/townhall/ - Townhall

Elon Musk is a tool with an overinflated ego that has managed to develop a following that thinks he's the real life Tony Stark.

But he's right that it would be good to have sustainable space colonies.

I, for one, believe that it's absolutely great for billionaires to spend their money advancing science and promoting expansion into outer space.

This isn't just because such things are nice for their own sake but because a number of billionaires (such as the Koch family) have essentially dedicated their fortunes to the cause of actually restricting and damaging humanity, especially by funding environmental destruction as well as organizations that make such despair even worse through political extremism and more.

Musk himself has a buttload of problematic aspects to his personal character, but I'll ignore that since my concern is his economic actions most of all.

If we can terraform another planet, it would be amazing and almost necessary for the survival of our species.

Earth's resources, after all, are still limited and we are feeling negative impact from certain events already.

As for disparity, rich people will do rich stuff. While it would be nice to have everyone on equal levels, Elon Musk touring space is more like a symptom than something to be egregiously upset about.

Honestly, though, getting rid of income disparity and have everyone living in comfort is almost as much a challenge as terraforming Mars.
(Heck, I think terraforming Mars would be more feasible than solving world poverty)

>>9507
I suppose it's hard to be one of the richest on Earth and not develop some ego.  But you think this particular goal is good.

>>9509
>great for billionaires to spend their money advancing science and promoting expansion into outer space

I agree with that, yes.  Projects of this scale will either be run by the rich or the powerful in government -- and they seem to be about the same group of people to me anyway.  I won't be familiar with either set to have a reason to trust them too much -- but I'm glad something is happening.

>>9510
You're thinking more of limited resources than a big asteroid wiping out the planet.  How are resources limited, and what resource is more abundant on Mars?

>getting rid of income disparity
Yeah, one half of the US believes the solution is to crack the whip over the poor; make them suffer so they find the gumption to improve -- the opposition believes that's heartless.  The other half of the US believes the solution is to give the poor what they lack -- the opposition believes that's socialism.  So it seems sentiments are placed in a way to prevent any great progress.

>>9521
Ideally, we'd want both a habitable Mars as well as a habitable set of U.S. city areas (in terms of solving chronic poverty, rising crime, and other issues). And I think that's actually doable. Difficult, of course. But I appreciate efforts.

It's a fun meme for doomers who are fans of science.

Orbital industry, an L1 station, and colonizing asteroids is a lot more interesting.

>>9531
It's a big PR element as well.  The first mission to the Moon was on every TV, the 5th, not so much.  First man (woman or nonbinary) on mars will be big news.  Space stations, even if further than ISS, won't have the same draw.

>Orbital industry, an L1 station, and colonizing asteroids is a lot more interesting.

I think as the nuts and bolts of establishing presence in space, yes.

Attempting to colonize Mars could be a fascinating and commendable goal. However, I believe at least for the long foreseeable future, any terraformed Mars is going to be a terrible place compared to a preserved Earth.

The problem I see, is that in some ways, Elon Musk almost seems more completely okay with sacrificing if not the environment of Earth, then at least sacrificing a bunch of people on Earth, in order to make this dream of Mars happen. Which imo is kind of a bad thing?

All of Musk's other big ticket projects (Teslas, Hyperloop, Starlink) all seem to be more interested in generating a bunch of money for him and his companies first, making actual strides to saving our current planet second.

>>9555
>>9555
>All of Musk's other big ticket projects (Teslas, Hyperloop, Starlink) all seem to be more interested in generating a bunch of money for him and his companies first, making actual strides to saving our current planet second.
As expected of for-profit companies, in contrast to environmental charities.

>>9555
>>9556
>Elon Musk almost seems more completely okay with sacrificing if not the environment of Earth

In fairness to Musk, he's not only advocated in public for pro-environmental measures but has actually, at least according to him, tried to work with the Biden administration on them.

See: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/12/elon-musk-reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-with-a-carbon-tax.html

I believe that Musk is one of those wealthy individuals who, akin to Bill Gates, believes that relatively green technologies represent the future of energy specifically and big business generally and thus want to get a leg up compared to competitors.

>>9555
>at least for the long foreseeable future, any terraformed Mars is going to be a terrible place compared to a preserved Earth.

Right.  That's why I think the best argument for Mars as an insurance policy involves catastrophic destruction of Earth or the human population.

>okay with sacrificing if not the environment of Earth, then at least sacrificing a bunch of people on Earth, in order to make this dream of Mars happen.

Yeah, I mean, the resources to go to Mars could always be used terrestrially.  I take that you either don't buy the necessity of Mars or don't think Musk is doing it correctly.