Is it really necessary to send humans to those places just to get the knock-on benefits? Couldn’t we do those things directly, without going there?
It seems to me that, today, those who have the money to spend on these endeavors would only do so if there were perceived short-term benefits to themselves. That means they plan to exploit the resources, or increase their own power somehow.
I know the good engineers that make this happen are doing it for the challenge and in the pursuit of knowledge, and I know that’s why we poors support it, but that doesn’t “pay the bills.” What is the motivation behind the money? Why are they really doing this?
It’s scientifically priceless. For instance, a permanent space telescope/excavation base on the dark side of the moon would be incredible.
…But realistically, post 2026, that should be handled by drones. Doubly so for expeditions to other celestial bodies.
The people pushing for human habitation in space aren’t really technical; they don’t have a good scientific background. But they think they are because they’ve seen some sci-fi, maybe they hold some high office, and their egos are the size of the moon.
They’re also surrounded by bubbles telling them they are right.
There was similar financial angst around the Apollo Program, FYI. The political question was “why didn’t that money go to social programs instead?”
I’m against that. I think the space race was scientifically priceless. But… TBH, I think funding winding down made sense, too.
But that should be distinct from the more recent flights of fancy. Let me be clear: humans (as we exist now) living in space makes zero sense, no matter how much we don’t want that to be the case. It certainly won’t fix any Earth problems.