15 thoughts on “Not Sure How Those Numbers Work”

  2. I’d be one of Elon Musk’s million people to pay $500,000 for a ticket to Mars. The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 was $15 million when US GDP was $500 million. I don’t think the political will is there to spend 3% of GDP now, $400 billion, on space settlement, but that doesn’t mean the business plan can’t close.

  3. If we are looking for more space to colonize, why not start with Antarctica? It’s nearly the size of N. America, much closer, we can breath the air, and in the ancient past it supported a rich and diverse ecosystem. If we can’t make Antarctica a place people would want to move to, I don’t see it working for Mars.

    1. If we are looking for more space to colonize, why not start with Antarctica?

      Violates the Antarctica treaty. Physical hardship is not the only obstacle to exploiting Antarctica.

      1. Why is “we can breath the air” a plus?

        You’re joking, of course, but I’ve known space advocates that would ask that question in all seriousness!

  4. The modern world was characterised by “greed, aggression and speed”

    They make that sound like a bad thing. This is an important point. Suppose we do make a huge ‘Apollo like’ national commitment to settle mars, but on a socialist plan. That’s a fail. Ownership needs to be for individuals and absolute. The entire future of mankind will be determined by this decision.

    What is the point of building something on Mars that can’t develop into a dog-friendly community with excellent parks for running the dogs?

    My thoughts exactly. I could not agree more. We must develop lots of shirtsleeve environments on mars. That means a commitment to ISRU settlement. First we need a few dozen people on mars researching all manner of ISRU but focusing on water, power and farming. We can supply them with life support for a reasonable annual cost indefinitely until they get those issues resolved to the point where we can then send colonists.

    Step 1: Send folks to Mars
    Step 2: …magic
    Step 3: PROFIT!

    No…

    Step 0: Mars settlement charter sign on from several banks.
    Step 1: Put two BA330 each with F9 upper stage in orbit. Cost $600m.
    Step 2a: Send supplies to mars surface (2yr x 12 ppl unrecycled. x 48 ppl w/ water ISRU.) Cost $50m to $500m annual for up to ten years.
    Step 2b: Shakedown lunar cruises until satisfied both ships will make mars trip.
    Step 3a: Send researchers to mars. Fuel cost.
    Step 3b: Continue to send over supplies to mars surface.
    Step 4: Prove farming on mars.
    Step 5: Send anyone, at no cost to them but a signature, to mars in as great a number as we have capability (starting about 200 per year.)

    Step 5a: Banks immediately profit 400% to 600%. Settlers immediately profit 400% to infinite depending on how you look at it. (they each immediately become millionaires in terms of controlling interest although their net worth Asset-Liability does not change.)

    Not magic. Double entry accounting.

    We should send nuclear power, but they can do with solar if they have to. Including producing solar cells from martian materials. You don’t send mass, you send knowledge where ever possible.

  5. The Fed just needs to increase aggregate demand for Mars. More rounds of QE ’til the monetary velocity = (2GM/r)^0.5…

      1. w/ book reports

        Let’s not get hasty here. Requiring a deliverable would be unfair to the students who couldn’t deliver.

  6. BTW, real estate pays for everything regardless of travel costs because the developed land sells for a percentage of the total package rather than any particular fixed cost. We don’t need Elon to get it down to 1/2m to go. First movers pay more as in any emerging market.

Comments are closed.