I think this girl will be there with you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBP6yriRFiQ

I don't get why everyone here thinks that some Rich adventure people are the target market for Golden Spike!

The target is any gov't that wants to do this, but doesn't want to spend all the money on the R&D to do the Rocket. Did anyone read any of the articles?!

Just think how annoyed the Chinese would be if the Japanese got to the Moon first, for a tiny fraction of the money they're spending? And I think the Japanese KNOW IT!

1.4 Billion is not private citizen money. It's Gov't size money. Maybe Huge corporation size money if they can figure a way to get an ROI.

All this talk about someone with a fortune the size of Bill Gate's going to the moon is loony. Getting countries to send some people up for the national prestige is the point. AND I'll bet the guys involved here are thinking that if they can get Japan and a few other countries to buy seats it'll get the US off it's duff and back into the business again of expanding Human Frontiers just the way NASA used to do back in the '60s.

I"ve gotta stick in the video from Neal deGrasse Tyson here on this very topic of "The next big thing"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjY0vqgDMnE

Lots of people talking about hitching a ride with other people doing the research and work are foolish. You do that to catch up, not to lead. If you wait for someone else to pass you so you can follow them, you'll end up at the back of the line.

Docking with the ISS is like going where hundreds have gone before. This is the perfect place for a private business to go. The trail is blazed the risk factors known.

Getting to Mars with people is a whole 'nother thing. I hope he can do it, but I think it will take a lot longer and require a lot more ground work than some people think. I don't doubt he is aware of it, but I do think he's generated a fan boy base that isn't. Because another thing he has said is he wants to go there with NASA. Therefore, his estimates of getting there in 10-15 years if things go well include going there with NASA. If he can't get NASA to help I think it is easy to assume it'll take a bit longer.

Historically it has been governments that have sent out the trail blazers. Private businesses that can't estimate the costs and risks don't bother. They wait until the government has blazed the trail and then follow (East India company for example).

Poke around Youtube for Neil deGrass Tyson for an expansion on that last point. He puts it together very well. And while you're at it, sign the penny4NASA.org petition so NASA has the money go to Mars with Elon.

"and was a jock in college"
Are you saying Kaku's knowledge of Judo disqualifies him?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvxQz8PPSbg

Neil deGrass Tyson answers the question of why we should spend on Space.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQhNZENMG1o

Tyson putting the budget in perspective:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxC4ua2k5xQ

The only other job you could look into is writing computer manuals. Still not going to pay much better than teaching English.

I lived in Taiwan for 3 or 4 years goofing off (teaching English) before I found those kinds of jobs. Other friends of mine took as long to perfect their Chinese before getting a good job. A friend of mine in Japan is doing IT work remotely for a couple US consultants I found him.

So, yeah, your trip to China is not likely to get you much monetary compensation. I'd dive into the language and try to find students who need higher level business/IT English skills. That will get you the contacts and may lead to jobs later down the road.

It is absolutely stunning that Neal deGrass Tyson hasn't been quoted here yet.

Here is a good 5 minute video by him:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQhNZENMG1o

On Innovation while under file by people like you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJBC5rHxYcA

Tyson testifying in front of Congress:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhc25v0DpJc
Pointing out you didn't have to have speical programs trying to convince students to be scientists and engineers "it was self evident."
"Will reboot America's ability to innovate"
"How much would you pay to launch our economy? ... How much would you pay for the Universe?"

If you can spend more than 5 minutes reading you can read his case for space here:
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137277/neil-degrasse-tyson/the-case-for-space

You will have to read through to the end. In this article he only cites one specific cross pollination technology that has saved countless lives of Breast cancer victims. But in other places you can see him citing example after example. Just go down to your local hospital. Check out the MACHINES in the hospital. Which one was made via targeted spending by people with the attitude of "Why spend money up there (or over there in physics) when we could be spending money on health science?" I'll give you a clue: NONE. MRI, Xray machines etc.

Space exploration taps ALL science subjects. They bring everything together.

You ask why should we be spending money up there instead of down here? WE ARE SPENDING MONEY DOWN HERE. How much are we spending "up there?" Do you really know? Most people think it is 5 or 10 cents on every tax dollar. During the space race it was 4 pennies. Today it is less than HALF a penny. Are you really telling me you are unwilling to spend even a penny for the Universe?

The answer to the original question is 'Fing obvious, we'll find resources that aren't in the stinking gravity well!

Why does everyone think anyone would mine an asteroid in order to bring the material back down to earth?!!!!

OMFG! The plan is to build a stinking star base and then a space ship! DUH!

There is a very interesting discussion of realistic space combat from a board game called Attack Vector Tactical.

http://www.adastragames.com/products/adastra/av.html

The tutorial gets into a lot of what is going on and the energy levels required to achieve them.

http://www.adastragames.com/downloads/AVT_Tutorial.pdf

The biggest problem with really engaging in space combat is the energy required and the distances involved. Some of Larry Niven's Man Kzin wars stories (mostly written by other people) get into this a bit. Ships crank up to near C, accelerate a bunch of rocks to hit planets and zip through. You can't see them coming very well and you can't stop the rocks.

David Weber is the most entertaining writer to read. He follows good physics, but the energy output of any of his warships is so unrealistically high a single missile from the smallest Frigate is probably enough to destroy a planet. Seriously, excelerate a ton of mass to .5 C and hit something with it. I don't recall exactly, but missiles in the Honorverse can get pretty darn close to the speed of light. The other problem he has is convincing me that with all this stuff moving this fast that anybody can hit anything. But hey, I've read every book, loved each and everyone and am eagerly awaiting the next one due in March. (and if you search the attack vector tactical web site, they also have a game based on his universe and the AVT movement system)

Really? Have you ever read any of the reports where they ripped Bush and Rumsfeld for even invading Iraq, let alone the total incompetence the Bush administration exhibited during the war? They tore Rumsfeld to shreds nonstop until he finally left, and then some more.

The fact is Stratfor gets accused of being Liberal Pansies, Neo-Con conservatives and everything in between constantly by people who have political axes to grind and are uninterested in understanding how International Relations works and has worked throughout history. When in reality Stratfor simply sticks to the geopolitical theory termed "Realism Theory" (look it up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realism_in_international_relations_theory). If you like, you can review all the IR theories on Wikipidia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_relations_theory. But in the end they you'll find they are simply subsets of Realism.

Oh my, My links to the federal stuff don't work because it's been updated:

http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/fairpay/fs17e_computer.pdf

Which is pretty close to this new Bill it seems (I've not done side by side comparison, and I need to (gasp!) get back to work)

Sorry, I did not pull out my whole war-chest on this, and that's my fault. This particular link was (as you rightly point out) not exactly relevant to the topic. I have done the research and currently IT workers according to Federal law are NON-exempt. My links are buried in Email somewhere. However a little bit of searching will find exactly what I'm talking about.

With a quick Google search (which I should have done, not you), here are a few that are more relevant. I used to have the DOL link, but it is not working now. However, the second link below summarizes from a legal perspective that in California at least, you have to past 6 figures to be exempt.

http://redmondmag.com/articles/2008/12/01/the-help-desk-overtime-bomb-is-ticking.aspx

http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/case/it_overtime.html

I am rather annoyed that the Federal (DOL) stuff I had I can't find now. I've dug through these in the past. All I can find now is for California, but I'm certain I had at one time the links to show for the Federal law too.

Here is a link to Opencongress.org where you can post comments on the text of the Bill. You need to login to do so however.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s1747/text

It's not part of the gov't, and I'm not sure if anyone up there will read it, So I'm not sure how useful it is. Anyone care to comment?

As per http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/case/it_overtime.html

"California employees in the IT and computer software industry, including computer professionals, IT professionals and computer programmers may be entitled to overtime pay. Both federal law and most state laws require overtime pay for such professional employees who work more than 40 hours per week unless the employee is classified as exempt."