Re: space travel or war

On Mar 20, 9:57 am, Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
In a high-technology age with nuclear weapons and worse, what would
you have the state do to protect its people from possible attack?

It is the today the federal government that wants to capitalize on the
fears of its citizens by permitting the grandstanding of our supposed
"upper hand" that would propel the fastest growth in the defense
industry, while marginalizing the freedom that promise markets WOULD
HAVE offered, if it were not for the "dumbing down" effect that war
material serves to employ.

Everyone accepted that the United States had to give up some liberties
in order to not only survive, but to prosper in this sort of
environment.

Right, which was just the nuisance that the military industrial
complex would have liked, because it would keep our military strong,
in the sense of there being a world based military police, which
became also in line with, and not inadvertently, the NWO. Yes, it is
the NWO that Americans are sacrificing our liberties to. Americans
have to decide where the "dumbing down" takes place in this conflict,
because, after all, this conflict is not the conflict that will end
ALL conflicts, but a much-less-than-world-encompassing one, where oil-
takes-all, and not the earth-paradise-goes-orbital.

To its credit the governmenet of the United States for the most part
avoided ideological excesses and advanced the cause of freedom and
liberty in the least restrictive environment possible for its
people. To its discredit it has failed to adopt a fair and balanced
process approach to common mode failures or install a process to
promote social innovation and evolve fundamental social advance.
This was not for lack of trying or the courage of those in charge
however, this was due primarily to the difficulty of the problem.

The key words here are "to ITS credit". To WHO's CREDIT? To the
GOVERNMENT's CREDIT? Uh, and where did the "advance the cause of
freedom REALLY come from? Was it not the individual's to begin with,
or have you somehow lost track of where the "by the people, of the
people, and for the people" really came from? (Hint: Most of the
information in Lincoln's day, PRIOR to the civil war, was either
delivered by horseback mail, or in the DUMBED DOWN SCENARIO, WAS SENT
BY TELEGRAPH). Telegraph was mostly for lazy people that couldn't
plan ahead and put pen to paper because writing reminded them too much
of their third grade education. Sure, train departures and/or arrivals
were wired ahead, in order to inform passengers of waiting times, but
I'm sure that the novelty of waiting at the station will forever make
the potential customers wonder where all the time went while waiting -
Most of the escape-from-greedy-city Americans were just beginning to
witness the marginalization of the business cycle at the expense of
wealthy industrialists on the heels of the early middle class.

Your rant on the other hand is not even motivated by ideology, but
rather, personal mental imbalance - a hairs breadth removed from
paranoid schizophrenia.

Hardly. The truth is, in wholistic time, I'm a whole lot more
successful than you, but I don't care to reveal how that success
permeates from the supernatural into the natural. You, on the other
hand, NEED the eyes of others to tell you the definition of what
success "is". That, IMO, is not enough of a transferable skill set of
knowledge, skills, and abilities, that becomes destined to improve the
world in which we live. THAT is only what others in their ivory
towers, whether they be in government service, or in the educational
institutions, have given you in their definition of your supposed
"credit" to their system of government. I'm from the old school of
thought - the 2000 year old school called Christianity - so I've got
literally CENTURIES of faithful inheritance in the promises of YHWH on
my side. Who might be backing you up? Another group of humanists?

That is, you promote political views neatly explaining your abject
lack of achievement in life by putting the blame on the the powers
that be and removing them from you. Your personal explanations of
your failure or success is not the proper function of political
science however.

Let's make a correction here with your statement. The "powers that
be", IMO, have separated themselves from the world of what some
intelligent and faithful others in this lost world believe to be most
helpful to the right people at the right time, and this information is
only for those who are able to interpret the mystery of the Gospel
being fulfilled in the time-frame that it was intended to be fulfilled
in.

The failure of humanity generally is however. While these two
processes may be connected in some way, the material you provided is
clearly the result of a deranged mind seeking explanations for his
personal failures, and seeking comfort from others seeking similar
explanations for themeselves rather than doing the hard work of
building a wonderful life for yourself with whatever opportunities
life gives you.

I refuse to accept the world view of what you think is successful, but
I will tell you that the definition of "success" is by no means
universal, especially for those that seek comfort in the things of
this world that are advertised, marketed, and delivered to people,
with the expectation that they will somehow "escape" the especially
visceral environment of the marketplace, that gets perpetrated on
taxpayers as a whole, when the Federal government writes their own
"blank check" (in Caesar's name), and at the same time is able to
provide a service to no one.

What would you have the government do? realistically? Spouting
some unattainable ideal of liberty doesn't cut it. Whining about
supposed privileges isn't a solution - its a sop to your emotional
state - nothing more.

Government SHOULD BE the guardian of free market enterprise, NOT the
limiter of revolutionary technology that, in their supposed police
state of affairs, would "undercut" the very foundation of our energy
industry with another greedy, divisive, republican PAC oriented
"promise market". The Republicans, as well as the Democrats, are no
longer to be trusted. The problem is now the national debt, at the
expense of the Federal government, that warrants their behavior to be
somewhat questionable, if not outright damnable. The whole problem
is, why isn't Rome burning at the top, instead of the bottom? (It's
THEIR economy, afterall)

Wake up and smell the coffee guy.

You're the one that's sleeping here, not me.

My commentary is directed at something else. I accept the situation
post-war America found itself in. I merely point out that management
of the Grand Arena - as Kennan called it - provided short term gains
and long term liabilities. Those gains have been paid out, and the
liabilities are coming due. What should we do now?

That's what should "WE", meaning the Federal government, who is the
great borrower of all time, do now, not the non-Federal government.
There happens to be only ONE college (that I know of) in the United
States that DOES NOT ACCEPT any Federal loan or grant money from its
prospective students. If that college were to accept grant money, then
the course material in that college WOULD BECOME SUBJECT to the STATE
ACCREDITATION BOARD. Since there are no students attending the school
that accept government grants, then the school is outside of the
jurisdicting body of the Federal government, and all intellectual
works are in the realm of public property. In the same regard, any
intellectual work, whether it be in the realm of engineering or
quantum physics, if it is created within Private Property, is able to
claim Sovereignity in the State in which it was created. There are
literally hundreds, if not thousands of these "idea factories"
percolating all over the area of the United States, and the U.S.
military has absolutely no jurisdiction over them. Like I said, the
problem is yours, not mine.

I do admt I spoke to some extent what America might have done, merely
to point out where we failed, and point out what we might do today to
set things aright. I do not question the loyalty or veracity of those
it fell to to do the difficult job of charting our course through the
cold war.

Again you use the word "WE" in the expression "where WE FAILED". Sorry
to say that your "WE" is not "US" if it was a completely different
establishment that was framing the intent of "WHO" the debtor was
supposed to be.

Even so, had we maintained our manufacturing and farming base, and
addressed the wage disparity as technology advanced and permitted
that, rather than using wage disparity among those economic sectors to
structure the Grand Arena in the first place,

Again, "WE"

had we advanced into the interplanetary frontier and used our advanced
technology to gain special access to vast new regions of raw
materials, energy, and information -

Again, "WE"

had we used this unique resource to maintain peace and prosperity in
the nuclear age,

Again, "WE"

had we accepted and promoted the religious insights of our explorers
to organize the world politics and religion for a post-nuclear space
age, rather than sweep it under the rug and try to forget it -

Again, "WE"

we would be in a far better position today as a nation, and as a
world.

Again, "WE"

We didn't do these visionary things in part BECAUSE they were
visionary - expected the men and women of the 20th century to freely
embrace 21st century ideals and solutions does not require they be
evil or motivated by bad intent - they didn't do these things because
they were hard to see and understand in the context of the 20th
century.

Again, "WE"

Yet today, we can see that the war on terror is easily and decisively
won - we first acknowledge as a nation that 4% of the world's
population cannot continually consume 30% or more of the world's
resources and commit ourselves to using our position to increasing the
availability of resources, and using our national capabilities to
maintain an environment of peace prosperity and growth for all. .

Again, "WE"

We also acknowledge that there are world's beyond our world, and
commit ourselves to developing the resources off-world and under our
oceans to meet our needs and the needs of everyone, and in this way,
maintain and increase our living standard while rapidly raising all
living standards of all using these new resources.

Again, "WE"

Finally, we point out that God made all of us, and the universe -
including the universe beyond Earth - and commit ourselves to honor
all things God made - by creating an environment that is least
restrictive to all men and women, and least destructive to the natural
environment wherever it is found, and provides the greatest
opportunity for all without denying anyone life liberty or the pursuit
of happiness.

Again, "WE"

Then we go about doing the practical things needed to make good on
these visionary statements.

Again, "WE"

1) devleop low-cost terrestrial solar power to generate 3.34 billion
tons of hyrogen from 30 billion tons of water each year to replace the
28.3 billion barrels of oil, 5.5 billion tons of coal, and 1.1 billion
tons of natural gas we burn each year, avoiding the generation of 40
billion tons of carbon. We become an exporter of hydrogen fuels

Not without YOUR government, of course. However, I can see how the
thread has worked its way into the mindset that would seem to work
best for those who would be interested in the infrastructure for a non-
polluting market of infinitely renewable resource of energy, which
would not only create a healthy job market, but release the U.S. from
its dependence on foreign oil, which IMO sounds quite promising.

2) develop a global wireless internet to provide 50 billion wireless
broadband channels throughout the world available at pricing all can
afford. We become an exporter of information services

I am in agreement here.

3) develop high-end low-cost tele-robotic systems using these two
assets and build manufacturing centers in the United States, employing
low-wage labor throughout the world telerobotically. We become an
exporter of jobs, while simultaneously exporting the products those
jobs make.

I hope that by "telerobotics" you don't mean the "skin of electrodes"
that I was referring to in the mining of precious metals on asteroids.
(They're not, IMO, "low wage" jobs). You are probably referring to the
construction of orbital facilities tele-robotically, if I'm reading it
right. - That would be quite a massive operation that would require
some real strategic maneuvering of pre-packaged orbital assemblies.

4) develop low-cost very large reusable launch vehicles and launch a
network of solar power satellites that use free electron lasers to
beam energy to terrestrial solar panels (1) to expand their utility
and increase their value - increasing the amount of energy available
to humanity - rapidly increasing income levels (and exports from the
US based manufacturing - employing foreign labor telerobotically)

Is this supposed to work through cloud cover? What would the gear
ratios have to be for a group of laser(s) that are set to focus on
such a small area as, say, a football field? (I'm guessing that the
pointers in this type of laser are accurate down to some fraction of a
second in a GPS type locating device, so it might also offer a "Star
Wars" type technology at the fraction of the cost.

5) develop pilotless, personal VTOL ballistic aircraft using
propulsive skin technology energized by space lasers - these aircraft
range in size from letter carriers to winnebagos. They seamlessly and
easily transport products and people ballistically from point A to
point B at very low cost, with zero pollution anywhere on the Earth

Would this be along the design of a resonance pulsed ionic "skin"
drive designed by the infamous Tesla? (With the exception, of course,
that the power supply becomes external, rather than internal). Yeah,
you're real good on who would have to be "licensed" in order to assume
"control" over a market like this. Do you really think that your
"Moses", whoever that might be, would want to follow the lead of this
very impersonal "space machine" into orbit? I really don't think that
any future earth-to-orbit propulsion system will end up being THAT
controlled, given the reverse-engineered FTL vehicles that are now in
existence (See A.51)

6) develop low-cost manufactured housing powered from space,
communicating with space based assets,providing work at US factories
telerobotically, and receiving food and products and information
generated in America.

I'm impressed with the potential that this idea offers. It sounds like
an energy-programmed environment headquartered in orbit, and out-of-
reach of things like terrorists and hazardous environmental
conditions. With organizations like HAARP, sounds like we've got the
perfect opportunity to turn those barren desert wastelands of places
like Death Valley and Saudi Arabia into the lush gardens that we've
wanted them to be for so long. Perhaps by changing the climate in
these areas, and providing the wireless infrastructure and space-based
energy grid to the most remote places on earth, we will have
discovered a newer version humanity living within ourselves.

7) use advanced solar laser space propulsion to capture rich asteroids
and bring them to Earth orbit. Use telerobotic systems to build solar
powered telerobotic mines farms and factories to provide food, fiber,
clothes, housing, at very high standards for all the Earth.

Yes, I've been interested in this kind of science for quite a long
time now, and continue to wonder why there isn't a more open mindset
for those things that would help to stimulate a greater promise market
potential for keeping whatever precious metal resources that became
"discovered" as an investment opportunity. Orbital or extraterrestrial-
wise, in creating the next new gold rush, this new breed of "miner"
would make orbital technology look like the days of Tomorrowland have
come home to roost.

This is how we successfully manage the post-nuclear age for growth and
general prosperity.

I'm in almost total agreement, but take exception to the Federal
government getting involved, since they've got a bad enough reputation
"forcing their agenda" with the energy markets worldwide, and thereby
inhibiting the populace at large, as if WE weren't smart enough to
think out solutions for ourselves, albeit Brown & Root and Halliburton
assume that they've already done it for us. There's a technological
crossroads here that needs to be explored. Either engineers start
designing transportational alternatives to the over-priced highway-and-
gasoline-powered-automobile syndrome, that somehow ALWAYS seem to
include earmarks that become attached to some important piece of
legislation, ending up in the glut of pork-barrel projects that have
become the lobbyist's bribe instead of the scientific citizen's most
intelligent representation.

The repercussions of these negative-law makers are accepted as "normal
business protocol" rather than criminal activity. This is the Mandarin
bureaucrat's "big tax pie" that gets stolen from the civilian, at the
expense of more "dumbed down" projects, instead of using the capital
for revolutionizing the technology that gets us to and from the
workplace. If personal transportation can't stop using ground-driven
vehicles by the next thirty years, humans will not only injure our
biosphere irreparably, but will waste away their potential as a space-
faring nation, and be unable to escape, given some global,
catastrophic event.


American
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: next the good jobs will go
    ... manufacturing and the other is creating new technology. ... The government needs to invest VERY heavily in the development of those technologies, ... research in "clean" energy? ... No doubt this will be required, and encouraged, however, Mr. Obama neglects nuclear power as an immediate alternative which is 100% safe and ecologically friendly. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: next the good jobs will go
    ... manufacturing and the other is creating new technology. ... the final frontier could not obtain sufficient funding to continue its space exploration programs even on the heels of the successful moon expeditions. ... The government needs to invest VERY heavily in the development of those technologies, ... research in "clean" energy? ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: OT- More wasteful government spending
    ... The scientists behind the technology, which has been developed in *** ... research funded by the US government ***, say that generating power in ... compared to about 4.5p for wind energy and between 10p and 31p for solar ... been done with government money, ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: OT: 2nd Amendment case
    ... supremacy of the federal government wasn't recognized, ... The federal government was going to go ... Mr. TUCKER this is offered, I presume, as an amendment to ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Off topic: Oops
    ... >>> to allow sufficient time for evacuation of those who ... >>> blame between state and federal government here, ... > people with no resources if you have nowhere to put them. ... >>> that's why you have a federal government. ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)