[dark_lord]

When Columbus and other explorers were exploring, profit was a factor. There was the potential for immediate financial gain. It didn't require Trillions of dollars spent over several years in R & D. Comparing exploration of the Americas to exploration of Mars is like comparing apples and oranges.

I don't agree. There is just as much "potential" for immediate financial gain today as there was then. And it doesn't require "Trillions of dollars spent over several years" today, either -- the key word being require. Consider the dinky boats they launched then, they couldn't haul much cargo back. But they wanted spices or other rare goods of high value. It is perfectly feasible for us to go into space after rare items. But the initial cost is prohibitive for corporations. If you look back in history, private corporations were not funding the initial ventures, and when they got into the game they were given monopolies.

I bet if a corporation was created owned by IBM, Intel, General Motors, Texaco, and Procter & Gamble; and this corporation was then granted complete economic and total economic rights to both the moon and the asteroid belt, and the US government guaranteed to protect that right militarily (think East India Company and Great Britain) that suddenly the economic exploitation of space might get a kick start. The East India Company was very tied to the Empire, and was a major factor in permitting the Empire to exist at all.

[kjam22]

Is there any real evidence that there is any real economic value on the moon or mars? Hard to imagine fossil fuels being there. It costs 300 million to send up a Shuttle. How much do we think it will cost to mine the moon or mars? And at what price would the product have to be worth to make a profit? There are no economics in it.... unless we don't have any of it on this planet. And even then.... the same money spent on synthetics or substitutes makes a lot more sense.