[DISCARDED] Space Junk

[Jutsa]

So, we have 97.1 which launches garbage into space, and then we have at least two options that weaponize space (53.1 and 147.4)...
sooo, I figured: Why not make a single draft that addresses both of these?

I thought about putting in a third "any space program is a waste of resources" but a) My 2 options were super long and b) We have a lot of those options already.
I hope you enjoy; I tried to make this have a few crude sex jokes because... well, you'll see why.

Draft 1.00

Title: Space Junk
The Issue: Aside from a few, very messy explosions, your Financial minister is so up-in-arms and huffed up about your recent, non-research space projects and projectiles that @@HE@@'s sweaty, blushed, and just about ready to exit your administration.
Validity: Followup to #97.1 OR weaponizing space.

Validity: Weaponized Space
Option 1a: "Alright... @@LEADER@@, I'm going to lay this out for you; we can't afford this," says your grieving Financial minister, showing you a chart with a few too many zeroes and a bit much grey hair for comfort. "Look, I know weaponizing space is cool and all, but it's totally impractical! And we're wasting billions, maybe trillions of @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@ trying to build..." @@HE@@ checks an order list detailed under the chart, "space balls and moon destroyers? In the meantime, nations like our rivals Marche Noire and Blackacre are building up competent and actually functional armies. There's absolutely no need for a space force, so please, for the love of all things decent, move the body of our funding to the forces here on earth."
[effect] space stations have been cashed in for land mines
[Flag Change] deweaponizes space

Validity: Followup to 97.1
Option 1b: "Alright... @@LEADER@@, I'm going to lay this out for you; we can't afford this," says your grieving Financial minister, showing you a chart with a few too many zeroes and a bit much grey hair for comfort. "Look, I know launching our waste into space is cool and all, but it's totally impractical! And we're wasting billions, maybe trillions of @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@ trying to build..." @@HE@@ checks an order list detailed under the chart, "space balls and dump-stars? In the meantime, the garbage is piling up higher and higher here on earth while waiting to be launched. There are absolutely no benefits to trying to launch garbage into space, so please, for the love of all things decent, just unload all our junk here on earth."
[effect] space stations have been cashed in for landfills

Option 2: "You suck!" a horrified @@MAN@@ with a lab coat and goggles exclaims, holding a vile vial full of volatile fluid with one hand and eating premium toast with the other. "So what if the endeavors are not 'necessary', or the proles complain about it being 'a waste of taxes'. And sure, it may not be the most environmentally safe or cost-effective solution. I'm honestly not sure what my point is. But I do know this: we decided to do this for a reason, and we're not going to back out just because of some stingy technophobes! We've gotta put more funds into reusable rockets research, more research into cost effective fuel propellants, and, yes: more effort into blasting off bigger and badder pinnacles of awesomeness, shooting across the sky with only the most powerful propulsion we can muster! All we need to do is transfer a ton of resources from every other government agency."
[effect] taxpayer money is spent pushing upwards with more force

[New Ladavia]

I like it a lot maybe you could add an option(2 b) where it would be:
Option 2b "Come on, Bigtopia just sent a dog into space" maintains a horrified @@MAN@@ with a lab coat and military medals exclaims, holding a vile vial full of volatile fluid with one hand and a big red button in the other. "So what if the endeavours are not 'necessary', or the masses complain about it being 'a waste of taxes'. And sure, it may not be the most environmentally safe or cost-effective solution. But I know something the world isn't moving backwards and sooner or later nations will be looking up to the stars. We need to increase our defensive capabilities for when they come and we're not going to back out just because of some stingy technophobes! We've gotta put more funds into reusable rockets research, more research into cost-effective fuel propellants, and, yes: more effort into blasting off bigger and badder pinnacles of destruction shooting photon beams across the sky! All we need to do is transfer a ton of resources from every other government agency and well be off in 3 2 1."
[effect] taxpayer money is burnt as fuel for rockets

But then you could also do a mirror issue.

[Australian rePublic]

What if you have both space weaponisation and launching garbage into space

[Candlewhisper Archive]

I think you're talking two different issues here, not variants of a single issue.

I'd suggest making this one just about impractical, expensive and useless space weapons, and make the space junk one a different issue.

Personally, I think the likely consequence of the government choosing to launch junk into space would be a bunch of different contractors going "no, that's not going to work" then some cowboy outfit saying "yes, we'll do it," then embezzling the cash and fly-dumping the waste in secret landfills.

[Jutsa]

@CWA: I mean, I suppose I could make this one soully for space weapons, but I genuinely thought this would be even better for the space junk than the space weapons.

I really like that cowboy idea, CWA... but I'm not entirely sure what you mean by a bunch of different contractors going "no, that's not going to work".
I take it you mean that each one proposes a different way of getting the junk to space, or something..?
Me being pretty out-of-the-loop on these things, the only way I know of doing this is "shoot big rockets".

@Aussie: Yeah, I did think of that... but in hindsight the option validities don't reflect that. I'll change that even though I'll probably split the issue up at some point anyway.

@New Ladavia: I could consider it, though I think the issue split thing should probably be addressed first.

[New Ladavia]

I respect your opinion though I fell you should switch your effect line for option 2b. Because:

taxpayer money is spent pushing upwards with more force

doesn't make sense to the average reader. however, taxpayer money is burnt as fuel for rockets provides some humour as the paper for the money(Pause for gold standard complaint) is being used to propel the rocket. Otherwise, when I think of space junk I would tend to associate that term with broken satellites in the atmosphere. But that could be another issue in itself (I think it has been done though)(I can work on it(McCarthyism trigger is commie soon))

[Jutsa]

That was actually supposed to be another crude joke that wasn't too obvious, but I agree it should be changed.

Only thing is, I'm not so sure that @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@ should be burned; not just cause of gold,
but coins, plastic currency, and digital currency all, too, exist. Plus I highly doubt it'd make good fuel.

Still, metaphorically... I guess it could work. I'll give it a think.
First I've gotta think about what to do about the space junk contractors... like, how I'd even make different options out of that.

[New Ladavia]

Just an idea to build on:
It's clear we can't keep on doing this," says Elon Musk(Melon Husk) " The government has just too much to handle and not enough money or time to do so. If you let private companies in on this well gladly send @@NAME@@'s trash off to space. We decided we have to much trash and the only way to clean our world is by sending it to other wolds. Open government contracts to private enterprises as well as some well-placed tax cuts and I assure you weel come flocking."

[Krogon]

I like this idea, but it might not work. It seems too much like a "you did a bad thing" kind of issue.

Perhaps, you could have dumping trash into space and space force as a validity? Maybe "while dumping trash into space, it hit a space fleet?" it would then raise the question of how to maintain both things.

[Jutsa]

That would be oddly specific...

But yeah, I'm starting to agree with you guys. I still... genuinely have no idea what issue could arise from either of these other than
"It's just a bad, costly idea", but I'll try to work something out.

As of now, this one's discarded, though. If anyone else would like to take a crack at either of these in the meantime...