Home
FAQ
Search
Register
Memberlist
Usergroups
Log in
Clean Slate Society Forum
::
Discussion
::
General Topics
::
Libertarian Ocean Colonies
Post a reply
Username
Subject
Message body
Font color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
White
Black
Font size:
Tiny
Small
Normal
Large
Huge
Fonts:
Default
Arial
Arial Black
Comic Sans Ms
Courier New
Georgia
Impact
Times New Roman
Trebuchet MS
Verdana
Close Tags
Options
Options
HTML is OFF
BBCode
is ON
Smilies are ON
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
Jump to:
Select a forum
|
|--Discussion
|--General Topics
|--Clean Slate Government
|--Clean Slate Economics
|--Clean Slate Technology
|--Free Chat
|--Links
Topic review
Author
Message
Locksley
17.08.09 1:20
It makes it less practical, not unfeasible. It needs to be a Plan B of sorts if we can't find land.
Redsand11j
16.08.09 21:40
I won't argue with the space colonization thing.
However, the high cost, measured in dollars or in actual resources, of ocean platforms makes them infeasible.
Locksley
16.08.09 21:31
Precisely. Ergo colonization of space is the logical next step in human progression.
But to do that, we really could use a new government that has that as its goal, instead of world domination or subjugation of its population.
NoMoreLies
16.08.09 20:30
Having a static amount of land has one fatal flaw: it's like a monopoly game with people entering the game after all the properties been sold off - they've very little chance of winning, or even surviving.
Redsand11j
16.08.09 15:56
And is that totally unfeasible? There are a lot of countries that need money more than they need land.