How Outer Space Can Save Our Skins

[anthropositor]

I am not an economist.  I hold most of them in fairly low esteem.  But these are times when we should give some thought to the unprecedented seismic quakes rumbling through the interdependent money markets of the planet.  A lot of rapacious gouging has gone on in the banking, investment and real estate sector.  And little can be done to bring those responsible to justice.  We can only ineffectually blame them.

There is a sense of panic in the air right now, like nothing in my lifetime.  As a matter of fact, it even eclipses the crash of 1929.  The safety net most of us thought we had is gone, and our governments are going to be just as powerless to actually fix the disaster as they were in the Great Depression.  That depression was of such magnitude that it ushered in the second historic world war on the heels of the first, and then escalated into the cold war which brought about the implosion of  one of the superpowers.

But the cautionary note was not heard.  The other remaining superpower was emboldened.  They, and their allies, embarked on new wars in the name of peace.  These were wars which, added to the century of the most gigantic wars the world has ever known, would bring down the entire economic house of cards.  Only this time, it is not just an economic upheaval.  This time the natural environment is complicating the disaster to an extent that dwarfs the dust bowl of the 1930's.  I am afraid that we are in for some terrible times.

The religion of capitalism is very nearly as destructive as the other isms that were hailed by other fanatics as the ultimate answer.  Even the most obtuse of us should be able to see that now.  The world economy has hemorrhaged, in terms of actual value lost forever, nineteen trillion dollars in the last year.  That is more than a trillion and a half dollars per month, up in smoke.  The system is not just in need of more incremental adjustments.  It is wrecked.

That immense lost value is not just some abstract economic statistic.  When the pundits say that we must bail out these huge financial institutions or other dominoes will fall as well, this mild metaphor does not represent the facts.   It means joblessness, homelessness, desperation and starvation for billions of people.  And not just the people in the third world.  Us.  There are no national boundaries to this crisis.  As a matter of fact, the impact extends beyond the planet Earth. 

The two things that the superpowers can be proudest of is that, for just a little while, in the midst of the steadily escalating cold war, we turned our attention on the space race, and to that extent, reduced our emphasis on mutually assured destruction, which had been the linchpin of our geopolitical "reality."

And though this great endeavor was itself of great economic risk, and could very easily have failed, it ushered in the greatest renaissance in the sciences that the world has ever known.  Unfortunately, these advances were not matched in the political realm, and after a handful of men walked on the moon, we lost our direction in space.  Oh, that is not to say we did no useful or exciting things.  We did.  But certainly the really bold moves just came to an abrupt stop.

Why was this?  Because, aside from the use of private enterprise as subcontractors, scrambling for government patronage and the lavish dispensation of tax dollars, the pioneers with the greatest potential to get things done and make a profitable venture out of this ultimate frontier were not in the game.  And now that the value of nineteen trillion dollars has just evaporated forever, even without the government as gatekeeper, investors are running scared.  Even the boldest are running for cover.

So instead of viable projects like the mining of Earth-approaching asteroids of the platinum family of metals and other precious strategic resources, an enterprise of great potential profit, with far less risk than attempting to establish a foothold colony on the moon or Mars, we will very likely languish on this prison of a rapidly deteriorating planet, in the throes of an unprecedented array of overwhelming disasters which too few of us recognize are even happening.

And meanwhile, what are our space scientists doing?  Spending fortunes digging trenches on Mars which, oddly enough, hardly even make the headlines.  Think of that!  We have robots on another planet for the first time in all of history, making discoveries which will have a direct bearing on our entire future in space, and few of us are paying any real attention, or thinking in any depth about the implications of the discoveries being made.  How shameful.

And at the other end of the spectrum, we have our space scientists and engineers in their ivory towers, speculating seriously about notions of "Terraforming" Mars, a project that under the best of circumstances, would have a duration of centuries, with little or no prospect of profit along the way.

Perhaps this should have gone on the thread called Saving Mother Earth, which I started some time back, but we weren't able to sustain our attention for very long on this very important subject, bearing directly on our survival. 

I note sadly that one of the most enduring, if not interesting threads here contemplates the second most ill-used vestigial organ in the human body, the appendix.  (The first most ill-used vestigial organ is the brain.) 

I sometimes have the nightmarish thought that if I started a thread about the Contemplation of the Navel, we might have unending conversations about whether our bellybuttons were "innies" or "outies," and that contemplation of our navels would outstrip all other threads, and perhaps inspire spin-off threads about the uses of or collection methods for the lint.

Because our attention spans are so incredibly short, we must think in terms of projects in space which can come to fruition in a decade or two and be of direct and apparent practical benefit  to humanity.  Otherwise, we can forget about space until the dark age we are now embarking on is over.  Having so blindly squandered and plundered our resources in such a plethora of ways, we can no longer afford to do what needs to be done, and cannot afford not to. 

Considering the state of the world economy, it may already be too late.

[Bamawing]

I grew up in Huntsville, Alabama. Space Camp town. Rocket City. My hometown's motto is "The Sky is Not the Limit."

So naturally, I'm all about exploring the outer regions of our living area.

The largest problem is the "why." Like you said, direct and practical benefit. If the benefits were obvious enough, I think someone could set up a list of steps short enough to hold the American public's attention. The problem is: what would we be doing and why?

I know and understand that if a big enough meteor comes crashing down, we're toast. But I don't *feel*in immediate danger... and I doubt most people do. So discovering a new place to live when our planet goes kablooie is probably out. I simply don't think people will buy it.

We have found several practical uses for satellites. OnStar and all that. Heck, most of the "outer spacy" things have to do with zero gravity, which can only be attained in orbit. But still...it would be very interesting to see what other practical ideas we could come up with for applications in outer space.

Tourism is probably out... the economy dictates that people get alternate forms of entertainment.

I remember my astronomy prof in college saying that a moon base would be an ideal place to put a telescope.

Without gravity or atmosphere to slow an object down, perhaps we could finagle an energy source. The hardest problem, I think, would be getting the energy down to us in usable form...

Does anyone else have any ideas?

[itchychick]

Yes, the possibilities are endless, and so, potentially, the benefit to humanity.

And yet. 

In light of the daily grind of issues and problems that most people face, this seems a very esoteric subject. 

Whether scientists can establish farming in outer space, or set up a telescope on the moon is largely irrelevant when you worry that you will not be able to pay your minimum mortgage payment, or dealing with a child who is ready to abandon school, or a caring for a family member with an intractable disease.

Theoretically, I am extremely interested and (given that I have children, and hope one day, to have grandchildren) have a vested interest in keeping this planet livable.  And yet, I have to say, that I spare no more than a passing thought to climate change (I take public transit, recycle, ride my bike and my next car will be a hybrid), or any of these relevant issues you raise, anthro, because in my waking time, I cannot spare the thought.  Instead my worry quota is filled with thoughts of how well my children are adjusting and growing up, to whether my husband's job is secure in these unsecure times,  whether I will have to return to employment to ensure my family's immediate well being.   And my worry quota is more than over-filled with these issues, as the state of my skin will attest. 

And so, I cannot be too critical of people who do not engage in this type of very important thought or dialogue.  It doesn't mean that they don't think it is important or relevant, but simply that they cannot.  Silly as though the topics which often engage us can seem (I mean, what problems will the Skincell Daily Quiz solve?) they provide an important and much needed release from the pressing and worry making issues that occupy our lives away from this cyber-escape.  At least they do for me.

[itchychick]

Now that I finished my little diatribe (sorry), I wanted to pick up on a few points that anthro made...

As far as being in a dark age, I find that an interesting, insightful, and depressing observation.  I think that on many levels we have lost the progressive path that led to the explosion of innovation and discovery which characterized the 20th century.  I don't think humanity shares either the sense of both optimism (that anything is possible) or the fear of total destruction that characterized the post-war period.  That's ironic, because both the possibility of innovation and the possibility (inevitability?) of destruction are just as relevant today as they were in 1955. 

I've noticed that as a society (and here, I only speak of the ones which I am familiar) we worry more about the here and now and less about the future than did people of my grandparent's generation.  Perhaps this is because we've never had to live through extremely hard times which caused us to reevaluate what is truly important, or given reason to "prepare" for hard times which may or may not come. 

When you've lived in luxury (relatively speaking) your entire life, it's pretty hard to imagine that you may not always have it.  Didn't the same thing happen to Rome?  Wasn't it after the apex of their own civilization, after many years of relative peace and prosperity that the motivation to continue to grow and progress seemed less pressing?

Perhaps it is a natural and inevitable cycle.

As far as projects for outer space go, I would like to see some ideas about how to offset climate change from our outer atmosphere.  I am no scientist, and I do not know how this might be accomplished, but I can see that there would probably be no profitable way to do this, and therefore it will not be done unless governments do so.  I can't say I have an interest in corporate motivated outer space endeavours, as I'm failing to see what kind of benefit they could have on humanity    - but that could be my cynicism and lack of creativity.

[Bamawing]

Didn't the same thing happen to Rome?  Wasn't it after the apex of their own civilization, after many years of relative peace and prosperity that the motivation to continue to grow and progress seemed less pressing?

Perhaps it is a natural and inevitable cycle.

That thought has crossed my mind more than once. So far I think the biggest reason we're still around - American society, I mean - is we haven't had the Vandals or Gauls attack. And that's not an impossibility... the kids I teach don't remember 9/11, but I do.

I read something somewhere comparing modern America to ancient Rome. From the beginnings to the rises, the two are eerily similar. As far as falling goes, well...

It would be interesting to see what kind of glue would hold the second dark ages together... like the Catholic Church held the first. The internet, perhaps? On the other hand, I read something else that claimed our new "Dark Ages" will probably not be extreme... the author thinks that things will become more localized, which makes sense. Heh. Perhaps that's why I'm so nervous about the move. I'm scared that the world will end and I'll be stuck over there...

But back to the exploration of outer space. I think the point that Anthro is trying to make is that large-scale production of... whatever... is going to benefit a lot of people indirectly. It provides jobs for the engineers that think up the stuff and the factory workers who build the stuff. It instills a sense of pride and unity. I'm tempted to add (so I will. Ha.) that it might divert our resources from our current poking of the hornet's nest that is the Middle East. It would be nice to do something productive.

I can't deny that it would be nicer to do something productive here, like fix the healthcare system or fix the educational system... but the fact is we don't agree on what the exact problem is, much less on how to solve it. I'm starting to wonder if this has to do with our economic system... Public schools are basically a socialist institution in a capitalistic society.

Still, I don't see that as being a solvable problem right now. It would be much easier to get everyone to agree to do something stellar. Once people start agreeing, they may realize they like it, and then...

Ok, now I'm rambling. I think I'll take some cold meds and lay down.

[itchychick]

An interesting point, Bama... outer space as a rallying point for the masses.  I do agree that it could function as a galvanizing force, but again, isn't that a bit akin to Nero fiddling while Rome burned?

[anthropositor]

Certainly the Roman Empire comes to mind.  They actually fell long before they knew it, by several centuries.  And some of the reasons were similar to what is happening now.  Exactly when they fell could be debated.

But let's just talk about one of the earlier points right now.

Asteroid or comet collisions with planets are extremely rare events. From that perspective it seems that we would be spinning our wheels to think about the problem.  This is one of the many ways statistics can be misleading.  Earth is struck by many tons of meteors every day.  Most meteors are are the size of grains of sand or smaller and have no significant affect on us at all.

It may well be 50, or 500, or 5000 or 50,000 years or more before  a planet shattering impact, so why worry?  Here is why.  For the very first time in history, we now have a technology that will allow us, if we actually continue to develop it as it should be developed, to see such a catastrophe coming enough in advance to do something about it. 

It is within our technological capability, or very nearly so, to actually avert such a disaster.  And, although it may not happen in the foreseeable future, it could also happen right now, today.  Our current very minimal efforts are not adequate to assure with any degree of certainty, that we would see it coming.  Certainly, the Tunguska event, in the early twentieth century was a total surprise. 

It certainly would be sad if we saw it coming with two years warning, but there were no useful interventions which could be accomplished in under five years.  Under those circumstances, the entire human race could become extinct before we achieved our destiny, namely to infest the universe like cockroaches.

If we actually tripled our surveillance capability, we could well see the really big asteroids headed in our direction years in advance, and the potential for a surprise catastrophic event would shrink to insignificance.  And the more advanced our colonization of space, the more capable we will be to divert or destroy the threat.

To my mind, this is the greatest profit we could make on a space venture.  When I spoke of profitable space projects being the only way to develop a really sustainable space effort, I was speaking of more conventional commercial profit on space investment.  But assuring the greater safety of the entire planet is a great and tangible profit for all of us, not just a handful of rich investors.

And in this particular, it is an area in which the governments can still play a pivotal role.  It is not just a matter of turning everything over to private enterprise, and getting government out of the space business entirely, because they have dropped the ball in so many ways for so many decades. 

Governments will always be screw-ups.  It is part of their nature.  The best we can hope for is that we can reduce the number and severity of the disasters, while increasing our ability to choose our leadership with greater rationality and finesse than we have demonstrated so far.  It's a long shot and we would have to really work at it.  It would certainly be worth the effort though.  I am sure of it.

[anthropositor]

My last post seemed to single out government as screw ups.  That is probably not entirely fair.  Certainly private enterprise has played a pivotal role in the economic straits in which we are now immersed.

Perhaps we should examine what things both government and big business have in common.  Both seem replete with scoundrels in the top echelons.  And it seems almost impossible to discover who the foxes are until they have eaten most of the chickens.

It strikes me that the revolving door between government and industry is central to the problem.  Lobbyists and their close cousins, influence peddling politicians. deplete our collective resources every bit as much as those sectors of the economy we now give the lions share of the blame.

When we address the sub prime mortgage crisis, our concern has been for the banks and other investment firms which, in their collapse, seem most to endanger the entire economy.  And while we shore up or otherwise indemnify these huge institutions against collapse,  we do virtually nothing for families now homeless and undergoing the greatest of hardships as a result of the very same crisis. 

These people have no resources or political power.  Nor are they organized in a collective way.  And since their disaster is happening one family at a time, these victims of corporate and banking excesses are not even on the radar of the government watchdogs making frantic emergency moves to stabilize the structure an economy with all the substance of warm jello.

My particular crisis could be termed a "sub-sub prime" mortgage crisis.  And as such, with similar sorts of problems happening to perhaps a few hundred thousand private-contract home buyers and wrongfully disenfranchised renters, is beneath the reach of any bailout that the government might devise.

I have about 40% equity in a home and acreage I have been purchasing for more than eight years.  Never missed a payment.  Never failed to pay the property insurance or any other contractual obligation.  My banks says their only impediment in buying out the seller, who is attempting to call the entire remainder of the note due and payable on totally trumped up grounds, is that the dwelling id more than ywenty five years old.  This is the banks arbitrary cut off point.

Meanwhile, the sellers, who have not registered the sale with the assessor, so that they could continue to borrow using the property as a part of their collateral, can continue to do so, at great risk to me, until I take expensive steps to force them to register the sale.  Economically disenfranchised or at the margins of the middle class for any of a variety of good reasons, have no effective recourse at law.

This was true during the Great Depression as well.  FDR told us "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."  Easy for him to say.  But it was just a platitude without meaning.  He didn't starve or find himself without shelter.  And never was there the slightest risk of that for him.  The fattest cats stayed fat.

When we think of ourselves collectively, as having won out over the forces of economic collapse, it is an illusion.  Those who died of exposure or starvation were not visible as losers.  They were just gone. 

History has it that we won the second world war.  Looked at clearly and comprehensively, the results are a lot less clear.  A decade after the war we and a previous ally had devised the only means for survival which was deemed to have any chance of success.  "Mutually Assured Destruction."  Mad!  And before another decade had gone by, we had brought ourselves to the very brink of that ultimate apocalypse we had made possible.

Democracy is not what makes the world a safer place.  An uninformed electorate is just a dangerous as the most evil of dictators.  Perhaps more so.  In turning toward space (and toward the world's oceans as well) we deflect resources away from the ever present escalation in armaments. 

But whatever successes we do manage to have in the exploitation of resources in space and the oceans here on Earth, that very exploitation will bring a host of new problems to contend with.  We should give considerable thought to that, in an attempt to forestall the problems before they come about.

So far, we have played the economic game in such an unsound fashion that we have needed no external economic enemies playing ingenious tricks.  Those enemies are out there, but their economic tricks do not cause anywhere near the destruction that has been wrought by our own ineptitude in regulating our systems. 

I know several students majoring in economics.  They take refuge in verbiage not readily translatable into plain English.  Slowly, painfully, they are learning to mislead others, and themselves, into thinking that they have some notion of what they are talking about.  They are attempting to emulate Greenspan's inestimable skills in obfuscation, even while thinking to themselves that they are making some sort of sense.  It is worthy of note that none of the economics Professors gave any of these young students any advance notice of the impending disaster.  One would think some of them would have had some idea...

With just these few comments on economics and Greenspan, I find my own phraseology sprouting clauses like an animated fractal display.  Most of the sciences, both hard and soft, utilize to one extent or another, language to confuse and complicate rather than to inform and clarify. 

This problem permeates all systems, making viable solutions far less accessible.  To the extent that we confuse the issue with legal jargon, or medical jargon, or religious jargon, or tech jargon in any of the sciences or other disciplines, we move further from effective answers.

If we address this problem, our ability to actually utilize the solar system as we must will, be enhanced.  If we do not, we will still be puttering around, doing a tiny fraction of what we could have, even a century from now.  All because of disguising our stupidity as sophistication.

Anthropositor's Razor:  Almost always, all things which have been put complexly can be simplified with gains in meaning and understanding rather than loss.