These people weren't even doing that. I'm not sure yet what they were doing and if their lives were spent on anything significant. The moon can't be colonized in any important way and Mars is too cold. One thing we've learned is there are physical limitations, we've learned there is no oxygen in those places.
Interesting concept, but this has little to do with the Space Shuttle Program, which at the present time seems to be an anachronism looking for a purpose.
We have proven men can go into space and survive for some period of time. We did that long ago. We have proven men could get to the moon and back. We did that long ago.
What we have not proven is either the utility or desireabilty of colonization. Perhaps there is a good and economic rationale for it, but if there is, I haven't seen it and nobody seems to be mentioning it, even for a huge government money-pot. If it were a feasible and practical program with some genuine commercial or military application, the moon would be presently covered with people.
Space is an extremely unforgiving and hostile place for human life, as is any known planet you can mention. Who will fund it, and why? Good Ole Money Bags Uncle Sam, who already has us so deeply in debt we are unlikely to ever get out?
Human colonization is a hugely costly project. But, until good reasons are given to do it, it is unlikely to happen except as a publicity stunt or some moss-gathering scientific works/welfare program. Why have we never colonized the ocean floor, which is a whole lot closer, accessible and holds a lot more promise of material return than the moon?
As exciting a prospect as colonization may seem, it belies reality but not because it ultimately can't be done. Given enough time and resources it can. But there is really no good commercial or military purpose to do it at this time or in the forseeable future or we would be headed in that direction already. We have plenty of resources and room here on Earth (despite the desperate cries of the environmentalists) and we are unlikely to ever send our "excess" population to Mars or need its iron or gold, if it even has any. We can get all we need of that from the remaining 70% of the Earth we have barely explored, much less developed.
Robotics presently seems the way to go into space, because the technology is there and it is cheaper and less cumbersome than manned exploration. Generally, man is just an expensive hinderance for most purposes.
Humans in space should be there where there is a defined purpose and a good reason to spend the money. Otherwise, it is just another giant public-works project using emotion as a rationale to continue. As somebody aptly pointed out previously, we are now using our precious resources in this program for such publicity stunts as catapulting teachers and aged Senators into space for no seemingly good reason except to feel warm and politically-correct cuddly.
This entire Shuttle Program needs to justify it's current and future status and goals before it should be allowed to continue spending more of our borrowed billions which if piled up could reach to the moon and colonize it!
The fact a 35 year old program currently exists in a particular form is not a good enough reason. We could say the same thing about all of our money sucking "social welfare" programs too - and in fact do, to our economic and social sorow!
Perhaps the current manned program is just a monstrous aerospace industry and geek boondoggle trying to hold our increasingly scarce national technological resources together? Fine. Then let's admit it and use it to our best advantage. But let's not blindly follow along the same ruts Westward just because the last wagon train went that way. Those ruts could dead-end somewhere in the Donner Pass if we don't really have a clue where we're headed!