• taladar@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    They are the long-term solution for entirely different scenarios. Space flight in the long term is all about having some part of our species survive in case we screw up Earth completely while fixing things on Earth is what will benefit more people but won’t do anything about the risk of the “all eggs in one basket” situation.

    • julietOscarEcho@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Thus frames the eggs as the humans and the basket as earth. Could easily flip it and say we are stewards of one planet and if we fuck up so catastrophically we have to leave maybe our arrival wouldn’t be the best idea for the next habitable planet we land on…

    • 4oreman
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      ok but both cost money, and id rather survive now then have descendants live on mars

      • taladar@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Compared to most of the things we do as humanity space program budgets are tiny. If you got rid of either the military or the super-rich you could fund everything humanity and the rest of the ecosystem needs down here and have money left over for dozens of space budgets for all of humanity.

        • 4oreman
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m down with that plan : but until then i need the space program to buy my groceries