A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Outlaw Space Tourist!?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 18th 06, 10:13 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Outlaw Space Tourist!?

This is just an idea. I was thinking it unfair that the rich should buy
a TAX PAYER sub'd ticket to space, (Remember it was the U.S. that
bailed out the Russian Program, (and paid for the station dev.)). I
think maybe a lotto, for rides to the station, (World wide of course).
If the Russians need more funds to keep the taxi running, (We should
chip in a few more bucks, (at least till the Dragon is opp., (LOL).


What do you think! We have all got the right to go! We paid for it!!
Have a drawing once a year or so!!

Carl

  #2  
Old September 19th 06, 12:49 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default Outlaw Space Tourist!?


wrote in message
oups.com...
This is just an idea. I was thinking it unfair that the rich should buy
a TAX PAYER sub'd ticket to space, (Remember it was the U.S. that
bailed out the Russian Program, (and paid for the station dev.)).


What the US has paid for, the US has gotten. The Russians have been selling
the "third seat" on Soyuz missions for quite some time now. In fact, I
believe the practice predates the shuttle/Mir program, which is when the US
started sending money to Russia:

http://www.astronautix.com/flights/mireo7.htm

Search the above page for "journalist".

This page says the first of the Shuttle/Mir missions was in 1994 when NASA
let a Russian cosmonaut ride on the shuttle during STS-60.

If the US didn't like Russia selling that third seat, it should have been in
the Shuttle/Mir and ISS agreements.

I
think maybe a lotto, for rides to the station, (World wide of course).
If the Russians need more funds to keep the taxi running, (We should
chip in a few more bucks, (at least till the Dragon is opp., (LOL).


What do you think! We have all got the right to go! We paid for it!!
Have a drawing once a year or so!!


I think you're silly to deny the Russians their capitalistic venture of
selling seats on Soyuz. You can take comfort in the fact that the US
Government still has complete socialistic control of its shuttle seats
(they're historically only given away to foreign dignitaries, US
politicians, US contractors, and the like).

Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)


  #3  
Old September 19th 06, 01:29 AM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Outlaw Space Tourist!?

Not trying to split hairs here, (But), aren't you forgetting all the
other funds, we have poured into russia for nuke clean-up, and security
issues. We have been keeping them from falling on the face since the
wall fell, (LOL). They are now flush with oil cash, (but who knows whos
getting it). Graf and His Brother are running amok over there. You may
be a little to selective in the old mem. dept, (as it relates to who
wrote, what checks, in a pinch). Yes we have vested too much control in
NASA, but since it is still in service, (How about that Lotto?)! I do
hope Space X gets the Dragon Flying! It would be great to see the
market get some control, (and force United Space AL. and the other
goons to produce, (rather than get paid draw pretty pictures, of
projects that never produce real hardware)). Remember Clinton, and the
Tenn. Robot, left us with this mess to clean up all the way around,
(i.e., X-33, CRV, Faster Better Cheaper, (Al Gores Russian Love Party,
(i.e. the I.S.S.)). The one good thing about G.B.'s Idoits is at least
they are putting on a show of cleaning house, (I just wish they would
go further, (Flame thrower maybe, (LOL))).

Have a great night!

Carl

  #4  
Old September 19th 06, 02:41 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Frank Glover[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 353
Default Outlaw Space Tourist!?

wrote:

Not trying to split hairs here, (But), aren't you forgetting all the
other funds, we have poured into russia for nuke clean-up, and security
issues. We have been keeping them from falling on the face since the
wall fell, (LOL). They are now flush with oil cash, (but who knows whos
getting it). Graf and His Brother are running amok over there. You may
be a little to selective in the old mem. dept, (as it relates to who
wrote, what checks, in a pinch). Yes we have vested too much control in
NASA, but since it is still in service, (How about that Lotto?)! I do
hope Space X gets the Dragon Flying! It would be great to see the
market get some control, (and force United Space AL. and the other
goons to produce, (rather than get paid draw pretty pictures, of
projects that never produce real hardware)). Remember Clinton, and the
Tenn. Robot, left us with this mess to clean up all the way around,
(i.e., X-33, CRV, Faster Better Cheaper, (Al Gores Russian Love Party,
(i.e. the I.S.S.)). The one good thing about G.B.'s Idoits is at least
they are putting on a show of cleaning house, (I just wish they would
go further, (Flame thrower maybe, (LOL))).

Have a great night!

Carl


The accuracy or falsity of the above being as it may, NASA has
*zero* interest in spaceflight lotteries. Simple as that. And I doubt
Congress would support it, if they did.

--

Frank

You know what to remove to reply...

Check out my web page:
http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm

"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the
human spirit."
- Stephen Hawking
  #5  
Old September 19th 06, 12:32 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Outlaw Space Tourist!?

Are we not in control, (we the people, (LOL))? It is we who can force
something to happen, (with enough pressure). It does not matter what
NASA is interested in! We can make them do what we wish with our funds,
(Just look what the tree huggers have gotten done with all this earth
sen. crap). Lets just do a mail in camp. to congress, (Lotto! Lotto!
Lotto!)! Hell it work to save New Hor., Hubble, and Belly button lint
on The Ice Caps. I know this is not a noble cause, (But what the hell,
(It would be really cool if you won)).

Carl

  #6  
Old September 19th 06, 03:03 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default Outlaw Space Tourist!?


wrote in message
oups.com...
Are we not in control, (we the people, (LOL))?


The people are never directly in control. The representatives they elect
are in control. In the US, we directly elect the Congress and the Senate
and the very top of the Executive branch (president and vice-president).
Those people we don't elect, are either appointed (like judges) or hired
(like most of the executive branch) by elected representatives.

Because of the above, corporations and special interest groups hold a lot of
power in the US because they have a very significant influence over
elections in the US.


Specifically, NASA's funding is determined by the legislature, so you could
theoretically, get Congress and the Senate to pass a bill mandating that
NASA run a space lottery. As long as the president doesn't veto the bill,
it would become law. Assuming that it wasn't challenged and declared
unconstitutional, NASA would have to run the lottery.

But it will never happen.

It is we who can force
something to happen, (with enough pressure). It does not matter what
NASA is interested in!


Actually, it does matter. Congress and the Senate pay fairly close
attention to what direction the Executive Branch (i.e. the presidet, his
aides, the NASA Administrator, and etc) wants to take NASA. They also take
into account input from other sources like the GAO. I doubt the GAO would
look favorably on a space lottery. They already complain that NASA doesn't
know where it spends its money. I doubt they would look favorably on
anything as uncertain as a lottery.

We can make them do what we wish with our funds,
(Just look what the tree huggers have gotten done with all this earth
sen. crap). Lets just do a mail in camp. to congress, (Lotto! Lotto!
Lotto!)! Hell it work to save New Hor., Hubble, and Belly button lint
on The Ice Caps. I know this is not a noble cause, (But what the hell,
(It would be really cool if you won)).


Of course there is the giggle factor coming into play here as well. When
you propose something which is universally seen as silly on the surface,
people can't stop laughing long enough to give the finer points serious
consideration.

Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)


  #7  
Old September 19th 06, 03:17 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Outlaw Space Tourist!?

Jeff, You are right about the giggle factor, (but), my state,
(Georgia), gives every child the opp. to go to coll., (Due to Lotto).
We are prob. the only state that does not use it's lotto as replacement
funds for short falls in other projects. If we Ear Marked the funds
from a NASA Lotto to the Human Space Flight Program, (It just might
become a self funding program). I think that if you market this right,
We just might finally get out of the gravity well, (and give some lucky
folks a joy ride). It would be cool to at least have the dream of space
flight for the common guy/gal again. We would have to have a clause
that covers health issues and transfer of winning ticket if not fit,
(Give to family member or friend).

I think this and a NASCAR like branding model will save the program,
(and put some fun into space). What we are missing is the fun factor!!
It just might get the vid-idiots off the sofa and into research!

Sue Ya! (LOL)!

Carl
P.S.
Thank you for your time in thinking this one thru!

  #8  
Old September 20th 06, 02:26 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Frank Glover[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 353
Default Outlaw Space Tourist!?

wrote:

Jeff, You are right about the giggle factor, (but), my state,
(Georgia), gives every child the opp. to go to coll., (Due to Lotto).



So does mine. (New York) But it's one thing to say the money is for
the benefit of 'the children,' quite another to say it'll launch a
couple of tourists per year.

And there's also the issue of how safe the public percieves the
shuttle to be...


We are prob. the only state that does not use it's lotto as replacement
funds for short falls in other projects. If we Ear Marked the funds
from a NASA Lotto to the Human Space Flight Program, (It just might
become a self funding program). I think that if you market this right,
We just might finally get out of the gravity well, (and give some lucky
folks a joy ride). It would be cool to at least have the dream of space
flight for the common guy/gal again. We would have to have a clause
that covers health issues and transfer of winning ticket if not fit,
(Give to family member or friend).



The private guys are going to do all this much better than NASA, anyway.


I think this and a NASCAR like branding model will save the program,
(and put some fun into space). What we are missing is the fun factor!!
It just might get the vid-idiots off the sofa and into research!



It's not quite space, but Google (or whatever search engine you
prefer) "Rocket Racing League"


Sue Ya! (LOL)!

Carl
P.S.
Thank you for your time in thinking this one thru!



--

Frank

You know what to remove to reply...

Check out my web page:
http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm

"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the
human spirit."
- Stephen Hawking
  #9  
Old September 20th 06, 01:44 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Outlaw Space Tourist!?

Frank.

It is not the shuttle I was talking about. I think the lotto money, (If
earmarked for NASA human programs only), would help to get the new
vehicles online quicker. Maybe we should pitch a Lotto idea to Mr. Musk
or his Hotel buddy too? I just think that no matter public or comm.
program, you can not get around the fact that public funds have help
along the way. It is time to give back to the people the dream of a
common guy/gal getting to space for fun. The problem in selling the
product to the public, is not danger, (Look at the x-games), it is the
fun and gee-wiz factor. We have forgotten how to make research and dev.
fun and interesting. I do not want to see a future of exploring on the
sofa with a X-Box controller in hand. I want to see us with our hands
on a spanner building at L-5, (Yes I was a member of the L-5 in 95
crowd).

I also think a lotto for the JPL group would be a good idea too! Win a
chance to drive a rover, (and fully fund all the other programs that
have got the axe). JPL? Standing alone from NASA? Now there is a
thread!?!

It is the thrill of the hunt! We can eat anytime, (Just put it freezer
Mom!)!

Carl

  #10  
Old September 21st 06, 02:04 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Frank Glover[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 353
Default Outlaw Space Tourist!?

wrote:

Frank.

It is not the shuttle I was talking about. I think the lotto money, (If
earmarked for NASA human programs only), would help to get the new
vehicles online quicker. Maybe we should pitch a Lotto idea to Mr. Musk
or his Hotel buddy too?



When Falcon-9/Dragon becomes operational, that might be thinkable
(though private investors will have had a lot to do with getting that
far...if I were Paul Allen, I would've made my support of Scaled
Composites contingent on getting one ride on SS1 above 100km)

But a private company offering a lottery, while it will still have a
number of legal hurdles to jump, isn't the same as a branch of
government doing it.


I just think that no matter public or comm.
program, you can not get around the fact that public funds have help
along the way. It is time to give back to the people the dream of a
common guy/gal getting to space for fun. The problem in selling the
product to the public, is not danger, (Look at the x-games), it is the
fun and gee-wiz factor. We have forgotten how to make research and dev.
fun and interesting. I do not want to see a future of exploring on the
sofa with a X-Box controller in hand. I want to see us with our hands
on a spanner building at L-5, (Yes I was a member of the L-5 in 95
crowd).

I also think a lotto for the JPL group would be a good idea too! Win a
chance to drive a rover, (and fully fund all the other programs that
have got the axe). JPL? Standing alone from NASA? Now there is a
thread!?!

It is the thrill of the hunt! We can eat anytime, (Just put it freezer
Mom!)!

Carl


Okay, but what happens when, that precedent having been set, *other*
government agencies lobby for their own lotteries...?

--

Frank

You know what to remove to reply...

Check out my web page:
http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm

"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the
human spirit."
- Stephen Hawking
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 2 November 2nd 05 11:57 PM
JimO writings on shuttle disaster, recovery Jim Oberg History 0 July 11th 05 06:32 PM
CEV PDQ Scott Lowther Policy 577 May 27th 05 10:11 PM
European high technology for the International Space Station Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 May 10th 04 02:40 PM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 February 2nd 04 04:33 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.