Does this mean that you believe that the development of orbiting power satellites should not be an area of concern for government and should be left for the modern entrepreneurs who come from the same school as did Andrew Carnegie? Mr. Stine. I wouldn't say the same school as Andrew Carnegie, sir. But the philosophy behind writing “The Third Industrial Revolution” was simply to point out that there is a lot out there to do, there are things out there to be done—and, basically, there is a buck to be made. I think if we are really going to see good, solid everyday space flights, space travel, living in space, it will be because, in the same way this country has grown, somebody saw a way to make a buck out of it. And, incidentally, the Government will figure out a way to tax it. Senator Ford. Yes, but I also heard—I think Barnum said that a sucker was born every minute, but he forgot to tell us there are two people looking for him. [Laughter] Mr. Stine, I appreciate your coming today. I am sorry Senator Goldwater could not be here. He wanted to be. I understand he had another meeting, which interfered with his presence here. So I thank you for coming today and we appreciate it very much. That concludes our list of scheduled witnesses for today. I think that we have had some, to say the least, exciting ideas. Certainly there is not going to be any single solution, in my opinion, to our future energy problems. So we would do well to examine closely, I think, all our options. To those who claim that using satellites as power plants is too futuristic, let me say this. We got into this energy business through a lack of foresight. If these systems appear to be feasible and economically attractive, how can we not pursue them? In our next hearing, on Wednesday of this week, we will talk more about the economics of the satellites and about what NASA is planning to do to explore further these concepts. And I thank all of you for being here today. [The subcommittee adjourned at 12:10 p.m.]
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==