[snip]
The following is from a great book by A.K. Dewdney: Yes, We Have no Neutrons.
The formula is N = R* x Fp x Ne x Fl x Fi x Fc x L
For which:
R* = number of new stars that form in our galaxy each year
Fp = fraction of stars having planetary systems
Ne = average number of life-supporting planets per star
Fl = fraction of those planets on which life develops
Fi = fraction of life forms that become intelligent
Fc = fraction of intelligent beings that develop radio
L = average lifetime of a communicating society
The formula has appeared in several popular science magazines with the values set to:
N = 10 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 0.01 x 0.1 x L
So, N = 0.01 x L
The only numbers in the formula which anything other than a guess can be made are R* and L. Based on current observations most set R* at 10. Everything else in the formula would be a wild guess, except for L. More is known about L than any other part of the formula, since we are a communication society. Since we receive more and more of our communication from satellites, cable, and the internet, we are broadcasting less and less away from the earth. In the near future we will likely go dark as a significant source of radio/broadcast signals capable of being detected from space. If we say that our source of signals is about 100 years, drop the 100 back into the formula and you get 1. That must be us.
You have a slight units error in your analysis.
R* x Fp x Ne results in the number of new life supporting planets *per year*.
Multiplying the next three terms (Fl x Fi x Fc) gives us the fraction (or probablility) of those planets that will eventually have intelligent life.
So, to get the number of coexisting societies per galaxy, you can more or less take the number of new societies per year and multiply by the number of years during which those societies will be able to detect each other (L). The number of new detectable societies (with your wildly optimistic probabilities
That's not 1 technological society ever, that's an average of one in existence for any given year, in our galaxy.
There can be many many civilizations that rise and fall, and never know each other, over the course of billions of years.
Tinfoil glasses
Spending has gone up with both parties in control of the presidency or the congress. The main difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Democrats raise taxes when they spend more, but the Republicans don't. Here's a nice write-up on the national debt over the years:
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm
Unfortunately, he doesn't provide inflation-adjusted graphs, which would be interesting.
This is one thing I find funny about "political sloganism" - the Republicans always talk about "tax and spend Democrats", but never talk about the fact that the republicans are the "don't tax but spend anyway" party. As an individual you can't spend money if you don't make money, and there's no reason for the government to be any different. (and many reasons for the government to be the same - read "The Creature From Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin for a lot of interesting information about how the financial system works)
The following statement is not true. The previous statement is true.