Space Policy Round – By John Hood – The Corner – National Review Online
Gingrich should never have talked about a colony on the moon. His idea of loosening regulations and offering prizes to encourage private enterprise in space makes a great deal of sense, but it wouldn’t lead to a commercial colony on the moon, at least not for a very long time. The market would be primarily space tourism, satellites, commercial use of orbital space. He looks like a geek surrounded by grownups, not really a fair characterization but one that Gingrich invited.
John Hood has his head up his ass, which is, sad to say, not at all unusual for some of the stiffs who hang around The Corner at NRO.
He is, apparently, clueless about Moore’s Law and the effects it is likely to have on global efforts in space. I am minded of another old chestnut, no less accuraate for its venerarability. called Clarke’s Law: “If a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is probably right, but that if he states that something is impossible, he is probably wrong.”
Hood isn’t a distinguished scientist – far from it – but he is very probably wrong about the effects of unleashing American ingenuity and drive in an effort to colonize the moon. There are good reasons to make the effort, whether Hood thinks so or not. We are already hip deep in satellites and the “commercialization” of orbital space. The moon is the next frontier in space. Gingrich’s suggestions would speed the opening of that frontier, no matter what John Hood thinks.
Or, in this case, doesn’t.
The ‘NASA community’ here in Central/Eastern Florida is pretty substantial and I am curious how this will play out vote wise.
I have several contacts who are/were NASA engineers/employees and the Obama cuts have hit them in the wallet. To a man, they care deeply about the space program.
The NASA budget for the 53 years of its existence is about the same as the cost of the TARP bailout. That’s not NASA’s annual budget. That’s 53 years of NASA.
(Maybe. It’s hard to get a handle on TARP’s cost. Nominal pricetag: $700B. Or maybe double that. Or maybe nothing. But note the 14-month difference between those articles.)
Not that I’m saying that NASA, as a government space agency, should exist. But at least there was some practical payback and for decades a feeling of grandness, unlike the money-down-the-rathole TARP.
Tourists need places to go and places to stay. They need all sorts of infrastructure that would be built. That same infrastructure would be used to exploit resources on the Moon and elsewhere.
I’m pretty sure many of us old farts that can’t fulfill our childhood dream would invest in someone doing it for us.
While I agree with the prize concept to stimulate private industry, I’m torn between a Moon colony or my very own affordable and practical Flying Car. Dangit !
BTW, I have a pilot’s license, so don’t even go down that road, heh.