Re: from 6 billion to 500 million: how? (was RE: true abundance?)

From: John Marlow (
Date: Wed Jan 31 2001 - 18:01:23 MST


On 31 Jan 2001, at 10:17, Michael Lorrey wrote:

> Oh, geez, more liberal 'we've gotta fix our problems here' tripe.

**Not at all; we gotta SURVIVE here first. I'm not one of these "Wait-
a-minute, Chris (Columbus) baby, don't do it, wait 'til we've solved
out number-one prioprities" types.

**I don't disagree with any of this below, except d (because we keep
manufacturing graver threats to our own survival). If the $14-for$1
figure is accurate (source would be great), which I hope to hell it
is--why the huge problem in getting space program expansion? Should
be a no-brainer, even for the pols. Gotta be a matter of public
perception; that can be changed if the figures are there to back it
up. I think it should be done even if it's a total write-off--but,
hey, that's just me.


> a) space investment generates $14 in the economy for every dollar spent,
> the highest of any government program in history (which typically return
> $0.57 per dollar spent). b) Economic growth from space investment does
> far more to 'fix our problems here' than liberal tax and spend nanny
> welfare state handouts ever did.
> c) Note since the Apollo program was shut down in favor of funding the
> Great Society, that program actually increased the number and percentage
> of people living in poverty.
> d) If we made it through this past century, the odds of human
> civilization surviving the next one are pretty good (depending on what
> your definition of 'human' is).
John Marlow

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:27 MDT