Donald Trump Thinks Going To Mars Would Be "Wonderful" But There Is a Catch 442
MarkWhittington writes: Donald Trump, the mercurial real estate tycoon and media personality who, much to the surprise of one and all, has become the front-runner for the Republican nomination for president opened his mind just a little about his attitude toward space exploration, according to a story in Forbes. In an answer to a question put to him about sending humans to Mars, the current focus at NASA, Trump said, "Honestly, I think it's wonderful; I want to rebuild our infrastructure first, ok? I think it's wonderful." In other words, dreams of going to Mars must take a back seat to more Earthly concerns. It is not an answer many space exploration supporters want to hear.
He's got company (Score:5, Funny)
Many people would like to see Donald Trump go to Mars.
But the Martians would probably consider him to be an illegal alien and might expect us to pay to put up a wall to keep him out.
Re:He's got company (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately for the martians, yankee illegals are notoriously hard to keep out. Ask the Cherokee how that worked out for them...
Re:He's got company (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:He's got company (Score:5, Informative)
Americans of the frontier era were illegal immigrants even by the USA's own laws. The U.S. at various points in its history signed treaties with Indian tribes agreeing to settlement boundaries, and enacted them into domestic law, such as the various nonintercourse acts [wikipedia.org]. Many people simply ignored these laws and illegally crossed the borders, squatting on land on the other side. Once enough of them did, they were retroactively legalized, what you might call "amnesty".
Re: (Score:3)
Also there's no such place as Germany; the proper name is "Deutschland". And no such place as Spain; the proper name is "Espana" (sorry, can't type a tilde-n). No such place as China either; I don't know what they call it, but I'm sure I can't type on this keyboard.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The Martians might consider us sending Trump to Mars as an act of war.
I only say "might" because while most humans would, we don't entirely understand the alien mind.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you remember on Slashdot in years past, whenever a story about Mars came up, someone would write some kind of science fiction about the Martian council's response to Earth's actions? I sure miss those stories.
http://pocho.com/wp-content/up... [pocho.com]
Re:He's got company (Score:5, Funny)
Let it be known that rumours of the death of our glorious overlord K'Breel, First Speaker of The Council are exaggerated and heretical. All those found to be promulgating such malicious and flagrant falsehoods are hereby ordered to attend reeducation seminars, on pain of forcible removal of the middle and lower left gas sacs. Any citizen found to be harbouring or otherwise giving succour to said enemies of decency and Martian righteousness will face the additional penalty of exile to the frost mines of the North for a period of not less than thirteen cycles.
Let it also be known the Grand Plan nears fruition. Rejoice, citizens! Soon the loathsome inhabitants of our planetary neighbour will be completely ignorant of our existence and the First Speaker's plans for their extermination may proceed. Soon we will be rid of their interference, free from their noisome electromagnetic emanations and free to walk the beautiful red sands of home without fear of their invading robotic thralls. Rejoice citizens, or face immediate vacuum desiccation.
That is all.
Signed,
K'Traal
Assistant Speaker to The Council.
Re: He's got company (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps, but would he cause another Great Depression like the last war monger?
Re: He's got company (Score:5, Interesting)
Just how many of his businesses has he bankrupted, again?
Re: (Score:3)
Just how many of his businesses has he bankrupted, again?
4, out of hundreds of them...
That is actually a really good record, for those who actually know anything about the subject...
Re: He's got company (Score:5, Informative)
Funny how after he took a lot of other people's money and said declared bankruptcy he suddenly found millions just after the original owners had no way to get it back.
Re: (Score:3)
He's still got negative net worth.
In terms of money?
According to his federal filings (which are legal documents and it is a serious crime to lie on them), he is worth at least in the billions, after taking into account debt.
He claims $10 billion, his filings are over $1 billion (but don't really reflect the total, given how that works.
Regardless, he is clearly a very rich man...
Re: (Score:3)
Only the debt he did not manage to evade thanks to fake bankruptcies and powerful friends protecting him from the law.
Re: (Score:3)
My point is he's the poster boy for corruption, the very ugly side of America and not someone to be proud of. People who have done far less but don't have the right connections are in jail.
Hey now, stop talking about Hilary... this topic was about Trump!
Re: (Score:3)
Just how many of his businesses has he bankrupted, again?
Not that many. But could you trust him not give his own businesses advantages? Is he going to be an [bbc.com] American [huffingtonpost.com] Berlusconi [vice.com]?
Re: (Score:3)
Any businessman who's in business for a long time is going to have failures.
Sure. Once. Maybe twice. Four times is a business practice (Trump even said it himself), and anybody still lending him money (or in other words "gives him credit"), in the eternal words of George W. Bush, "can't get fooled again".
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Bush didn't cause the recession via the war. It came about because of years, including his, of allowing Wall Street and the housing bubble to suck the life out of the U.S. economy. Also, the American people bear some of the blame, they took out second and third mortgages, were too busy to read what they were promising in loan payments, more or less lived beyond their means because, what the hell, everyone they knew was doing the same thing. The American people are fucking saints...dumb saints, but saints.
Re: He's got company (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: He's got company (Score:4, Interesting)
You've got to be kidding. Donald is many things, but 1) he's not religious, and 2) he seems quite pragmatic. The regular Republicans have all been clamoring for another war, this time with Iran. Donald, being a businessman, will want to run the country like a business, meaning he'll want to cut unnecessary expenditures, and certainly not spend another trillion dollars on a stupid war like Bush.
Honestly, it puzzles me why so many people try to demonize this guy so much, mainly because of his stance on illegal immigration I think, and just plain being boorish and non-diplomatic-speaking. Would I prefer him as Pres? No, I'd like Sanders. But compared to **all the other Republicans**, I'll take The Donald in a heartbeat. All the others are either religious wackos (Santorum, Huckabee) or libertarian loons (Paul). Maybe Carly is an exception, but after the way she ran HP into the ground I certainly wouldn't want her either.
Re: He's got company (Score:5, Interesting)
Honestly, it puzzles me why so many people try to demonize this guy so much, mainly because of his stance on illegal immigration I think, and just plain being boorish and non-diplomatic-speaking.
Well, I'm not completely sure, but I think it's because he's racist, misogynist, and prepared to shit on anyone who gets in his way. No, wait. I am completely sure that's why. Fuck Trump, fuck him right in his too fucking rich for anyone's good stupid shit hairpiece ass. Fuck him twice.
The Art of the Deal (Score:4, Interesting)
> To the contrary, I think he might actually be better than most at diplomacy -- he knows how to negotiate and strike deals, even or especially with people who are hard to deal with.
Yep, that's EXACTLY what he's very good at, negotiating deals. That's why his book is called The Art of the Deal.
I won't vote for him, but I will acknowledge what his strengths are. He figures out what the other side ACTUALLY wants and what he actually wants, and comes up with a way for both sides to get most of the what they want. He _might_ help negotiate through the gridlock in Congress by proposing or supporting bills which allow most people to achieve their ends.
I say "what they ACTUALLY want" because most of the time, what people ask for isn't what they actually want. Software developers understand that. Somebody might propose a ban on SUVs when they want cleaner air, a foreign leader might make all sorts of demands when what they really want is to save face, to tell their constituents that they stood up to America. Trump's skill is to find a way to allow the foreign leader to declare victory while giving us what we want.
That said, I think his weakness is that he speaks too soon and too much, without first thinking about what he's going to say. I have a reputation which exceeds my actual skills and knowledge. The myth is that I know a LOT, that I almost always have the correct answer, that I'm virtually never wrong. The truth is that I simply keep my mouth shut when I don't know. It's not that I always have the right answer, it's that I don't often argue for an answer that's wrong. I shut up or just ask questions unless and until I have the right answer. Trump isn't like that.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want a chilling prospect, consider that with the current state of British politics it is entirely possible that our PM after the next general election in 2020 will be Boris Johnson. If you think the last "special relationship" between Blair and Bush was scary...
Re: (Score:2)
Trump getting shit done, eh? Like them 4 bankruptcies? Let's ask the people those fucked over how they feel about Trump and shit. And Sanders will be fine until you get the tax bill to pay for the blue haired and every other group he feels the rich (the rich being people like you) ought to pay for.
Re: (Score:3)
So, when looking at Trump, we should be looking at how W did.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So wait, we should evaluate Presidential Candidates based on their performance in private industry BEFORE running for office?
Republicans were mocked for doing just that in 2012 and 2008, you know pointing out that Obama never held a private-sector job, never led anything, and never had to make a payroll before becoming the leader of the free world... Or pointing out Romney's success in the private AND public sector (Romney Care? Salt Lake City Olympics? etc.)?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: He's got company (Score:5, Insightful)
> track record of getting shit done and speaks his mind
Is good at going bankrupt and says incredibly stupid shit that no emotionally functional person would say? Americans are a fascinating species.
Re: (Score:3)
Trump would make a hilarious president, and at least he has a track record of getting shit done and speaks his mind,
4 times bankruptee with a cult of personality who feels he doesn't need to listen to anyone else... You really want this guy running your country. Surely you're countries in enough strife as it is.
Re: (Score:3)
You really want this guy running your country.
If it's a choice between him and any of the other Republicans, I'll take Trump.
False dichotomy (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The president is nowhere near as powerful as most people think. When it comes to the budget the best they can do is negotiate with Congress how to allocate the high level funds. There's no way they would go through every small program offered by the government and see if it's needed. Yes they could set up a panel to go through but that's what the auditor (whatever you call it down there) is for. The problem is that every program that exists has been created was done so with political support and you ca
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Please tell me what the president is not allowed to do now. I've seen a war with Libya, not approved by Congress. A new immigration policy, directly voted down by Congress. Changing a massive healthcare bill about 15 times, directly against the wording in the bill passed by Congress. A treaty signed with Iran, not likely to be approved by Congress but I am told it is still fully leagal. All in just the last few years.
The treaty and immigration things are directly in the Constitution under Congressional
Re:False dichotomy (Score:5, Interesting)
It's definitely *not* a false dichotomy. There's a huge difference between the things NASA does for a few billion dollars, which usually revolve around robust hardware that doesn't have to take squishy meat-bags into consideration, and starting a colony on Mars. Musk is proposing sending *millions* of people to Mars, and the lower bound is close to 200. We're talking about tons(literally) of equipment to house the people, as well as giving them the tools necessary to create the things they need from the Martian environment. They'll have to repair their own equipment, and learn to expand on their own in a relatively short amount of time. Even if they're subsistent on supplies from Earth, we're still talking about an expensive and constant barrage of goods - above and beyond what the Martians 'need' so that they have what they need when things go bad(redundant systems for *everything*).
Failure on Mars means everyone dies and the equipment falls into disrepair from weather and other bad things. Dead people and the entire thing is a sunk cost. Failure on the moon means everyone could possibly escape alive(they use escape pods to get to an orbital vehicle which can then take them back to Earth, much like the Apollo landers), and the equipment will remain more or less in the same condition as its left since there's no atmosphere. So long as a rogue meteor doesn't come marauding through hitting shit, it'll be in the same working condition when we manage to send people back up there.
So yeah, that's a 'wonderful idea' and in time it will happen. But is it the most pressing issue of our time? Definitely not. We don't even have any sort of operations set up on the moon, even though the moon offers a lot of resources(particularly helium) that could potentially be used for nuclear fusion or other interesting things here on Earth. My thinking is: if we haven't even set up some sort of sustained colony on the moon(for science, industry, etc) then we have no business trying to do the same on Mars. The moon is far lower risk, far lower cost, and our presence there is nonexistent. Mars can wait.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Trump is very capable at making money for himself. He does it by mismanaging companies into the ground and then having them (not him) declare bankruptcy. Can't wait to see how that translates to running a country.
That said, he's still the best the Republicans have.
Re: (Score:2)
Head loony in the defective's bin, a loony's loony.
Ooh! I Got One (Score:2)
There really isn't that much pork (Score:2)
I know a billion dollars sounds like a lot of money, but to a nation it's not. Trump won't be able to solve our problems without raising taxes because to really fix our infrastructure problems would require rolling back the tax cuts and loopholes we've been doling out to the 1% since Regan. There's a reason why our
Re: (Score:3)
Re:False dichotomy (Score:4, Insightful)
One person's 'government waste' is another person's salary. Obviously they'll vote to waste as much money as possible, to keep themselves employed.
Re:False dichotomy (Score:4, Insightful)
Romney's 47 percent.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
They know squat about how an economy is supposed to work.
You are correct, but sadly too many people voting ALSO don't know squat about how an economy is supposed to work.
The lack of general financial knowledge among the general population is really bloody sad...
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sure that a lot of technology originally developed for space has ultimately contributed to our infrastructure. It may not have resulted in consumer products, but that doesn't mean that people don't rely on those developments every day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:False dichotomy (Score:5, Insightful)
space exploration returns next to nothing, its basic economics
Only if you assign a zero value to scientific and engineering knowledge.
But that's day one in MBA school I think.
Space Gives Positive Economic Outlook (Score:2)
space exploration returns next to nothing, its basic economics
The problem with statements like this is that "basic economics" is not always correct. It is a model, and like all models, it is incredibly helpful at helping us understand things and make predictions, but it doesn't always reflect reality. Most economists didn't predict the debt bubbles and economic issues of the past decade, for example.
In any case, let me illustrate why it's actually a great thing to do space exploration, even when other things need done too (nothing is mutually exclusive):
Re:Space Gives Positive Economic Outlook (Score:4, Insightful)
The (economic) question is however are those advances better (more progress/$) than direct funding of consumer products? Analysis shows no.
I am aware of such analyses, but do not know if such analysis is the consensus opinion or more a conjecture at this point.
I would still argue that overall the other benefits I listed imply that government funding of such things would be good. If nothing else, business is sometimes very risk averse, and once government research proves something is feasible, then they will jump on it (see the various businesses that have popped out of projects started at FFRDCs, for example). So such funding would then jumpstart consumer products that wouldn't have been tried in the first place by the private sector.
Re:False dichotomy (Score:5, Interesting)
A country accomplishing something exceptional returns pride for its citizens. This feeling of being proud is one of the things which contribute the most to happiness. Happy people create a better environment for everyone. Happy people will more easily build strong communities and consequently a strong country.
More importantly, accomplishing something exceptional brings respect from other populations.
I remember that morning of 86. I was going to a math class. I was late, but when I entered the class, I realized it hasn't started yet. People were gathered around the teacher and they were discussing. I then learned that Challenger exploded. Somehow, I was really affected. It was crazy, I was not American, but I certainly did have a lot of respect for the US. So anything bad happening to the US did affect me.
The US is now kind of despised by a lot of people around the world. The main reason is how the US mess with the world and how Americans are "arrogant". Yet, back in the 70 and 80, the US were messing the exact same way with the world and Americans were the same people as they are now. But here's the thing : the US also accomplished great things in the 60 and 70 in the name of humanity. So sure, the US were a bully, but they were a bully who was able to accomplish great things.
I remember that morning of 2001. I was home. I heard the news two planes crashed on the Twin Towers. I saw how reporters where depicting this event as one of the worst tragedy to ever occur, but to be honest I didn't really care. Sure, I thought it was sad 3000 people died, but people do die around the world every day because of politics or religion. How many innocent died because of the US messing with the world for their own benefits?
Respect has to be earned, but once you get this respect, the benefits you get are enormous. You gain support from everywhere in the world. Most people in the world will see you as a model to follow, not as an enemy who's trying to abuse them. They'll feel your pain almost as much as their own. They won't fight against you, they'll try to join you.
What does basic economics say about that?
Don't worry (Score:3)
O'Neillian he is nit (Score:2)
Someone should summarize Gerard K. O'Neills " The high Frontier" for this guy - and other candidates.
It's be interesting if any of them really get it and agree with the core concepts
Re: (Score:2)
You have lost your wager
Not mutually exclusive.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Trump is one of the better of the bunch. He likes to shoot off a lot but really one of the most obnoxious blow hards ever made a pretty good president. Teddy Roosevelt had a tendency to outrage people too but looking at his legacy he was one of the better ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I liked when Trump explained that he donated to all the candidates to make them obliged to him, so when he needed a favor, they would jump when he said "frog."
I mean, everyone already knew it worked that way, but no uber rich nutter had ever came right out and described the process in such plain language before.
He's right (Score:2)
Of course the same could be said about throwing trillions at the F-35.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course the same could be said about throwing trillions at the F-35.
... or all the money spent to save the country from the results of tycoons like him that caused the banking crisis?
Seriously, look at all the scientific advances and inventions from the space race ... advances for space exploration help us down here ...
Re:He's right (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
And he was pretty much spot on. The Boeing 777, the various Aibuses (Airbusi?), the LHC all owe quite a bit to the management structures developed for Apollo. Our ability to organize tens of thousand of human beings doing very complex things (not just picking up rocks in one place and dropping them in another) really took a big jump during Apollo.
And then jumped a couple of steps back when Gantt charts became popular, but that's another story.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, considering that "bad roads and failing bridges" generally comes out of State budgets, and "sending humans to Mars" would come out of Federal budgets, I'm not seeing anything mutually exclusive about the two.
Sort of like my neighbor choosing to put in a pool doesn't actually impact me buying a new car....
Re: (Score:2)
You have no idea of the amount of Federal subsidies for those things. Even the one million dollar new bike path in my town was built mostly with federal money
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you. You put your finger precisely on what enrages thinking people about runaway federal pork. Build your own goddam bike path.
Trump makes sense again? (Score:5, Insightful)
> In other words, dreams of going to Mars must take a back seat to more Earthly concerns. It is not an answer many space exploration supporters want to hear.
That sounds perfectly sane. Sending people to Mars now, is a waste of resources. We send probes, probes tell us basically what we already know (its slightly less inhospitable than say...Venus) and we learn some new details about the inhospitable conditions. Artificial Intelligence or Genetically Engineered creatures to send to Mars is a much more efficient approach. Let's get that working on Earth, first and we can talk about the myriad of inhospitable places that open up. That's very long term thinking, which is part of what space exploration is about. I don't think Trump supposes to know anything about long term technological viability. He just happens to be on the right side of this.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Time to cancel way to many US Gov't programs that DON'T WORK!
Start w/the Dept. of Education. -- State & local control of schools worked just fine before Carter.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Absodamnlutely. Run over with a bulldozer all of the departments which do nothing. The Department of Agriculture doesn't grow a damn thing, and that's none of the Feds' business anyway - 134 billion. The Department of Labor doesn't get a single person a productive job, and that's none of the Feds' business anyway - 138 billion. The Department of Education doesn't educate anybody, and that's none of the Fe
Re: (Score:2)
...He just happens to be on the right side of this.
Sometimes he gets lucky and the words coming out of his mouth make sense.
Re: (Score:2)
I think our first major offworld outposts should be space stations built out of raw materials extracted from asteroids. We can control the atmosphere, the environment, crucially the gravity, expand that living space forever as the population grows, and the raw materials are in complete abundance. Going to Mars to establish colonies will look nothing like the wild west, and will probably be much more difficult than establishing stations in space.
Re:Trump makes sense again? (Score:5, Interesting)
What really bothers me about "solve the problems on Earth first" logic is that if we do that we're never leaving this rock.
21 TRILLION dollars has been spent to eradicate poverty. Over 40 years on there's been very little impact of the Great Society program to actually eliminate poverty.
Imagine, just imagine what 21 TRILLION could have done if spent on space exploration. We'd likely have moonbases, footprints on Mars, asteroid bases, much quicker international travel, large space stations. 21 Trillion is a lot of fucking money. We basically wasted it trying to solve poverty with handouts. I know that sounds harsh, but the numbers don't lie. We didn't fix poverty, I believe there is no way in hell that spending that money on space exploration wouldn't have had a much much greater impact on society.
Another comment mentioned the National and World pride derived from accomplishing very difficult feats like landing on the moon. That value, while not being economically measurable is something that truly does move humanity along and make people understand that for some things, we're all in this together. And I really think that is likely a more valuable outcome that the direct spending of money on poverty.
I'd like to see a comparison (Score:2)
In all honesty, at 41 years old, I think I'll be long dead before either is a reality.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
You could have saved your breath. I know exactly where you're coming from. Your wild hand waving is entirely expected and predictable regular right wing propaganda as old as the universe. I said, make it two way. Borders are global "Jim Crow". They define racism and bigotry, in addition to the revenue they generate. I guess I have to repeat once again, save your silly politics for the believers in the echo chamber, and see your aspirations of supremacy for what they are. The veneer has worn off. Anybody wit
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I'd like to see a comparison (Score:4, Insightful)
The Berlin Wall was built by East Germany to keep people from leaving not to keep invaders out.
The real problem not being discussed is you can either have open borders or a welfare state. You can't have both for long.
Wrong focus as usual... (Score:2)
We are not getting off this rock anytime soon... (Score:2)
At least not in any meaningful way. Forget about colonization in any way that allows many people that want to leave for at least a century. It is also quite possible that the colonization of America will remain an unique event, and nothing even remotely similar will be happening again, ever.
Re: (Score:3)
How's the colonization of America an unique event? People walked across the Bering land bridge when they had the chance just like they walked into Europe and Asia. They may have had boats as well like the people who colonized Australia probably did and the people who colonized many islands definitely did.
Now an unique event would be colonizing Antarctica, something much easier then Mars but still needing quite a bit of technology beyond fire, canoes and spears
Surprise only to loyalists like samzenpus (Score:3)
much to the surprise of one and all, has become the front-runner for the Republican nomination for president
It doesn't surprise me at all that Trump is in the lead. He represents everything that the republicans keep saying they want. Now they have it and they don't know how to get rid of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Republican voters want someone who does the things Trump says. The Republican establishment want someone who can lose to Hillary and keep them in Congress for another eight years.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When necessary they certainly do! They bail out the banks, pry into our communications, make defense contractors rich with chronic warfare, I have seen them act very fast when big money calls in their cards. Congress is performing exactly as expected. With 96% reelection rates, it can't be seen any other way. Otherwise all the campaign money and other bribes will go to somebody more complaint. And of course the voters blindly will follow along and vote in the 'new' boss, complain, and reelect him until he's
limitation is not financial (Score:3)
The limitation is not financial. Space exploration isn't expensive compared to other large infrastructure projects. Space exploration is very difficult and really exciting to work on. Given the opportunity, it could suck the attention and political talent away from domestic infrastructure projects.
In the upper levels of the government, there are a handful of roles from which a person can realistically manage the combination of congressional and bureaucratic oversight necessary to get "large" things done. If we're going to Mars, the director of NASA needs to be a superstar with a ton of facetime with Congress. That person can be the "visionary" science expert in Washington, or the "establishment" expert in Washington, but he can't "just" be a good administrator.
Chuck Bolden is a great guy, but he's not calling up his personal friends in the VC community like Arati Prabhakar (DARPA director and current "visionary" expert) or playing a key role in high stakes international diplomacy like Ernest Moniz (Sectretary of Energy and current "establishment" expert). Both of those administrators specialize in military related work. As long as the focus in Congress (and the media) is defense, it's going to be hard to break into that scientific leadership role focusing on anything but defense.
Re: (Score:2)
yes we use probes instead of manned craft so that is true.
there are many unsolved problems of humans going to Mars that make it absurd to attempt now. There are problems facing us in the near term that solving would not only benefit humans on earth but would solve some of those issues of Mars trip too.
For example, pursuing promising fusion reactor designs instead of the dead end of Tokomak including ITER sinkhole.
Sounds reasonable (Score:2, Funny)
The Earth is flat, and Mars is a light on the firmament. We cannot "go there". His priorities seem to align with common sense.
See Parallax's "Earth not a Globe": http://www.sacred-texts.com/ea... [sacred-texts.com]; also Youtube channels for Eric Dubay, Mark Sargent, Matt Boylan, Jeranism, and others.
The truth is getting out. Great to see Trump aligning with it, even if he isn't directly stating it.
Why does he make sense? (Score:2)
Hate to say it but seems like 80% of what he proposes actually makes sense. As opposed to the 20% of what the other candidates say.
What kind of a non-story is that? (Score:3)
Seriously, I really expected something more from him than stock answer #202, namely "Yeah, I think $topic is a good idea but we should get our act together first".
This, ladies and gentlemen, is a non-answer from a politician. This answer fits any question, any topic, anything. That's neither a commitment nor a dismissal. It is, essentially, nothing.
*sigh* This campaign is going to be a long one if they already start with the empty statements in the primaries.
Re: (Score:3)
Reality TV star Donald Trump advising us on space exploration...who could possibly object to that?
He could hardly do worse than Congress, with its insane, unaffordable Porklauncher.
Besides, there's no way in hell the US government is going to be funding a trillion dollar NASA trip to Mars. The first people there will be tourists flying on their own dime, at vastly lower cost.
The funny part is that he thinks modern America has the ability to fix its broken infrastructure. Things that could be built in months a century ago would take a decade or more of environmental studies before anyone even started wor
Re: (Score:3)
Honestly, the biggest problem is financial cost.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You seriously underestimate the ability of government to stick its nose in no matter what.
Just ask the people in Colorado how they like their new Arsenic flavored water
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Oh dear (Score:5, Insightful)
You are entirely neglecting the fact that the reason the toxins are there is from mining by a private corporation that never cleaned up its mess. But EPA bad, corporation good, right?
Moron
Re:Oh dear (Score:4, Insightful)
Honestly, the biggest problem is financial cost.
There's plenty of cash hogtied up in the derivatives markets. And there is over 4.5 trillion in "excess reserves". Personally, I'd rather see it used for California desalination plants, but whatever. Like the water itself, the money is just not where we need it. It is being used to fix the toilet on somebody's yacht.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, the biggest problem is the lack of political will and the required cutback in pork and military spending.
Re: (Score:2)
Since a trip within the solar system including Mars is not an "interstellar" one, perhaps your level of ignorance is on the order of your pickles and Trump might be wiser than you
Re: (Score:3)
"just too revealing for your tastes" (Score:3)
If ever a man's hairstyle told you absolutely all you needed to know, that hairstyle was Trump's. A ridiculous bit of follicular folly that successfully underscores the naked scalp from which it attempts to distract.
It's Summer. Donald is Me First & the Gimme Gimmes [youtube.com] filling air time before the real campaign begins.
Of course, I don't dispute that he could be a total false flag operation
Re: (Score:3)
More than half of H-1B visas are issued for the program's lowest allowable wage level, and more than eighty percent for its bottom two. Raising the prevailing wage paid to H-1Bs will force companies to give these coveted entry-level jobs to the existing domestic pool of unemployed native and immigrant workers in the U.S., instead of flying in cheaper workers from overseas.
Seems reasonable.