Would you support making a rotating space colony which doubles as a research station?

Question

As in support, I meant with your taxes. Since I'm talking about NASA making one this mostly applies to Americans. Other people are more than welcome to comment about their space programs too.

I mean, NASA made wonderful technologies which affect our everyday lives. The microwave oven, cordless power tools, and lasers used in the hospital were made possible through their researh.

Would you support the space colony if it made a certain number of inventions a year to help the public? If not, why wouldn't you?

Answer 1

yes

Answer 2

You are overstating the impact of the manned space program on our lives.  For example, NASA had nothing to do with the microwave oven:

http://www.gallawa.com/microtech/history...

http://www.ideafinder.com/history/invent...

Similarly, laser technology was developed anywhere but at NASA.  And as for cordless power tools, it was advances in  battery technology that enabled their development, and batteries are a universal thing, not closely coupled to the space program.  In fact, there have been very few commercially successful spin-offs from the manned space program.  It's a huge money sink, funded mainly because we all have a romantic idea we are someday going to colonize the stars.

The problem is there is no way to make money out of going to space except for tourism.  Manufacturing is more cheaply done on Earth since you don't have raw materials anywhere near low-Earth orbit, and getting materials there is so costly in terms of energy that it simply isn't worth it.  There is a reason no companies are standing in line to use the "research platform" of the ISS and that reason is there is no point.  This is the same reason NASA spends tens of millions of dollars launching science experiments designed by high school students into orbit.  It's great experience for the kids, but in terms of advancing science or doing anything relevant it's a joke.  

So, no, I think manned space flight is a waste of money.  Chemical rocket technology isn't efficient enough to make it worthwhile.  A rotating space colony would be a colossal waste of resources, not to mention pointless in terms of the human costs.  

I strongly favor putting more resources into robotic space probes.  Compared to the manned program, unmanned probes have returned orders of magnitude more, and more useful data.  Robots don't get cancer, their brains don't atrophy in zero-g, and they don't get bored in flight.