Billionaires Blast off

[SLD]

Does anyone else find themselves secretly hoping that one of them explodes?

That’s wrong I know, but what’s the point of these trips? They aren’t advancing science. They’re just going a multi million dollar thrill ride.

 

[Tigers!]

We do not know what we might learn esp. concerning construction techniques etc.
I am young enough to remember that the Apollo program faced the same thoughts.

But up front yes it is a lot of money.

 

[bilby]

We do not know what we might learn esp. concerning construction techniques etc.
I am young enough to remember that the Apollo program faced the same thoughts.

But up front yes it is a lot of money.

The Apollo program broke new ground, and pushed the boundaries of the possible.

These billionaires are making short sub-orbital flights that don't even get into space. If you don't cross the Kármán Line - 100km altitude - you aren't in space. If you don't complete at least one unpowered orbit, you didn't make a space flight. The US military have their own definition, but like imperial measurements, nobody else in the world uses it.

What these guys are doing would have been impressive and innovative seventy years ago; But it's neither today. Anything that might have been learned from this was already learned a lifetime ago. Today it's just showing off their wealth in a pathetic display of conspicuous consumption.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Does anyone else find themselves secretly hoping that one of them explodes?

That’s wrong I know, but what’s the point of these trips? They aren’t advancing science. They’re just going a multi million dollar thrill ride.

I think it's a good thing we have more players in the launch business. Carrying billionaires to space contributes nothing but it's like the Tesla they threw to the asteroids--the value was in the launch, not the payload.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Bezos is donating $200M to the Smithsonian, so it’s not like he’s only spending his fortune on himself. I don’t understand all the hate for these rocket flights. We don’t know who it will inspire or what technological advancements may come. What should he do, ride around the Mediterranean on a super yacht doing very unsavory things like some other super rich folks who have been in the news lately?

 

[Derec]

Does anyone else find themselves secretly hoping that one of them explodes?

No. Why would you?

That’s wrong I know, but what’s the point of these trips? They aren’t advancing science. They’re just going a multi million dollar thrill ride.

What's wrong with thrill rides? If you go on a tourist trip to the Galapagos or something, you are not advancing science either. It's not like you're going to catalogue previously unknown flora and fauna while there.
But just because Charles Darwin did it almost 200 years ago, does not mean your trip there would be pointless.

These people have a lot of money. I see nothing wrong in spending it on stuff not affordable to us mere mortals. Bezos' jaunt to the edge of space is no more pointless than his longer-than-football-field yacht.

 

[Toni]

Does anyone else find themselves secretly hoping that one of them explodes?

No. Why would you?

That’s wrong I know, but what’s the point of these trips? They aren’t advancing science. They’re just going a multi million dollar thrill ride.

What's wrong with thrill rides? If you go on a tourist trip to the Galapagos or something, you are not advancing science either. It's not like you're going to catalogue previously unknown flora and fauna while there.
But just because Charles Darwin did it almost 200 years ago, does not mean your trip there would be pointless.

These people have a lot of money. I see nothing wrong in spending it on stuff not affordable to us mere mortals. Bezos' jaunt to the edge of space is no more pointless than his longer-than-football-field yacht.

I don't agree.

First of all, the impact on the environment must be very significant and I don't think it's justifiable just to massage the egos of a bunch of rich people.

But the other more important thing is that it would be a very, very grave mistake to allow wealthy people to somehow stake a claim to any part of space or space exploration or the intellectual property rights to any discoveries made as part of these missions.

Of course you are way too young to remember the early days of NASA and the beginnings of space exploration but I'm not. Today, the world is filled with products and devices that directly arose from the space program. I don't want Jeff Bezos near any of the next waves of technology and innovation to arise. That belongs, by rights, to the world, not to any individual who has the ego and the pocketbook to grab even more for himself. It's obscene. And dangerous.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Does anyone else find themselves secretly hoping that one of them explodes?

That’s wrong I know, but what’s the point of these trips? They aren’t advancing science. They’re just going a multi million dollar thrill ride.

Yes, Some people probably find themselves hoping that secretly, and others not so secretly. I'm not in either category. They're using their own money to have some fun (and also it's publicity). You could argue against that on, say, environmental impact grounds, and that would at least get some matter for debate. But you seem to hate them just because it's a multi million dollar thrill ride. What if it is? (though it's actually also for publicity, as they want to sell such thrill rides to other very rich people).

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Bezos is donating $200M to the Smithsonian, so it’s not like he’s only spending his fortune on himself. I don’t understand all the hate for these rocket flights. We don’t know who it will inspire or what technological advancements may come. What should he do, ride around the Mediterranean on a super yacht doing very unsavory things like some other super rich folks who have been in the news lately?

They're rich. The hatred is there mostly because so many people believe they stole the money from others and/or that their money belongs to others, they should donate it all, or something like that.

 

[bilby]

Bezos is donating $200M to the Smithsonian, so it’s not like he’s only spending his fortune on himself. I don’t understand all the hate for these rocket flights. We don’t know who it will inspire or what technological advancements may come. What should he do, ride around the Mediterranean on a super yacht doing very unsavory things like some other super rich folks who have been in the news lately?

No, he - like everyone else, shouldn't be super rich at all.

Nobody has done enough in their lives to deserve such wealth. Nobody.

OK, maybe Stanislav Petrov. Maybe. And he never got any wealth in return for his genuinely meritorious actions.

Fuck them all. If you've got, let's say, 500x median income for your nation or more, you should pay 100% tax on all further income. We can hand out a trophy with "You won capitalism" on it or something. Maybe put up a statue of them for the pigeons to crap on. But nobody in the history of the world has done enough with their lives to earn more than $16M in today's dollars.

 

[bilby]

Does anyone else find themselves secretly hoping that one of them explodes?

That’s wrong I know, but what’s the point of these trips? They aren’t advancing science. They’re just going a multi million dollar thrill ride.

Yes, Some people probably find themselves hoping that secretly, and others not so secretly. I'm not in either category. They're using their own money to have some fun (and also it's publicity). You could argue against that on, say, environmental impact grounds, and that would at least get some matter for debate. But you seem to hate them just because it's a multi million dollar thrill ride. What if it is? (though it's actually also for publicity, as they want to sell such thrill rides to other very rich people).

Unless you're an autocratic king or dictator, nobody has their own money.

Money is a measure of what your society owes you. It's not property, or a commodity, and it doesn't belong to you. It's a measure of what society owes you at any given point in time, and your society gets to decide how it fluctuates in value. You might have some of it taken away as tax, or some of the value of it taken away by inflation. Or you might be given some for whatever reasons society has to give it away - as payment of salary for bureaucrats or soldiers; as a benefit to people otherwise unable to support themselves, or their families; as a grant for education, or public art, or scientific research.

Money hasn't been a commodity people can own for almost a century.

It's a measure of what the world owes you. And nobody's done enough for the world to be owed a super yacht, or a private spacecraft.

 

[Derec]

The Apollo program broke new ground, and pushed the boundaries of the possible.

It did. But it stalled. The science since then has been done with unmanned probes.

These billionaires are making short sub-orbital flights that don't even get into space. If you don't cross the Kármán Line - 100km altitude - you aren't in space.

Well, Bezos' trip will be just above the Kármán Line for what's that worth. I think these trips are best described as to "the edge of space" no matter what side of the Line they are on.

What these guys are doing would have been impressive and innovative seventy years ago; But it's neither today.

They are not pushing the envelope on how high or how far. They are not boldly going where no man has gone before. But nobody is pretending they are. The point is a) that it is fully private spacecraft and b) that the purpose is to fly paying customers for the purposes of tourism.

Anything that might have been learned from this was already learned a lifetime ago.

They are not just flying to the edge of space. They created companies that designed and built the hardware to do so, hoping to attract enough paying customers.
If they manage to bring the cost to say $10k or $20k per launch over time, that would be a tremendous thing.

As far as it being pathetic, why? Because Yuri Gagarin and Alan Shephard have done it 60 years before? Bah! Space, even suborbital space is still a very exclusive club, with fewer than 600 people going there out of maybe 10 billion humans who have lived on Earth since 1961. That's far fewer than the 10,000 who have climbed Mt. Everest since 1953, just as a comparison.

Today it's just showing off their wealth in a pathetic display of conspicuous consumption.

If they can afford it, why not? I think conspicuous consumption is only pathetic when you are living beyond your means to front. Like leasing a BMW when you don't know where your car insurance payment will come from. But this? What's the problem?

 

[Derec]

It's a measure of what the world owes you. And nobody's done enough for the world to be owed a super yacht, or a private spacecraft.

And then what, comrade? Expropriate the rich like they did in the glorious Soviet Union? How did that work out?

 

[Terrell]

The drop it from a plane & take it to the edge of space isn't something new. Only that it was funded privately, as far as I know.

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/news/FactSheets/FS-052-DFRC.html

First flight in 1959. 3 were made 199 flights between them.

 

[Derec]

I don't agree.

I am not surprised.

First of all, the impact on the environment must be very significant and I don't think it's justifiable just to massage the egos of a bunch of rich people.

Not really. Those trips are going to be one-offs for most of the passengers. It's not like Branson or Bezos or any of their customers are going to be taking the trip on a weekly or even yearly basis.
But plenty of rich people fly in their private jets pretty regularly.

But the other more important thing is that it would be a very, very grave mistake to allow wealthy people to somehow stake a claim to any part of space or space exploration or the intellectual property rights to any discoveries made as part of these missions.

Why? The government is pretty good on basic research, but developing practical uses has always been best left to the private sector.
And even in the Age of Exploration, the voyages were funded based on the hope of finding lucrative trade routes or new territories to settle and make use of. That's why for example the East India Company was founded.

And if Blue Origin develops technologies that may be useful and profitable, why should it not be able to profit from it for the 25 years prescribed in the patent law? Other than envy of some posters here of course.

In fact, I think Bezos is being too timid. With his wealth, plus some outside investors, he could really secure his place in the history books by building a permanent Lunar colony. I think it would be feasible to do it by 2040, complete with space port and a practical Lunar Shuttle system. And after that is done partner with a high end hotel chain like Four Seasons or Mövenpick to build a full service hotel as an annex, maybe by 2050.

Of course you are way too young to remember the early days of NASA and the beginnings of space exploration but I'm not.

True, I grew up in the age when NASA was but a shadow of its former self.

Today, the world is filled with products and devices that directly arose from the space program. I don't want Jeff Bezos near any of the next waves of technology and innovation to arise. That belongs, by rights, to the world, not to any individual who has the ego and the pocketbook to grab even more for himself. It's obscene. And dangerous.

If Bezos' company develops a technology, then, by rights, it belongs to it for a limited time. Just like any technology developed by any other company. That's the whole purpose of the patent law.
You do not encourage innovation by saying, ok you invested money, hired great engineers, steered R&D in a particular direction etc. but that doesn't matter since all your base innovation are belong to us the government.

 

[bilby]

It's a measure of what the world owes you. And nobody's done enough for the world to be owed a super yacht, or a private spacecraft.

And then what, comrade? Expropriate the rich like they did in the glorious Soviet Union? How did that work out?

Ah, yes. Everything that's not the exact system approved by twenty-first century libertarian leaning small-government Americans, is Marxist-Leninism as practiced by Joe Stalin in the 1930s.

There are only those two possible ways of running an economy.

It's amazing how easy everything becomes when you deliberately avoid learning about anything other than devotion to the current system, with the only alternative being damnation.

I keep forgetting that US economics is just US Christianity with a funny hat.

 

[Jayjay]

I don't really care about one-off hops into space either way. But if Bezos or Branson can make a sustainable business out of hauling millionaires to the edge of space, I'm all for it. Some of the money is going to be spent developing next generation ships and maybe extending to orbital flights or space hotels, which in turn creates more opportunities for something else like moon colonies or asteroid mining.

 

[bigfield]

Bezos is donating $200M to the Smithsonian, so it’s not like he’s only spending his fortune on himself. I don’t understand all the hate for these rocket flights. We don’t know who it will inspire or what technological advancements may come. What should he do, ride around the Mediterranean on a super yacht doing very unsavory things like some other super rich folks who have been in the news lately?

No, he - like everyone else, shouldn't be super rich at all.

Nobody has done enough in their lives to deserve such wealth. Nobody.

OK, maybe Stanislav Petrov. Maybe. And he never got any wealth in return for his genuinely meritorious actions.

Fuck them all. If you've got, let's say, 500x median income for your nation or more, you should pay 100% tax on all further income. We can hand out a trophy with "You won capitalism" on it or something. Maybe put up a statue of them for the pigeons to crap on. But nobody in the history of the world has done enough with their lives to earn more than $16M in today's dollars.

Wealth, shown to scale
https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/

We can have a world in which wealthy people exist, without handing nearly all money to the super rich.

A trillion dollars is such a large figure, that you might as well say "eleventy gajillion zillion dollars." So in this section, we will try to understand the scale of this figure by looking at what could be accomplished with various chunks of this wealth.

Some will argue that using this wealth for public benefit is not possible, because it's "tied up" in stocks, and therefore inaccessible. This is just not true.


As we proceed, try to keep in mind: all of this wealth is controlled by a group so small, that they could fit on a single 747 airplane—with 260 seats left over.

If you scroll far enough, you get to some spending ideas, given the $3.2 trillion controlled by the 400 richest Americans:

Still plenty of money for a billionaires' space race, even.

 

[bigfield]

The political philosophy of the US: as long as you don't break the law, you are welcome to accumulate unlimited power. It's the paradox of liberalism.

 

[untermensche]

I don't want them to explode.

These are people who won in a corrupt authoritarian repressive system.

I want parts of the system to explode.

These billionaires dying wouldn't help with that.