Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
This week, Lileks is on vacation, so we forgo the guests and open the floor to you, our faithful Ricochet listeners. We get questions on the President (natch), Rob’s favorite restaurant, which Founding Father the founders resemble, who the characters on Cheers would have voted for and more. Also, Cuomo is a dumbo, newspapers collude, and so long to the Queen of Soul. R.E.S.P.E.C.T. 🙌
Music from this week’s podcast: People Get Ready by Aretha Franklin (with The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra)
Subscribe to The Ricochet Podcast in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
Boll & Branch
Use Code: RICOCHET
The right sheets can take your sleep and your style to the next level. With Boll and Branch, that upgrade has never been more affordable. Go to BollandBranch.com and use promo code RICOCHET to get $50 off your first set of sheets plus free shipping in the U.S.
I like these podcasts where you take questions, but I wish you would do just that, and not start with 20 minutes or more of talking about other things.
Like this:
“Welcome to a special ‘ask the founders’ episode of Ricochet. Our first question comes from…”
I think this is silly. If you don’t like the format, don’t listen. Others do.
I re-listened just for fun, and started fuming again.
Going to Mars would take decades and cost trillions of dollars, eh?
I suspect the brilliant Mr Robinson doesn’t know, would not suspect, and would not believe if told, that the complete total of NASA budgets since their founding – including all the Mercury and Gemini and Apollo missions, the moon landings, Skylab, the shuttle, ALL OF IT – is only about $500 billion.
Over a period of SIXTY YEARS!
Which again paid for all the Mercury and Gemini and Apollo missions, the moon landings, Skylab, the shuttle, ALL OF IT!!!
For SIXTY YEARS!!!
Would you like to try again, Mr Robinson?
NASA is more than manned spaceflight. They’ve done good things, even recently, with robotic spacecraft.
Why does what a speechwriter and interviewer says about “going to Mars” get you “fuming?” Really? I’m a science fiction writer. I have written people much further away than Mars. Does that make you go all tingly inside? Peter’s a nice guy. If I were writing a speech, and Peter expressed an opinion, I would listen closely. I may or may not decide to incorporate his advice into the speech, but I would certainly listen. But even on that subject, I would not get emotional about Peter’s advice. So, Peter has an opinion of government funding of science and scientific expeditions? Well, he has seen the inside of government, and might understand government funding and waste better than some. But science? I’m not going to be surprised if Peter says something about science that is not even wrong. Why would you invest emotion in anything he says? Why would you invest emotion in anything that anyone on the Internet or television says?
If you don’t have one, you need a wife to calm you down. Preferably a redhead.
The way NASA would do a Mars mission, Mr Robinson is correct.
Every time a reasonable proposal for a Mars mission comes up for public debate, NASA administrators find some tangential research project that ‘must’ be solved be for a Mars mission could be contemplated. (Robert Zubrin calls these conditional preparation missions “Toll Booths”) NASA argues for delay, for technology, for research, for testing. Without even blushing at the 40 years they spent in earth orbit doing research, testing and developing technology.
Why NASA is Stagnant
The toughest part of going to Mars is first reforming NASA to be capable of managing the program. The NASA that landed men on the moon has been dead for decades.
Let’s go back to genesis: The question was “Should we spend a lot of money to go find out (if there is water and/or life on Mars)?” A one word answer was requested and Peter said “No.”
This leaves lots of room for legitimate and interesting discussion. I first brought up the issue of gov’t or private funding. Obviously there is the matter of defining “a lot of money.” (Apparently, Mars advocate kedavis doesn’t have enough; he wants to use Peter’s and mine against our will.) The economic question of opportunity costs is raising itself. Since it wasn’t specified, there might naturally be a discussion of why humans are needed on the mission if robots alone can accomplish it. Even the question “Who do you mean by ‘we’?” makes me wonder why we can’t just let the Chinese pay for it. Surely they would share the wealth of knowledge gained.
Importantly, it is helpful to remember that most of the personal preferences expressed on this topic here are subjective. For some people, Mars exploration would be a dream come true. Others, indeed, most people, don’t care about it at all. And they don’t owe anyone reasons or apologies for disagreeing.
I am not as optimistic on this, but otherwise quite like and agree with your comment.
When Rob Long was asked a kind of similar out-of-his-field question, he basically said “I’m the wrong person to ask, it’s not my field.” Peter never seems to do that. If he would present himself as JUST an interviewer and speech writer, and skip trying to present an informed, intelligent position on subjects he knows nothing about, it wouldn’t be an issue. Or at least not much of one. Because I’m sure some people would still assume he has good information and sound judgment in many areas where it simply isn’t true. And he proves it on a regular basis.
So you’re one who believes that if some particular expenditure doesn’t suit you personally, it’s inherently invalid on a national basis? That doesn’t seem to get much traction these days, except among the “Free Men” who usually seem to end up in jail, or worse.
Jolly joker.
And don’t call me (or the Chinese) Shirley.
I hope you’re just mocking Peter’s “agreement” with someone’s silly grandmother, previously.
You know what I just realized? Buildings should not have elevators. They just go up, and back down. Nothing is accomplished.
Also, indoor plumbing should be outlawed. It wastes water. Outhouses are the way to go. (ar ar! Earth humor.)
Wow suddenly I feel very wise!
I was also going to add this 2015 editorial that estimated the cost of a Mars program of 9 crews landing on Mars of between $1.5Trillion and $2Trillion.
Even in government accounting thats real money – over 18 years. (9 crews, launch windows are every 26 months)
https://spacenews.com/op-ed-mars-for-only-1-5-trillion/
Meanwhile, If NASA’s budget had only kept up with inflation from 1978, to $80 billion/year now, over 18 years that comes to almost 1.5 trillion.
It’s so sad. And yet there are some people who manage to somehow believe that, what amounts to a 75% cut in real dollars, is still spending too much.
These belong here, too:
Christopher Columbus:
King Peter Robinson: “No.”
John Fitzgerald Kennedy:
President or Senator or whatever, Peter Robinson: “No.”
Ferdinand and Isabella turned him down the first time. Henry VII of England turned him down. I believe a few others did as well, before Ferdinand and Isabella finished the Reconquista and finally said yes.
Meaning what? It’s okay for Presidents Clinton, George W, Obama, and Trump to say no, as long as president Chelsea Clinton or president Max Headroom says yes, eventually? Either way it still means the “No’s” were basically wrong, and they knew it.
Important Announcement Concerning The Ricochet Podcast
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Based on popular demand, going forward, the producers and talent of the Ricochet Podcast have decided to forgo the mix of guests, topics, and opinion that has served the show well for 412 episodes and will now ONLY discuss manned missions to Mars. The new format of the show will be as follows:
LILEKS: Welcome everybody! Peter, do you think the Federal Government should finance a mission to Mars?
ROBINSON: No.
LILEKS: Rob, do you have an opinion in this?
LONG: Is that a segue?
LILEKS: See you in the comments, everybody! Good night!
We hope you enjoy the re-booted Ricochet Podcast starting this week.
Nicely done! :-)
I didn’t know you had it in you, Scott. 😁
That is the active end of the program. With test flights, development and engineering schedule it could take a decade (or more) to get to that point. (especially the way NASA drags its feet on anything Mars related) The entire program would cost well over $2 Trillion, over maybe 25 years.
That works out to $80 billion/year, which is where NASA’s budget should be anyway to keep even with 1978, in constant dollars.
But the other big option is to allocate the funds and buy many of the services from SpaceX etc, which would be much faster and much cheaper. Right?
Did anyone else notice that the actual question that was asked on the podcast was *not* about Mars – it was about (I don’t recall the exact wording) whether they’re surprised by what sparks conversation on the site, with the Mars issue just being an example of a throwaway aside on a previous podcast.
Peter took the opportunity to to explain his mars position, and then they never got back to the actual question and moved on to the next one.
Yes, but you see the problem?
An extended program requires consistent political support and consistent guidance. NASA changes administrators every 4 years. Because NASA purposefully politically engineered itself, its at the constant whim of politicians.
Launching a 30 year program that will cost well over $2 Trillion, we’re back to the 90 day report. It’ll have no political support, spending billions on a project that wont see results for 20 years? Maybe this is why we dont build truly massive mega projects anymore. We wont start something that will not be completed in our lifetimes. (or careers at least)
This is the thought process that led Robert Zubrin to write the “Case for Mars” and the “Mars Direct” plan.
You’re right. They didnt answer the question. We’re all distracted over space exploration.
We have more debt than ever and just recently the actual volume of interest we pay out is the highest ever. I say we need some ROI on government spending pronto or the Fed is going to “pay” for everything some day.
Not all of us.
You’re not going to ever get any ROI on welfare, social security, etc. Space research, on the other hand…
I’ll take your word for it. We need a lot of ROI, obviously. #GOSPLAN
Good lord.
Reading this thread you’d think that Peter Robinson was solely in charge of setting and disbursing NASA’s annual budget.