Libertarians, do you think asteroids should be left to the free market?

[Julius Skrrvin]

Holla at me, when you squat or deadlift 4 plates though(lower body strength)

Can only do three and some change

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

It's not a troll thread. I'm dead serious. What would libertarians do about the threat of asteroid impacts? I haven't heard an answer yet. If an extinction level event occurs, is that just a giant hiccup in the cosmic free market? Is a nuclear winter and 90% of life on Earth dying the cost of freedom? Is it collectivism and a stifling of freedom to have NASA and other government agencies working on strategies to monitor, detect, and possibly deflect or explode asteroids before impact?

As (at least) a pseudo libertarian:

The existence of the world >> the free market

I would assume a vote to use federal funding in a much higher percentage to take care of this to preserve existence of all things would be in the best interest of liberty on a global scale.

In terms of libertarian philosophies alone, spontaneous order is one concept that could additionally explain this. Even without a central authority playing a role, you could safely assume that individuals and businesses would co-operate and help fund NASA or another way to take care of this issue. You dont think people like Richard Branson and Gates, amongst others, wouldn't contribute tons of money to deal with this?

 

[Blackking]

http://www.policymic.com/articles/6...take-proves-something-every-libertarian-knows

NASA's $1.2 Billion Mistake Proves Something Every Libertarian Knows

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

As (at least) a pseudo libertarian:

The existence of the world >> the free market

I would assume a vote to use federal funding in a much higher percentage to take care of this to preserve existence of all things would be in the best interest of liberty on a global scale.

In terms of libertarian philosophies alone, spontaneous order is one concept that could additionally explain this. Even without a central authority playing a role, you could safely assume that individuals and businesses would co-operate and help fund NASA or another way to take care of this issue. You dont think people like Richard Branson and Gates, amongst others, wouldn't contribute tons of money to deal with this?

You're acting like there's going to be time for Obama get billionaires on the horn to pay to build a giant death star while an asteroid is already in en route to hitting Ohio. You have to have a strategy already in place. NASA has already been researching and developing strategies for NEOs for decades. Do you think NASA should even exist?

 

[Blackking]

The fact that eventually a profit can be made from space exploration... means that the programs will be privately funded... NTM most advances in space and military are made by private companies who work around the system. They are able to exploit the system because of the unlimited pockets of the fund gov.

There would more than likely be less waste with mostly private investors for space exploration.

To attempt to make the case the people would allow an asteroid to hit the Earth is idiotic in the sense that libertarians aren't pro death of billions of people. They are just against huge gov spending and control. Every business protects it's investments. Every nation protects it's interest.. Competition and private interest are what is currently putting us in the 'future' with all space related technologies... and it's what will eventually be used to stop asteroids, creatures, or whatever.

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

You're acting like there's going to be time for Obama get billionaires on the horn to pay to build a giant death star while an asteroid is already in en route to hitting Ohio. You have to have a strategy already in place. NASA has already been researching and developing strategies for NEOs for decades. Do you think NASA should even exist?

Well shyt, how far in advance would we know about this asteroid? Usually, astronomers chart major threats a significant time in advance. The chance an undetected asteroid would just appear spontaneously and be directly on course with Earth isn't very likely.

I think there is a place in the government for NASA. I would probably change the way budgeting is done, and give the people more of a say to where their money is going. I think the people would largely co-sign using federal dollars/their tax dollars in large amounts to fund this endeavor and I additionally think many would contribute far more in addition to help ensure the safety of the world. Some of the projects that NASA undertakes is a relative waste of money (Many countries stopped their moon projects to save money), but this is a national/global event and wouldnt be a waste. And don't act like other countries wouldn't cooperate either.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

The fact that eventually a profit can be made from space exploration... means that the programs will be privately funded... NTM most advances in space and military are made by private companies who work around the system. They are able to exploit the system because of the unlimited pockets of the fund gov.

There would more than likely be less waste with mostly private investors for space exploration.

To attempt to make the case the people would allow an asteroid to hit the Earth is idiotic in the sense that libertarians aren't pro death of billions of people. They are just against huge gov spending and control. Every business protects it's investments. Every nation protects it's interest.. Competition and private interest are what is currently putting us in the 'future' with all space related technologies... and it's what will eventually be used to stop asteroids, creatures, or whatever.

Once again, you don't develop an anti-asteroid plan and technology on the fly. There's no Tony Stark to build a giant antimatter cannon in a few days in real life, so your claim that libertarians wouldn't let it happen is irrelevant. NASA has been working on an anti-NEO monitoring and detection plan for decades and they're still probably not there yet. There wouldn't even be any free market incentive to monitor asteroids as NASA does, much much less destroy or repel them. We'd be no better off than the dinosaurs if we didn't have NASA and other government agencies doing this work.

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

Once again, you don't develop an anti-asteroid plan and technology on the fly. There's no Tony Stark to build a giant antimatter cannon in a few days in real life, so your claim that libertarians wouldn't let it happen is irrelevant. NASA has been working on an anti-NEO monitoring and detection plan for decades and they're still not there yet. There wouldn't even be any free market incentive to monitor asteroids as NASA does, much much less destroy or repel them. We'd be no better off than the dinosaurs if we didn't have NASA and other government agencies doing this work.

CERN would help. Other countries would help. Black budget technologies that countries have and don't disclose could help. NASA appropriating more funds towards Anti-NEO monitoring and detection instead of Mars and other endeavors would help.

The CPI report said NASA had spent “at least” $878,000 in the past two years on research into ways to deflect or neutralize asteroids that risk collision with Earth.

They were given 18.4 billion dollars to play around with in 2011.

 

[Blackking]

Once again, you don't develop an anti-asteroid plan and technology on the fly. There's no Tony Stark to build a giant antimatter cannon in a few days in real life, so your claim that libertarians wouldn't let it happen is irrelevant. NASA has been working on an anti-NEO monitoring and detection plan for decades and they're still probably not there yet. There wouldn't even be any free market incentive to monitor asteroids as NASA does, much much less destroy or repel them. We'd be no better off than the dinosaurs if we didn't have NASA and other government agencies doing this work.

well, we can't re-write history... so
the research won't be thrown out onto the bush. Possibly with less gov there will be less waste and more innovation.

Let's keep in mind that the most advanced research and development efforts come from the private sector.

 

[godkiller]

Yes...



Through the free market all things are possible

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Well shyt, how far in advance would we know about this asteroid? Usually, astronomers chart major threats a significant time in advance. The chance an undetected asteroid would just appear spontaneously and be directly on course with Earth isn't very likely.

I think there is a place in the government for NASA. I would probably change the way budgeting is done, and give the people more of a say to where their money is going. I think the people would largely co-sign using federal dollars/their tax dollars in large amounts to fund this endeavor and I additionally think many would contribute far more in addition to help ensure the safety of the world. Some of the projects that NASA undertakes is a relative waste of money (Many countries stopped their moon projects to save money), but this is a national/global event and wouldnt be a waste. And don't act like other countries wouldn't cooperate either.

As far as how far ahead of time we can detect them, that depends on factors like their velocity and proximity to the Sun. There's some asteroids that have gotten very close that we didn't detect until days before. Nobody saw that recent meteor shower in Russia coming.

Now who does the detection? NASA! lol. That's the point. Nobody in the private sector is spending business costs on staring at rocks in space.

But you said you support NASA with a scaled-back role. So I'm going to assume you keep NEO monitoring in their budget and we're on the same page there.

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

As far as how far ahead of time we can detect them, that depends on factors like their velocity and proximity to the Sun. There's some asteroids that have gotten very close that we didn't detect until days before. Nobody saw that recent meteor shower in Russia coming.

Now who does the detection? NASA! lol. That's the point. Nobody in the private sector is spending business costs on staring at rocks in space.

But you said you support NASA with a scaled-back role. So I'm going to assume you keep NEO monitoring in their budget and we're on the same page there.

Of course. And I would vastly increase how much they spend on it too. In my previous post, they supposedly spent less than a million on it in the past two years combined. If, under your premise, this predicament is so important (which I, for the most part, agree on), then they need to spend more of the money they are given on it rather than other stuff.

Without knowing the specifics of their budget, 878k in two years out of 18+billion (per year) is pretty pathetic.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

CERN would help. Other countries would help. Black budget technologies that countries have and don't disclose could help. NASA appropriating more funds towards Anti-NEO monitoring and detection instead of Mars and other endeavors would help.

They were given 18.4 billion dollars to play around with in 2011.

CERN, other countries=government. My point isn't about NASA per se, but rather about the role government here and the inability of the private sector to handle this and other problems.

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

CERN, other countries=government. My point isn't about NASA per se, but rather about the role government here and the inability of the private sector to handle this and other problems.

Okay.

Well, I believe that the first and foremost priority of parties in a social contract/gov't and to a slightly lesser extent, private individuals, is to preserve natural, human rights, of which liberty is paramount. However, without life itself, there are no human rights. As a libertarian, I would scale back a significant portion of the government, but one of the things I would preserve are the things that protect life, first and foremost. We could get into a nuanced argument about national security here, but even with a scaled back budget, I would seek out co-operation from any and everyone willing to help in this cause from the private market to other countries. The private market alone could possibly be able to come up with solutions, but they would probably vastly differ and have no order in what is attempted. We can't simply have a bunch of rogues just shooting shyt off into outer space without some oversight.

In conclusion, as a libertarian, I would prioritize and weigh the ability of the private market to fill in for the government in specific areas of the budget, then cut accordingly. Personally (although some may differ), national and global security wouldn't be high on the list as to where I would leave it up to solely the private/free market, and I don't think that necessarily contradicts libertarian values.

 

[DEAD7]

Once again, you don't develop an anti-asteroid plan and technology on the fly. There's no Tony Stark to build a giant antimatter cannon in a few days in real life, so your claim that libertarians wouldn't let it happen is irrelevant. NASA has been working on an anti-NEO monitoring and detection plan for decades and they're still probably not there yet. There wouldn't even be any free market incentive to monitor asteroids as NASA does, much much less destroy or repel them. We'd be no better off than the dinosaurs if we didn't have NASA and other government agencies doing this work.

Are you insinuating that the market is not more innovative than government? or that if NASA couldnt do it in 10yrs no one can?





Secondly NASA has a monopoly on manned space missions, so there is no way to determine if there is or isnt a market there til its opened up... Might be, might not.