@pusher_robot's banner p

pusher_robot

PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 23:45:12 UTC

				

User ID: 278

pusher_robot

PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS

0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 23:45:12 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 278

There's a chance of this year, but given the current cautious pace, I think next year is a little more likely. BO's pad mishap has removed even the small amount of competitive pressure they were bringing, for now. If the next flight has a successful relight with no issues, they'll go for it on the flight after. If no manufacturing or testing delays, that would probably be later this year. If there are any flight glitches or testing issues, that will slip. The gigabay production facilities nearing completion in both Texas and Florida will mean an increase in flight cadence is very likely in either case.

Small probes are irrelevant next to ~100 tons of soft-landed payloads.

Ironically you won your bet mostly due to SpaceX being so far ahead of the competition they can afford to proceed with much more caution that they previously have. Starship has undoubtedly been capable of achieving orbit for over a year now, each launch deliberately bringing it just under that threshold, and the only reason it hasn't is because SpaceX doesn't want to run the minor risk that an uncontrolled re-entry results. This makes it likely that once they are confident that uncontrolled re-entry is a mitigated risk orbital starship launches will go from "never" to "always".

Adding +1 vote for each child under 18 would also create good incentives and add balancing power to those who choose family over income. I think the problem you describe isn't too large a problem, as market forces would be constantly fighting against it.

This becomes an easier problem to solve if you permit multiple votes per person. Then you could, e.g., divide the total income tax collected by the number of registered voters, and give each voter a number of votes equal to their shares of taxes paid, rounding up, with a minimum of one and a maximum of, say, 10. Rough figures put that share at about $15,000, so for every $15,000 of federal income taxes paid, you get an extra vote, up to 10, which would correspond to an income of around $500K. This would weight the franchise in favor of those with skin in the game without giving wildly disproportionate power to the ultra-wealthy. (This would also have the side benefit of incentivizing cleaning up voter roles, to decrease the denominator of the income contribution and raise the price of additional votes for the wealthy).

You will be protected from the Terrible Secret of Space

It's not just crime and disorder, it's mismanagement in general. Many large cities have very high taxes and struggle to deliver basic civic services beyond safety, like transit, parks, civic maintenance, or public improvements. Every year, things get shittier and worse. Tore out the flowers. Closed up the toilets. Potholes unpatched. Children can't read. Removed the benches. Tore down the statues. Closed the library branch. Closed the public pool. Stopped maintaining the beach. Stopped mowing the grass. No more leaf collection. Let brush overgrow everything. Cut the municipal office hours. Added more sales tax. Added more property tax. Added more income tax. Increased salary and benefits. It's maddening, it never ends.

ETA: Oh yeah! And no more fireworks on the 4th of July!

If we go off the notion that America is a Christian nation with Christian values

It isn't, not anymore if it ever was.

then the US responsibility is really high to help

Only if you accept the hidden premise that the government is a moral avatar of the individuals it governs, which I've seen little basis for in Christian teachings.

those in need

It's not obvious why people on the other side of the planet who are intentionally and willfully giving themselves sexually transmitted diseases would fall into that category. You're wrapping in utilitarian concepts of "need" wherein saving the life of a fool you will never know or meet is a greater "need" than, say, mentoring a young man in your neighborhood so he doesn't end up in prison. And that's putting aside whether most of the help is even reaching those who need it.

Which we can see in how religious charities are some of the most helpful around in the third world.

Indeed, and who funds those I wonder?

Because in the modern day in first world nations, most victim complaints are not real.

Real or not, they are used because they work. You will never convince people to stop whining about being victims as long as rewards - material, social, or political - flow to those who claim victimhood status.

It was obvious by January of this year that committee had no plans to do much of anything at all.