[noch]

> If you think it's about money you haven't understood the real issues.

Incidentally, and obviously, I completely agree with you.

And aside: People who think money is an actual limitation often sound to me like people who've never issued shares or been in a conversation with a municipality issuing debt. Money is literally not an impediment and I don't think money is an issue except to the extent that I was dragged into an argument about it.

You'll recall I spoke of "wealth", as completely distinct from "money". Of course you already know the distinction as you've alluded to it in your own post.

I'm interested in all the wealth that will be generated.

[lproven]

> I'm interested in all the wealth that will be generated.

Changing the name does not change the point.

I suggest you go read Iain M Banks's Culture novels.

You will have fun, because they are wonderful, but you will also learn what a civilisation that has moved beyond the concept of "money", "wealth", or "payment" would be like.

In brief: better in every imaginable way.

It is not about money.

[michaelmrose]

Money is a representation of actual resources. There aren't enough public resources in excess to fund a meaningful mars colony and do the things that the government is required to do to avoid dissolution or getting dragged out of the people's house.

It will be a stretch to justify a scientific expedition without trying to build a city on mars.