Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: simberg.interglobal@xxxxxxxxx (Rand Simberg)
- Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 16:54:16 GMT
On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 09:40:47 -0400, in a place far, far away, Josh
Hill <usereplyto@xxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:
>>>>Oh come now, Josh: there's the alternative of no program
>>>>at all. Not spending money on idiocy is a *good* thing.
>>>
>>>
>>> There is that. But I prefer to think positively . . .
>>
>>It's called 'denial', and it's not really something you
>>should prefer.
>
>It's a matter of priorities. I'd rather the government wasted money on
>suboptimal space programs than on $250 million bridges to uninhabited
>islands in Alaska.
Even when those suboptimal space programs perpetuate myths about the
high cost and difficulty of space that makes it more difficult to find
investment for it that might reduce the costs?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Josh Hill
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- References:
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Josh Hill
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Rand Simberg
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Josh Hill
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Alan Anderson
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Paul F. Dietz
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Josh Hill
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Paul F. Dietz
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Josh Hill
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Paul F. Dietz
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- From: Josh Hill
- Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- Prev by Date: Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- Next by Date: Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- Previous by thread: Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- Next by thread: Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
- Index(es):