Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NASA Boss Speech

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    As a physicist, I can't tell you how close we actually are to making a breakthrough that would lead to the kind of star travel we see in ST.

    Hmm. I took that to mean he has NO IDEA AT ALL, if we are even close to a breakthrough

    Comment


    • #17
      I see one of greatest issues with any kind of long range space flight is still power generation. If read someone like Michio Kaku theories on the subject are there are 3 type of civilizations. Keep in mind we are a type 0 under this model
      http://jmsnews.com/forums/newreply.p...uote=1&p=44059
      JMSNews Forums - Reply to Topic
      Type I: this civilization harnesses the energy output of an entire planet.

      Type II: this civilization harnesses the energy output of a star, and generates about 10 billion times the energy output of a Type I civilization.

      Type III: this civilization harnesses the energy output of a galaxy, or about 10 billion time the energy output of a Type II civilization.

      Star Trek would be some where between Type I and II. If you think in these terms you realize how far we really have to go to powering our way across the universe.

      This article here on the subject
      http://www.mkaku.org/articles/physics_of_inter.php
      "Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Champagne in one hand - strawberries in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming WOW - What a RIDE!"

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Doom Shepherd View Post
        Three questions:

        If the tax breaks were for the mega rich, how come I got one? I make just over 33K. That ain't mega rich, unless you live in Sudan or somewhere.

        If you can't give a tax break to the rich, how can you give a tax break to the poor? The bottom 50% of wage earners in the US pay no taxes already. Zero minus zero is still zero.

        Ever been given a steady, living wage job by a poor person?



        If you want to really save money, cut waste.

        25% of Medicaid's yearly pay-outs go to fraudulent claims.

        Then again, what do I know? I live in a country that once spent $224 million to protect eight flies. Really!
        The point is what are taxes for if not to provide for society as a whole?

        In Britain if we are found to have a chronic illness (and I suffer from a number) medication is paid for from taxation.

        If I had to pay for my own medication, I'd be dead.

        Before being diagnosed I earned enough to pay a lot of tax, enough to pay medical insurance too perhaps but insurance companies have an obligation to their investors to pay out as little as possible.

        If the contributors are the potential benefactors of the system and the system refuses to pay out the management (or Government) gets replaced.

        If an insurance company refuses to pay out they may get sued (and probably will win) and the management will get a fat bonus for saving the company money.

        Taxation is a good thing if the proceeds are spent wisely.

        Cutting taxes, cuts off the means to provide at source for what society needs.

        Only the very poorest shouldn't pay anything, everyone else should be taxed according to their wealth.

        Governments are responsible for spending taxes, when a politician offers tax cuts they are really attempting to place themselves out of the reach of accountability for the lack of necessary services and pass the buck for lack of provision to the bureaucracy of others.

        If private business is so good at providing essentials why do so few nations have a privatised military?

        If we want national space programmes we need to pay for them out of taxation.

        If we are content with a corporate, business lead approach to space exploration then we shouldn't complain when the only objects our countries launch into space are spy and Sky satellites.
        Last edited by Shr'eshhhhhh; 01-31-2008, 03:15 PM.
        I have the wings for Bingo.

        Comment


        • #19
          I agree wholeheartedly with your last post Shr'eshhhhhh.

          Tax cuts in a time of economic bounty seem to me to be criminally insane. This is the time in which government should be investing in infrastructure, services and education and not giving tax cuts to people that don't really need a few more dollars in their paypackets.
          Here in Australia we've just had a change of national government, from Liberal [read conservative] to Labor [read centralists with slightly leftist tendancies].
          Part of the Labor parties main campaign was to promise 30 billion dollars in tax cuts during a time where our hospitals/health services are barely coping with the demand, when we've just experienced the worst drought in recorded history, where we need urgent action in changing the way we plan to generate power and our universities & schools are so cash strapped that they're losing their world class status. Not only that, we're facing a run away inflation rate due to our economy going ballistic in growth which will lead to higher interest rates and if the Federal govt. cuts taxes then people will only spend more anyway thus fueling further inflation.

          I've always been suspcious of the economic rationalists/conservatives who advocate tax cuts as they do not have the greater society's welfare at heart but are more concerned with the individuals welfare which is selfish & stupidly shortsighted.

          I also think you've hit the nail on the head with your point out national militaries not being privatised - it's all about control & power and who weilds it and governments are loath to give up power in any shape or form but are more than happy to give up responsibility & accountability.
          Last edited by Talwyn; 01-31-2008, 06:18 PM. Reason: corrections

          Comment


          • #20
            I can't speak much for taxes outside of the US but I think the USA current tax code is a joke and a bad on at that thousands of pages of loop holes. I understand that when you help pay someones way into office you want something back, but I think people should be required that you pay the percentage of the taxes and thats it done nothing more nothing less. Yes that means if you want to just help one group you can no long do that but you make it harder to dodge taxes without doing things that are truly illegal. Simplification is one of the best ways to get people to pay there taxes and increase the money government is bringing in.
            "Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Champagne in one hand - strawberries in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming WOW - What a RIDE!"

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Shr'eshhhhhh View Post
              If private business is so good at providing essentials why do so few nations have a privatised military?
              Simple independent militarises organise coups thereby becomes the government. Even the USA had to make the president the commander-in-chief. Civilian elected control of the army is rare but should be encouraged.
              Last edited by Andrew_Swallow; 02-01-2008, 02:42 AM.
              Andrew Swallow

              Comment


              • #22
                We can build spaceships that go to the stars, it is just a one way journey. The journey is so long that we will probably die of old age before we arrive. A new technology may speed the journeys up.

                NASA may be able to survive if it can just devise a way of producing a major good news front page story every couple of years. Most headline stories are bad news.
                Andrew Swallow

                Comment


                • #23
                  Keep in mind, as I've said before, my statements only apply to the US, not the UK or other nations. What works here may not work there, and vice-versa.

                  Now back to the US...

                  After our last round of tax cuts, the total amount of money the federal and state governments collected actually rose significantly. As it did the last two times we did it, under Reagan and Kennedy.

                  You can argue emotional "won't somebody think of the children" till you're blue in the face... nothing wins arguments like results.

                  Mostly because the government collects more money during times of greater economic activity, (because it taxes it) and what drives the economy is personal and corporate spending. Personal income tax alone is only a small portion of government revenue, and the slack there is usually taken up from other sources.

                  Here's an example... I pay a 10% personal income tax rate.
                  But taxes make up about 20% of the cost of goods I buy.

                  Therefore, if I keep more of my money, and spend it on said goods, the government actually ends up with more of my money, in the long run.

                  Also, keep in mind that arguing for lower personal income taxes is NOT the same as arguing against taxes in general, or against other specific taxes (like a tax on consumption, which would be a better plan--- the more resources you use, the more you pay), no matter what the blues would have you believe. Don't make the mistake of falling into the "all or nothing" strawman trap... as too many on both sides too often do.

                  The greater society's welfare is largely supported by the strength and the power of the individual. While we all rely on others to some extent or another, the less you are forced to rely on anyone else, the stronger you are.

                  Of course, I grew up on a farm, so to me the above observation carries the weight of self-evident Natural Law.
                  "It's hard being an evil genius when everybody else is so stupid." -- Quantum Crook, Casey and Andy Webcomic

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Night Marshal View Post
                    I can't speak much for taxes outside of the US but I think the USA current tax code is a joke and a bad on at that thousands of pages of loop holes. I understand that when you help pay someones way into office you want something back, but I think people should be required that you pay the percentage of the taxes and thats it done nothing more nothing less. Yes that means if you want to just help one group you can no long do that but you make it harder to dodge taxes without doing things that are truly illegal. Simplification is one of the best ways to get people to pay there taxes and increase the money government is bringing in.
                    Agreed. But the tax code will never be simplified as long as two things exist:

                    1. Career Politicians. Remember when being in Congress meant you LOST money, compared to your regular vocation? That's how it was, back when we had statesmen like Jefferson and Madison. You got into politics because you had ideals, and stayed there only as long as those ideals held up. Now it's about power and money. Ideals don't get you elected anymore. (Although vague, empty promises of "change" can still boost your poll numbers.)

                    2. Powerful lawyer lobbies. The most powerful lobby isn't the NRA or the AARP, it's the Trial Lawyer's association. With most of Capitol Hill being overrun with lawyers, they have a huge foot in every door. It's to lawyers' advantage to keep the tax code (and other laws) complex and troublesome... because they make scads of money off of the trials and lawsuits that inevitably follow.
                    "It's hard being an evil genius when everybody else is so stupid." -- Quantum Crook, Casey and Andy Webcomic

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by beerguy101 View Post
                      As a physicist, I can't tell you how close we actually are to making a breakthrough that would lead to the kind of star travel we see in ST.

                      Hmm. I took that to mean he has NO IDEA AT ALL, if we are even close to a breakthrough
                      Skipping the tax talk, it gives me a headache.

                      I suppose you could read it in that vain, but if you read the entire thread and his question in context...he appears to be saying it in a colloquial manner, if that's the right way to put it. Meaning...I can't tell you such as "I can't tell you how proud we are of you." Meaning I can't put it into words.

                      Just the impression I got from the full post and context. You can check it out if you like over at trekmovie.com. I'd post a link but my work computer freaks out at that site for some reason. It's in the second Q&A titled something like "Roberto Orci answers more questions."

                      CE
                      Anthony Flessas
                      Writer/Producer/Director,
                      SP Pictures


                      I have no avatar! I walk in mystery and need nothing to represent who and what I am!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        The Jupiter-120 is a proposed rocket for taking people to the International Space Station and the new lunar lander.



                        The new rocket uses many parts from the Space Shuttle. A movie of the tansformation can be seen by clicking on the following links.

                        .avi of Jupiter 120

                        .mov of Jupiter 120

                        Related website
                        http://www.directlauncher.com
                        Last edited by Andrew_Swallow; 03-18-2008, 12:18 PM.
                        Andrew Swallow

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Andrew_Swallow View Post
                          The Jupiter-120 is a proposed rocket for taking people to the International Space Station and the new lunar lander.

                          The new rocket uses many parts from the Space Shuttle. A movie of the tansformation can be seen by clicking on the following links.
                          I thought that's what the Ares 5 was for.
                          "It's hard being an evil genius when everybody else is so stupid." -- Quantum Crook, Casey and Andy Webcomic

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Doom Shepherd View Post
                            I thought that's what the Ares 5 was for.
                            The Ares-V is a Moon rocket. It carries the cargo, including the lunar lander, and meets up with the Ares-I, carrying the astronauts.

                            The Jupiter-120 is a rival/replacement to the Ares-I.
                            The Jupiter-232 is the rival to the Ares-V.

                            There continues to be major design problems with the Ares-I.
                            Andrew Swallow

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X