how can the political system will react when we start mining asteroids and archieve post scarcity of minerals and metals?
>>79901894
Suppose it really depends on who gets there first. If it's a state sponsored organization like NASA, they won't have to react, they'll be in control.
If it's a private company, we're all fucked. So, incredibly fucked. Picturing Chinese factories, but in space, where your boss controls the route to and from Earth.
>>79901894
>flying a rocket to a giant hunk of rock to mine metals in outer space
>"""post-scarcity"""
Resources aren't free, you'd think your shithole country would teach you that.
>>79903084
a single 2 meter asteroid holds the year production of earth.
a 1km could power earth consumption by centuries.
there's one asteroid that could power humans by millions of years.
how's that not post scarcity?
>>79903259
Because you still have to expend tons of energy to get there, mine the materials, and bring it back, you dumb fuck. If it were as simple as you make it out to be we'd have done it a long time ago.
>>79903543
we have the technology now.
we can solve the entire scarcity of resources by only mining a couple of them.
>>79903655
dude we dont need metals we need power. and no, we still need up to 20 years to start nuclear fusion power plants on earth.
>>79901894
>post-scarcity
kys commie scum
There isnt all that much scarcity in developed countries as it is.
Communist central planning is holding back economies. They are like a raging inferno reduced to barely a simmer by the chains of government.
If the US economy were fully unleashed we'd have an unprecedented utopian abundance.
>>79903543
>implying we'd bring it back
Space colonies anon
>>79908656
It doesn't matter where it goes, you still have to produce the energy to push raw materials out and around gravity wells. If it requires a significant amount of energy to obtain, it's not post-scarcity, and the laws of physics require it to take a significant amount of energy.
'Scarcity' is a liberal economic construct, it doesn't actually exist in the world. I'd assume that extraterrestrial mining operations would likely scale to our existing and future markets, with very little difference made to the average consumer.
>>79901894
There is no scarcity of metals and minerals, never has been
The way mining works you mine the easiest to get to and process stuff first, because it's cheapest to get therefor most profitable
When you "run out" it's like people who say we are running out of oil because Saudi Arabia has limited reserves
But that sky is falling shit never took fracking from shle oil or tar sands into account
That oil was always there too, just not profitable as long as OPEC controlled massive reserves that were incredibly cheap to extract
Price goes up you start working more expensive reserves
Metals are same way
There are thousands of proven gold reserves for instance that are left dormant till price hits point the mines are profitable
Asteroid mining (more likely mars mining actually) is far down line step in this process
When prices rise enough to justify cost we just take that next step
>>79901894
Realistically if we are post scarcity and the Elites want to stay in control?
>Medicine
There would be a widespread and horrifying plague that killed tens of millions. No cure could be found but a treatment kept the illness from becoming fatal if taken every few days or so.
>>79908865
>>79908978
mining asteroids is now cheaper than going to the moon.
>>79909072
>tens of millions
china has aborted 400 million babies because of their one child policy.
By pointing out that the energy invested in such operations is far higher than what we can possibly gain from it, and that it is as such is a very fleeting solution.
It's like shale-gas except literally no one believes it solves anything.
>>79908978
This. In the 70s, Paul and Jan Ehrlich (greens) had a contest with a libertarian economics professor (forget his name). They named ten resources (like copper) that they predicted would becone unavailable in ten years. They lost on every single point.
>>79909217
Tens of millions of white people anon.
>>79909129
Jesus Christ, shut up. It doesn't matter how cheap you think it is, if it takes energy to capture all you've done is move the scarcity from one commodity to another. RESOURCES ARE NOT FREE. r-strategists should be dragged into the street and shot.
You know there are loads of resource rich areas on Earth itself the elites have marked off limits. Such as Antarctica. According to Byrd that place has everything yet not one company is allowed to mine there. Face the game is already rigged long before asteroid mining will ever be a thing.
>>79909542
so your argument is that space colonization is a bad idea?
>>79909072
"No cure can be found."
It can and it will. Theres billions of people on the planet. Not only would someone find a cure, the cure would be mass produced in no time and the "elites" would get utterly BTFO.
Economics is more powerful than some old guy pretending to be powerful. Human nature is more powerful than some dumb libtard with money. You cant stop progress.
>>79909759
No, you dense motherfucker, my argument is that mining asteriods isn't magically going to solve the problem of scarcity.
>>79909870
>He thinks AIDs and HEP C are incurable
You are adorably misguided.
>>79909917
One single small asteroid of the sizes of a house contains more minerals that what we have mined in history.
An asteroid the sizes of a human has the market value of 3-5 billions.
Don't you think that will lower the prices of such minerals?
>>79910265
once we get there. it will be a slow, arduous crawl to a sustained harvest of these resources
we arent turning an energetic profit on the first couple trips, itll be the first couple dozen if not more
>>79909917 is essentially correct
If we could bring massive amounts of water and minerals from space it would be much better for our environment. But of course it would be too expensive energetically and economically
>>79910265
>Lowers the prices of iron
It takes more than iron to reach the astroids. It isn't post-scarcity since it takes so much to reach the astroid.
>B-but different astroids will have more of other minerals
Very few astroids have oil, uranium, and all that good stuff. Additionally do you have any idea how costly it is to
>go to space
>build a mining colony
>supply said colony by sending more stuff to space
>bring limited amount of minerals back each flight
An Astroid may be worth 5 billion but it will take 4 billion to mine it.
>>79910150
>he thinks that disease wont eventually be eradicated due to scientific progress
Sure if you ignore all of recorded history.
People who project resource shortages and fictitious diseases and disasters in the future are like smug aristocrats in the 1800's predicing that 50mph was the absolute impassable speed limit, and that we'd all be flying in hot air balloons in the futute to work.
All while being completely blind and oblivious to the coming telecommunicatipns revolution, nano tech, space flight, automobiles and supersonic aircraft, and so on.
You cant even conceive of the technology yet to come, yer you make small minded predictions.
Like a caveman worried about what will happen when all the mammoths go extinct and theres no more meat. Or a shortage of spears.
>>79910150
>Implying the government isn't withholding the cure
>>79910517
there's an asteroid that has a market value of over 2.5 Trillion dollars.
there's one single asteroid that could power current humans for millions of years.
>>79910757
>few
>millions of them
>>79910836
>implying the government is that competent when they couldnt even cover up Roswell properly.
>>79910814
But bacteria and viruses evolve just like humans. Unless you could kill every single harmful virus and bacterium in a matter of seconds, diseases will always be a thing. (Albeit we could reduce the effect of them and some can be prevented with vaccinations) Even then some benign bacteria could evolve into harmful bacteria.
>>79910915
I guess I should have said few in the solar system. Because I can assure you, it wouldn't even be worth it to try to go outside the solar system for these resources at this point. Maybe in a thousand years.
>>79911251
>10% of asteroids are filled with rare earth minerals
>few
>when there's thousands of them that are discovered
>we have only discovered 2% of possible asteroids
>all the problems of the world are solved now that iphones have cheap nerd metals inside them
fuck off
>>79903543
>he thinks we won't have robots that do all that for free
>implying we our economic won't be entirely robotic in 50 years
>implying we won't soon all be neet masterrace
>>79911600
>oil becomes irrelevant
>suddenly saudi arabia collapses
>no more isis backed shit
>world peace
>>79901894
We'll have space communism
Basically star trek
>>79903543
why do you have to be rude? are you a fucking nigger? cant ahve a comfy thread because the ameri fucking nigger will come with his overdosis of savage genes chimping out on everyone
fuck off faggot
"resources aint free" well arent you a genius. stupid baboon
>>79911393
>Time and resources it takes to get there in the first place
>Only a limited amount can be taken back each time
>IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM
>Outside the solar system might as well be non-existent at this point
Granted I just went onto the NASA website and there are an estimated 1.1 to 1.9 million asteroids are in the Solar system. However the quantity of rare earth metals in asteroids where it is present is not usually a lot. Additionally I doubt there is even oil on any asteroids since there is nothing organic on them. Finally to hammer in the point that it is really fucking hard to colonize an asteroid the closest passing asteroid this year is over 100,000 kilometers away and the average surface temperature of an asteroid is -73 Celsius. And keep in mind the modern space crafts can only carry so much back and forth every flight so we won't be taking the whole asteroid in one flight
>>79912001
Do I need to come down there and take my canal back?
>>79912346
Oh wait I fucked up the closest passing asteroid this year is only 27,000 km away. still a lot but a far cry from 100,000
>>79912346
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzDxKMlWXeo
you need to update your info.
it would still be cheaper than landing on the moon, and much easier.
also it would be simpler technologycally than current mining on earth.
>>79912567
Can you give me the tl;dr of that video?
>>79912433
you cant even go down and touch your toes you fat dumb amerinigger
drink this
>>79901894
That really isn't the issue at present. The issue is more of the labor, expertise, and technology needed to produce finished goods.
>>79912655
Sounds like someone's angry about being a glorified toll booth.
>>79903259
>still falling for post scarcity meme
water isn't scarce but people still pay billions a year for it. That's because it takes effort and manpower to bring it to the end user. Things will always have a cost, the best case scenario is that costs are significantly reduced.
>>79901894
the exact same fucking way it does now
>>79912627
I'm just starting it.
dude, we have the technology.
we've gotten robots into mars, many of such asteroids are closer.
it's cheaper than landing on the moon.
simpler technologycally than making a new mine on earth.
>>79912655
I use this to degrease my bike chain
>>79912567
Also
>Cheaper than landing on the moon
>Building a mining colony requiring high cost, high expertise, high safety standards, etc.
>And then having to continuously supply it
I don't know about that. And even then every space craft you send up to get the minerals requires a fairly large amount of resources to launch, and can only carry back a limited amount of resources.
>>79913064
I get that we have the technology, we could have perfected prosthetics by now. But the cost of each individual flight plus the cost of taking it back may not beat the amount we get back. I agree that space should be the future of humanity but it is a far cry from post scarcity.
>>79901894
>post scarcity from the massive economic cost of getting equipment to an asteroid and bringing it back
>>79902950
>If it's a private company, we're all fucked. So, incredibly fucked. Picturing Chinese factories, but in space, where your boss controls the route to and from Earth.
Fucking this. Companies are the new governments, except they aren't accountable to anyone but themselves. It's a scary future if we go any other way but full Fascism/Socialism by the time post scarcity comes around.
>>79913323
>>79913333
It cost 50k dollars per kg to put in space.
>>79913064
>We have the capacity to carry billions of tonnes of various ores and rare earths that humans consume on a yearly basis
Fuck off
It's not a matter of getting there, it's a matter of bringing meaningful sums back that would be competitively priced to terrestrially mined minerals
Stop being retarded
>>79913599
You'd need to be mining precious metals to get your money back on just getting there, let alone the cost of bringing it back
Not to mention the new sources of metals would cause downward price pressure on the global market.
It's not feasible or competitive, if it was, we'd be doing it. Do you really think that some retard from some backwards country (you) discovered the ultimate solution to scarcity, and that the worlds economic and central planning officials totally overlooked it? Not likely.
>>79913599
I could by a kilogram of platinum for less than that right now. So there is your problem. It costs more to bring something there and back than it is worth on Earth right now.
>>79913665
>>79913987
>>79914011
t. luddites
>>79914722
t. Not an argument
Nobody is saying it isn't possible. Just not with current technology.
>>79914722
They aren't Luddites for telling you that as of RIGHT NOW there is no reason for people to invest in it. All of the minerals that we could bring back you can currently buy on earth for a much lower cost than your $50,000 per kg. What is so hard to understand about that, fampai? Its not about the technology, its about the cost.
>>79915193
Technology is a factor.
Go look at aggregate global mining production for any given year and tell me we've got craft capable of bringing back even a portion in a cost effective method. Go ahead, I'll wait.
>>79915112
>>79915193
most of the investors are people hyped about it and there's not much concern about cost but rather about improving space travel and colonization.
also goverment space agencies and universities.
>>79915369
>Investing not weighing risk and benefits
Yeah, no
Go back to doing something productive and stop being retarded.
>>79915477
>moore's law
>>79915977
Not an argument. Moore's law is an observation on computer chips, not aggregate technological advancement in the LRAS in the worlds economy. Computer processing power and speed isn't even the most relevant, if at all, factor limiting our capacity to harvest resources extra-terrestrially. The real issue with our technology is lack of fuel capacity, fuel efficency, and storage space. Not to mention the size of craft(s) required to mine hundreds of millions to billions of tonnes of ore and ship it back.
Just admit you're wrong and move on, or is the cognitive dissonance that strong? Fucking sub-humans, I swear you're worse than niggers. Or are you just "lol pretending to be retarded xD"
I would start thinking global warming would be an actual short term threat since we are now importing energy to earth.
"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now." - James B. Comey, FBI Director
Related video that I really recommend listening to when you get the chance:
youtube.com/watch?v=HMi072Ae_0w
[
