Maybe now we can stop this nonsense of competing among each other and start dedicating efforts to an international space program.
replies(2):
There was this post on HN that life can't be given to mars for 99.99% and even if it could, it would be the most miserable life with only 1-2 decades. It isn't self sustainable as people imagine it to be.
So all we have is, is this Earth & our fellow human beings & instead of treating each other with basic necessities like housing, education , healthcare.
Also these things, in my opinion of researching the space and giving housing, they aren't mutual. They can both be done but even if they are mutual,I would personally pick housing any day, because what point is of space, what point is of going to outer space some day and living shit there if humans are currently living shit here as well.
Regarding Housing, I think it can easily be fixed and so much more like how we say tax the rich, if we could just tax lands.
Because people think of land as some "asset" and that they "own it" ,when in actuality, I might argue that land is the only thing that I personally think the govt. has any right over. So I personally believe that we are better off taxing land so that these pesty landlords who get rich off of the housing crisis can really just suffer so much that the lands would just be productive and not speculative , reducing the price of lands down and even rents down till the point housing is way more favourable.
Its a net win to everybody except those pesty landlords & maybe "investors" or people who bought housing pre-georgism because they might now believe that its unfair to them? Still I think that georgism is pretty flexible and this could be sorted out in such a way that it would have been less controversial and more net positive to the Society than the latest tariffs fiasco, though people didn't vote for housing, they voted for tariffs.