to die by yourself  but he has survivors, because it's resurrection or incarnation but you should die around family


We all gonna die someday they may be resurrection or incarnation but you should die around people

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Disagree. Mars might be feasible one day, but there are considerable logistical obstacles to spreading much beyond that, let alone outside of the solar system altogether.

[FT-02 Senator A.F.E. 🇵🇸🤝🇺🇸🤝🇺🇦]

Inshallah, we'll become a glorious inter-galactic species

[Person Man]

     Disagree. Mars might be feasible one day, but there are considerable logistical obstacles to spreading much beyond that, let alone outside of the solar system altogether.

Like I said, a lot of the Scientific hurdles have nothing to do with space travel per se.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Nonetheless, these poll results do help me to contextualize some of the political opinions I often see being expressed on this forum (and elsewhere). If you seriously think the Earth itself is humanity's final frontier, you are probably predisposed to wring your hands about billionaire spaceflights and minor ecological problems. Just know that to the rest of us, you sound like the people who said desktop computers would be "little more than a novelty."

It just strikes me as frivolous and frankly perverse to prioritize wild, distant fantasies over the things we need right here and right now to lead good lives. Even if we take everything you say as certain (which, frankly, you should be clear that this level of certainty is simply not supported, and you'd really be better off admitting that you're professing it as an article of faith like the rest of us do with other things), it's not exactly clear why the "sacrifices" needed to get there are worth it right now. Churchill's point that the good of distant future generations doesn't justify putting the current generation through untold misery was of course intended as a conservative argument against Stalinism, but it works just as well as a social-democratic argument against your technolibertarianism. If we have to let Earth rot away for a century for the vague promise of one day reaching for the stars, then frankly I'd just rather stay put.

[Person Man]

Nonetheless, these poll results do help me to contextualize some of the political opinions I often see being expressed on this forum (and elsewhere). If you seriously think the Earth itself is humanity's final frontier, you are probably predisposed to wring your hands about billionaire spaceflights and minor ecological problems. Just know that to the rest of us, you sound like the people who said desktop computers would be "little more than a novelty."

It just strikes me as frivolous and frankly perverse to prioritize wild, distant fantasies over the things we need right here and right now to lead good lives. Even if we take everything you say as certain (which, frankly, you should be clear that this level of certainty is simply not supported, and you'd really be better off admitting that you're professing it as an article of faith like the rest of us do with other things), it's not exactly clear why the "sacrifices" needed to get there are worth it right now. Churchill's point that the good of distant future generations doesn't justify putting the current generation through untold misery was of course intended as a conservative argument against Stalinism, but it works just as well as a social-democratic argument against your technolibertarianism. If we have to let Earth rot away for a century for the vague promise of one day reaching for the stars, then frankly I'd just rather stay put.

There is a limit of what good government can give us if it has no means to do more.

[John Dule]

Nonetheless, these poll results do help me to contextualize some of the political opinions I often see being expressed on this forum (and elsewhere). If you seriously think the Earth itself is humanity's final frontier, you are probably predisposed to wring your hands about billionaire spaceflights and minor ecological problems. Just know that to the rest of us, you sound like the people who said desktop computers would be "little more than a novelty."

It just strikes me as frivolous and frankly perverse to prioritize wild, distant fantasies over the things we need right here and right now to lead good lives. Even if we take everything you say as certain (which, frankly, you should be clear that this level of certainty is simply not supported, and you'd really be better off admitting that you're professing it as an article of faith like the rest of us do with other things), it's not exactly clear why the "sacrifices" needed to get there are worth it right now. Churchill's point that the good of distant future generations doesn't justify putting the current generation through untold misery was of course intended as a conservative argument against Stalinism, but it works just as well as a social-democratic argument against your technolibertarianism. If we have to let Earth rot away for a century for the vague promise of one day reaching for the stars, then frankly I'd just rather stay put.

You are reading way too much into my post. I didn't propose any policies or ideological structures as the best way of obtaining this goal. I said that this should be the end goal for every ideology, whether it is libertarianism, communism, or fascism.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Nonetheless, these poll results do help me to contextualize some of the political opinions I often see being expressed on this forum (and elsewhere). If you seriously think the Earth itself is humanity's final frontier, you are probably predisposed to wring your hands about billionaire spaceflights and minor ecological problems. Just know that to the rest of us, you sound like the people who said desktop computers would be "little more than a novelty."

It just strikes me as frivolous and frankly perverse to prioritize wild, distant fantasies over the things we need right here and right now to lead good lives. Even if we take everything you say as certain (which, frankly, you should be clear that this level of certainty is simply not supported, and you'd really be better off admitting that you're professing it as an article of faith like the rest of us do with other things), it's not exactly clear why the "sacrifices" needed to get there are worth it right now. Churchill's point that the good of distant future generations doesn't justify putting the current generation through untold misery was of course intended as a conservative argument against Stalinism, but it works just as well as a social-democratic argument against your technolibertarianism. If we have to let Earth rot away for a century for the vague promise of one day reaching for the stars, then frankly I'd just rather stay put.

You are reading way too much into my post. I didn't propose any policies or ideological structures as the best way of obtaining this goal. I said that this should be the end goal for every ideology, whether it is libertarianism, communism, or fascism.

I mean, sure, I think it would be nice if we expanded to nearby planets. I don't think most people on the left are ideologically opposed to that goal (aside from a few anprim types). The point is that the priority really ought to be to preserve decent living standards for the coming generations before we start worrying about far-flung plans for cosmic expansion.