A NASA astronaut probably won’t be the next person to take a small step for man on a planet or moon a giant leap away from Earth. The US space agency is a shadow of its former self, facing death of a thousand budget cuts. Its space shuttles are retired, their replacements canned.

She loves her rocks, well, how about the ENORMOUS rock above our heads. Rockin' digital trickery: DP

It’s far more likely that the next footprint on the moon will be sponsored by a cashed-up entrepreneur. Think Richard Branson, the airline tycoon who founded Virgin Galactic. Or think American hotel chain billionaire Robert Bigelow, who wants to build a space station.

Or maybe think Gina Rinehart. Stuff NASA, we could have GINA: a Ginormous Investment in National Aerospace, sponsored by our very own chief mining magnate. Our richest person could put an Australian on the moon. Maybe even build an Australian colony. It would be revolutionary: for her, and for the country. And she could do it.

Don’t believe me? Look at the numbers. Rinehart currently has an estimated wealth of $20 billion, enough money to fund all $17.7 billion of NASA’s budget for this year and still have a healthy $2.3 billion to splash around, say, at the dogs or on the pokies. If output of iron ore, coal and commodity prices continue to rise over the next few years, her wealth has been projected to balloon to $US100 billion. And she’d probably overtake Bill Gates and Carlos Slim as the world’s richest person on the way.

The entire Apollo program that put Neil Armstrong and many others on the moon cost US$24 billion (at the time), a number that may well have increased with inflation and the cost of new technology. But considering the profits she makes, surely a sustained colossal investment into an Aussie space program over a period of 15-to-20 years would yield serious results.

What’s in it for Gina Rinehart though? We already know she’s a bold thinker. She once explored the feasibility of using a nuclear bomb to create a harbour on Australia’s north-west coast, according to The Guardian. But what it would really do is solve many of her issues.

Ms Rinehart has a big publicity problem. She’s having a public spat with her kids and threatened to revoke their ransom insurance if they don’t cooperate with her demands. She’s hoarded a colossal amount of wealth. She’s opposed to the tax man taking a few of her many billions away from her. It’s fair to say many Australians don’t like her.

Few Australians can sympathise with the problems of the super-rich. Several years ago Bill Gates was developing symptoms of I’m So Obscenely Rich That People Are Starting To Hate Me too. He started the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and it turns out Bill’s billions might just eradicate malaria from the face of the earth.

A similar act from Gina Rinehart in the form of an Australian manned space program would be a bow in the tie of our national prestige that we never thought we could accomplish. Planting the Australian flag on the moon or Mars would utterly transform the way we see ourselves on the world stage. Rinehart would become a national hero.

Who’d give a rats about that pesky mineral resource rent tax after that?

And by investing in the space race, Rinehart would be spreading her wealth to thousands of Australians—the Apollo program, for instance, employed over 400,000 Americans. This in an Australian industry that would thrive with substantial investment.

Dr Ragbir Bhathal, an astrophysicist with the Search for Extraterrestrial Life (SETI) initiative at the University of Western Sydney, told The Punch late yesterday afternoon that Australia has enough expertise with space and astronomy that we could and should have a space program.

We’re already world leaders when it comes to space science and tech. For instance, Australia (with New Zealand) has a one in two chance of becoming home to a gigantic radio telescope array, which would make us pioneers in astronomy at a time which David Reneke from Australasian Science Magazine already says is shaping up to be the space science’s “golden age”.

Rinehart could herald in a “golden age of spaceflight”. But there’s one more, less grandiose, reason why Rinehart might want to become Queen of The Stars: wealth.

She knows a lot about extracting iron ore from deep holes in the ground. There’s a giant rock made of valuable materials floating in the sky above us. Could you imagine the mineral dollars lying below the Sea of Tranquility?

Rinehart could have a monopoly on the moon’s resources. Her current bank balance would be raised to the power of billions. That is, she could build herself temple made entirely out of million-dollar notes. We’d be richer as a people, and she’d be well, even more unthinkably rich.

President John F. Kennedy, the man who pointed the US space program at the moon, is famous for saying: “Ask not what your country can do for you, but for what you can do for your country.”

This is what you can do for your country, Ms Rinehart. And yourself.

dan@thepunch.com.au

126 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • acotrel says:

      05:18am | 16/02/12

      Isn’t it great that a lot of zeros in a computer can give somebody so much influence in a democracy ? I wonder how the new-born babies get to have their say ?

    • Super D says:

      07:54am | 16/02/12

      Gina gets one vote, same as you.

    • Lucretia says:

      08:35am | 16/02/12

      One vote on the board of Fairfax and one vote on the board of Channel 10?

      Now tell me the other directors aren’t afraid that if they don’t go along with what she wants, she’ll treat them as she treats her children and make their lives very difficult?

    • john says:

      08:50am | 16/02/12

      @Super D “Gina gets one vote, same as you. “

      That may well be true, however we all know in a extreme capitalist democracy as opposed to a moderate capitalist democracy what actrorel stated is closer to the truth.  We all, as does acotrel know that $$$$ influences democracy more these days for better or worse, mostly worse for the majority and better for the 1%.

      Values, ethics and perceptions of what is just, right or fair does get contorted in an extreme capitalist democracy as we can all see at the moment. A typical example is banks laying of thousands after announcing multimillion dollar profits - just one of many hundreds of examples.  The we are primed to “suck it up” by various press, advertising & PR departments.

    • john says:

      08:58am | 16/02/12

      I should have said multi-billions before.  smile

    • iMitchy says:

      10:07am | 16/02/12

      Votes put bums in seats. Nothing more.

      There are years between elections and that’s when the wealthy go to work on whoevers bum is in said seat.

      @acotrel - “Isn’t it great that a lot of zeros in a computer can give somebody so much influence in a democracy?” - Only if the ‘first digit’ is not a zero too : P

    • Robert Smissen of Rural SA says:

      08:10pm | 16/02/12

      If Gina didn’t reinvest in Oz & put her $ $ in the bank we’d be a poorer place, a lesser person would have already pulled the pin.

    • Bruce says:

      10:11pm | 16/02/12

      @Robert

      You think she’d just walk away from all those billions? I wouldn’t get between her and a 10c coin.

    • SteveKAG says:

      05:44am | 16/02/12

      Novel idea but not sure she has enough motiviation, i like the idea of us becoming a space flight country.  We need a one in the Southern Hemisphere.
      I can see the value of a space station hovering around earth, particularly if common folk like me cound jump on board Virgin Atlantic at Cape Point Henry (may as well use it if Alcoa goes) and riding it up to “Hilton Stratasphere”
      I can see definate value in sending manned missions to other planets or one that gets us closer to the sun to study it, or even trying to get FTL speed but other than that, just going up and circling around…........no point really!

      The problem with mining the moon is how you get the stuff back here, there is an astaroid that is aparently the richest source of gold ever, that would capture my attention and i bet Gina would not be the only one then thinking of mining in space.

      Good thought process even if truly out of left field.
      I like the idea of a ‘hilton’ type space station.  I would love the adventure of going up in a rocket and staying for a week circling the planet.

    • David Foley says:

      11:41am | 16/02/12

      Read Robert Heinlein’s “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress”.
      Everything needed to send the ore back home…
      Although there are other, more “interesting” lessons in that book we would be wise to heed…

    • Rocksteady says:

      02:26pm | 16/02/12

      Forget the gold Steve, it’s all about the Helium-3.
      Own that and you own the world.

    • Mahhrat says:

      05:55am | 16/02/12

      What is the moon made of anyway?  Is it worth that kind of expedition?

      Apart from that, it’s not a bad idea, though it’s certainly a unique way to reinvest in the country that’s allowed her so much wealth.

    • M says:

      07:21am | 16/02/12

      The Moon is made of Cheese bro.

    • ShamWow says:

      10:47am | 16/02/12

      The moonies believe it’s an alien space ship, maybe she could blow a hole in it to prove them wrong.

    • Craig says:

      05:58am | 16/02/12

      There are many advantages for Gina in a space adventure. She could send her children into orbit to protect them from threats (and keep them away from the media and lawyers), in geosynchronous orbit over the nations they prefer.

      She could increase her grip on the media by adjusting any satellites used by competitors to Channel 10 and there’s the prospect of giant space mining lasers - pointed at Canberra to help get her point across.

      Finally she could raffle off tickets to space - having those who displease her join a one-way trip outward bound.

    • Annie says:

      07:06am | 16/02/12

      I would rather her be on board with a one way ticket.  Please.

    • Engi says:

      06:00am | 16/02/12

      Problem with your mine the moon idea is simple physics makes it impossible with our current technology to have any hope of doing it economically. To believe that you’ll magically get around these issues to make ‘mining the moon’ feasible by spending billions of $ to get there is pure wishful fantasy.

      The other question besides the job created is what’s the real benefit? Yay we got to the moon again…. now what? Did we discover any new tech getting here, err. most likely… no, are the possible lunar rock discoveries really worth billions of $. Bill gates is actually achieving something with his money, this would achieve little if anything. Theres a good reason NASA is getting its budget cut, its called diminishing returns.

    • iansand says:

      07:51am | 16/02/12

      It is always uneconomic to do something for the first time.

    • Engi says:

      08:10am | 16/02/12

      Not always true, but your point is noted. There would be a surcharge so to speak involved in adapting current mining technology to operate in 1/6g and a vacuum.

      However you’ve also missed a few other points. We have been lunching rockets into space for decades. It costs millions of dollars every time and isn’t getting much cheaper. We’d need some amazing breakthrough and NASA, or the Russians or the Chinese haven’t found it yet in all this time.

      To hall mining equipment to the moon, your talking about 1000s of tons of equipment, fuel which with our current rocket tech is utter lunacy. Obviously, due to the reduced moon gravity you could make your machinery lighter, however, the very fact that it needs to be able to breakup 1000s of tons of rock means that it will still need to be some serious machinery and therefore still, considerably heavy.

    • dancan says:

      09:26am | 16/02/12

      @Engi – There are a couple of reasons why you’d want to set up a base on the moon. 

      Firstly as you said, the physics of getting to the moon from earth make it quite difficult but the physics of getting from the moon to say mars, is much easier.  So as a stepping point to explore and claim or mine parts of the solar system before anyone else it would be quite a catch. 

      Secondly there would be almost no external influence to what your business does on the moon (if any at all), for a corporation the idea of complete freedom in business or R&D must be pretty tempting.  Hell if you really wanted, you could build your own launch platform in some crap hole then no one could stop you flying up whatever you wanted, and you can’t get any more of a secure R&D lab then a moon base.

    • Bruce says:

      06:21am | 16/02/12

      Its not hard to understand why Gina Rinehart would what to go the moon. The person who can bring back large quantities of Helium 3 will control power generation for centuries.

    • Sarah says:

      09:34am | 16/02/12

      Reality Dysfunction and Edenism… Lets build Habitats!

    • LIvin says:

      06:49am | 16/02/12

      Yep, she’s made her billions here, so rather than invest in the complete restoration of the environment and the country she has pillaged to amass her pile of loot, best just pop off to the moon and see if you can exploit another pristine environment, with no savages or greenies to argue with.

    • Super D says:

      07:58am | 16/02/12

      What a comment on the green movement that it demands protection for a pristine environment that is a lifeless vacuum!! Lifeless vacuum describes the intellectual capacity of the greens!!

    • john says:

      08:40am | 16/02/12

      Super D
      right over the top of your little head.

    • john says:

      08:56am | 16/02/12

      @Super D

      Im a different john to your reply @ 08:54am

      Perhaps the PUNCH could consider allocating one user name per PUNCHER with some simple programming script. So other users can’t use the same name.

    • john says:

      09:13am | 16/02/12

      @john
      perhaps you should be a little more creative in your choice of a user name.

    • Livin says:

      09:27am | 16/02/12

      @ Super D
      Mate! I love a controversial sledging! I may not be a genius, but it doesn’t take much grey matter to realise that there is something wrong with ripping apart the land, turning mountains into holes, and hoarding all the money to buy newspaper interests with your spare change so that you can garner favourable public opinion from the gullible. That’s what this all boils down to. It’s got nothing to do with the moon. It’s got to do with the fundamental human flaw, “We don’t know what we’ve got until it’s gone” and we are busily exploiting finite resources for the gluttony of the few, with no thought to the future. We are building mining towns and infrastructure to support them and they will only be useful whilst the boom is not busted! History shows us what happens to these towns when the mining bubble bursts. They die!  Now Super D, doesn’t that sound like a “lifeless vacuum” of a future scenario? No sensible long-term thinker would think that this was good. What a waste of time and resources we could be ploughing into renewables right now!

    • john says:

      09:30am | 16/02/12

      @john
      “perhaps you should be a little more creative in your choice of a user name.”

      same can be said for you sunshine.

    • john says:

      10:00am | 16/02/12

      No,
      I’m john and so is my wife!!

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      10:18am | 16/02/12

      @john- How about Little John, Big John, John Boy, the one true John or John the Bold?

    • Poster formerly known as john says:

      10:31am | 16/02/12

      Good point
      I’ll make the first move.

    • Super DF says:

      12:28pm | 16/02/12

      @Livin um but in your first post you said….

      “best just pop off to the moon and see if you can exploit another pristine environment”

      and then in your second post you said

      “It’s got nothing to do with the moon”

      So which is it?

      I took you at your word the first time and thought we were talking about the moon because thats what you said but now its not about the moon and somehow my comments that were about the moon are now about the earth and this renders my valid arguments invalid.

      It’s kind of changing the game half way through mate.

      At least we’ve got all these johns bringing some intellectual firepower to the thread or we’d be stuck with a Livin vacuum….

      PS not sure where the sledging was and why in is controversial

      PPS I guess its true what they say about arguing with idiots.  They do drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.  I give up.

    • john says:

      05:18pm | 16/02/12

      @Super DF says: “They do drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.  I give up.”

      Oh yeh that’s hot I’m all wet - 100% right, give up into submission by a more experienced person.

      mmmmmm

    • john says:

      05:28pm | 16/02/12

      john says:

        @john 11:00am | 16/02/12

        ” No,
        I’m john and so is my wife!!”


      Hang on a minute I’m not your wife, I can’t be your wife, I’m someone else’s wife. Therefore you have to be more creative and find another name. Stop confusing all the PUNCH readers.

    • acotrel says:

      09:22pm | 16/02/12

      @Livin
      At least this d iscussion is taking place.  That in itself is cause for optimism !

    • onlooker says:

      06:56am | 16/02/12

      Australia has been good to Gina Rinehart, it is a shame with all the wealth, that woman could not use in 10 lifetimes , she did not do something good for Australia. But if she cannot look after her own children, I guess it would be to much to expect she gave a little back to the poorest in this country.

    • Rose says:

      12:56pm | 16/02/12

      It would be preferable if she donated to already established agencies and didn’t try to get personally involved. This is a woman whose father and children have/had little time for. She seems to be a poison to all human relationships.

    • john says:

      06:53pm | 16/02/12

      @Rose

      What kind of creature could say to their own children; correction, get their lawyer to say to their own children ...

      “Given your clients’ continued opposition to.. the suppression of information from the media in relation to the proceedings.. we can only presume that your clients’ previously stated concerns for the personal safety of their families and themselves have now completely and entirely disappeared.”

      “Under these circumstances, it seems that your clients would place no value in the continuation of ‘ransom insurance’ that is currently provided to them and/or their young children.”

      In other words, if you go public, wouldn’t it be awful if you or your kids got kidnapped sometime because I won’t be paying any ransom. But hey, if you don’t care about your own safety, or the safety of my grandkids, I’m happy not to care either.

      Has anyone ever heard of a worse example of the affliction of greed? Poor woman.

    • Stephan says:

      07:14am | 16/02/12

      Commercial exploitation of the moon and near Earth Space is probably the only way we’ll get a permanent foothold in that environment.

      For those who doubt, the technology to do so exists today.  The problem is and has always been twofold.  People and money.

      Space is an unforgiving environment.  The Moon maybe less so.  But standards of construction employed on Earth just won’t cut it in space.  Additionally there are still issues with the affects of low, or no, gravity on the human body.

      But it is imperative we spread away from the tiny blue world we call home and are quickly killing with over exploitation.  I recall a quote regards “unlimited growth in a limited world”.  Add space to the equation and unlimited growth is all too possible.

    • Trevor says:

      09:23am | 16/02/12

      Great point Steven.

      Readers of this blog should familiarise themselves with the olduvai theory. It basically goes that mankind has only one shot at escpaping this littel blue ball called Earth. And with the peak of oil productuion, that chance, and the subsequent chance of sustainable exponential growth as you describe is gone.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olduvai_theory

      Interesting yet fairly pessimistic stuff.

    • Gregg says:

      07:15am | 16/02/12

      Dan,
      Just in case you didn’t know, Lucy is the Starlet so get those stars out of your eyes and off your mind.
      Even Gina probably knows that spending money on the moon would be about as useful as blowing millions on carbon capture from power stations.
      It just ain’t going to happen and has just been another Kruddy fanciful dream.

    • Space Ghost says:

      07:24am | 16/02/12

      I support any programme that sees Reinhardt launched into space.

    • M says:

      07:32am | 16/02/12

      What a fantastic idea. Pie in the sky it may be, but we need dreams and dreamers.

    • The Old Man says:

      07:37am | 16/02/12

      Never mind talking about Bill Gates and Gina Rinehart, lets throw Rachel Carson in gaol! She did more to eradicate the human population through malaria, than Bill has done to try and fix the problem. DDT has had a reprieve, and is now accepted again. What these people do with their money is their business. If they want to keep a private yacht at Monaco, at least they are providing employment for people, you wouldn’t expect your own friends to continually boast of their philanthropy, why should you expect it of ‘celebrities’?

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      07:40am | 16/02/12

      Hi Daniel,

      We are all beginning to think very globally & in a very spacey kind of way! I totally love that expression by Mr John F Kennedy.  My question to you ” is anyone really listening”?  We all have had this fascination with travelling to the moon & other planets for a while now.  I just have to say no wonder, because I think you can not imagine our night sky without a moon, right?

      I am just wondering if it has actually paid off so far? Because pay off is always measured by some kind of financial gain!  I personally feel unless we all come up with some very valuable stones like diamonds on other planets pretty quick, we might actually begin to lose interest in the National Aeronautics & Space Administration programs all together.

      Ginormous Investment in National Aerospace sounds like a very valuable cause to begin that Australian Colony on the moon & other planets. I totally appreciate the imagination & creativity which went in to writing this article.

      However, once we have created all those jobs in Australia working for GINA in Australia, what are we supposed to do for a living once we get to the moon, though?  Are you planning to be the very first journalist with no job prospects what so ever on the moon? Kind regards to your editors.

    • M says:

      07:52am | 16/02/12

      You reckon a mine on the moon would run itself? OH&S types would have a field day up there. If there were a viable mining project on the moon, competition for jobs would be astounding.

      Imagine having “Mining superintendant - Lunar Resources Project” or “Operations Manager - Extraterrestrial Minerals Inc.” on your CV. You’d be set for life.

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      08:03am | 16/02/12

      Hi M,

      Thanks for your reply.  My question is that “have we actually discovered any precious stones or metals on the moon yet”? If that actually fails we could always count on having a franchise of Muffin Break Outlets with a unique Australian taste!  Have a nice day.

    • M says:

      08:37am | 16/02/12

      Ever heard of Helium3 or Titanium?

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      08:56am | 16/02/12

      Hi M,

      Thanks for the extra information.  But I actually meant diamonds, gold & platinum for a very profitable business venture!  With a chain of Tiffany’s Jewelery Stores to follow!  Because we all want to be very rich, very quickly!  FYI Diamonds are a girl’s best friend, right?

    • M says:

      09:32am | 16/02/12

      The gold price is set to tank, diamonds aren’t rare and we already have an oversupply, and platinum has limited use in manufacturing or industry. Not much good mining them.

      On the other hand,Titanium is the same strength as steel at half the weight, and helium 3 is tipped to be the major power source for future nuclear reactions. Far more profitable to get involved in rare metals and gasses than gold or compressed carbon.

      As for a girls best friend,  I’d say that these days it’d be the family court.

    • Simon says:

      09:53am | 16/02/12

      M. Love your work mate smile

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      10:15am | 16/02/12

      Hi M,

      I can not imagine a beautiful diamond necklace or a engagement ring made out of TITANIUM, sorry!  It is not just stylish.  Some marriages may end up at the family court! That does not stop most people from trying to have the best wedding ever!  Also I am certain that you surely can’t deny the fact that organizing weddings is very good business indeed!

      Let me assure that when you take that first step in to marriage, family court could be the last thing on your mind. There are other more important things to organize such as the wedding cake, wedding gifts, wedding waltz, wedding guests, wedding dress & wedding champagne.

      Lets try to be more optimistic that some marriages don’t actually end up at the family court. By the way Daniel, sorry to talk about non sense but I truly enjoyed this topic much more than any other. It has certainly lifted our spirits in a way almost equal to the feeling of travelling to the moon.  Kind regards.

    • jay-ded says:

      12:15pm | 16/02/12

      @ Neslihan

      I am just wondering if it has actually paid off so far? Because pay off is always measured by some kind of financial gain!

      How about the payoff being information?  Isn’t information just as important as financial gain?  We have learnt so much during the space explorations and will continue to learn more.  I think that’s much more valuable than finding a nice diamond for some bimbo to wear.

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      10:19pm | 16/02/12

      Hi Jay-ded,

      I am sure that we have learnt a lot from the space explorations such as the average temperature on the moon is about ?5 °C. The day period (about 354 hours) has an average temperature of about 107 °C (225 °F), although it can rise as high as 123 °C (253 °F). The night period (also 354 hours) has an average temperature of about ?153 °C (?243 °F)! Which makes it almost impossible for human beings to live on the moon, unless we all want to live underground for a very long, long time.

      Thanks to GOOGLE, we have all this invaluable information at our finger tips.  I most certainly prefer the delicate balance & nature HERE ON EARTH, personally speaking.

      Are you also implying that only BIMBOS invest in engagement rings & wedding bands? Can we also say the very same thing for men, who just like to wear very expensive & designer watches as well? It has been very educational & fun chatting with you. Kind regards.

    • Justin of Earlwood says:

      07:46am | 16/02/12

      Good to see that the tall poppy syndrome is not only alive & well in Australia, but is positively flourishing.

    • TM says:

      07:58am | 16/02/12

      Yeah, I agree. Now very fashionable to cut down Gina but you get that from the chattering classes and the space cadet that wrote this piece of trash.

    • Daniel Piotrowski

      Daniel Piotrowski says:

      08:20am | 16/02/12

      @TM - Pun intended?

    • TC says:

      09:02am | 16/02/12

      I don’t think its tall poppy syndrome at all. I think people dislike her because shes made her billions buy digging up rock that belongs to EVERY citizen in this country. She makes billions off a natural resource unlike a Bill Gates who built an industry out of hard work, knowledge, intelligence and superior business skills. All Gina does is dig shit up and is obviously so greedy she can’t even throw a few scraps from the table to her kids. I think Australians just want to see a little bit put back into our country and environment rather than see her spend billions in search of more profits on the moon.

    • JT says:

      09:14am | 16/02/12

      @TC: No they don’t. Why does the left continue to peddle this lie. The minerals belong to the states, the states charge royalties for the right to mine these minerals. If you want to share in the massive profits (that come years after massive investment) buy shares.

      ‘‘she can’t even throw a few scraps from the table to her kids.’‘

      You mean those kids demanding chefs and security simply because they are her children. If you want to attack her, do so for her bad parenting in raising such spoiled brats.

    • TC says:

      10:48am | 16/02/12

      @JT,

      Typical greedy capitalist comment Mr Gekko.

      Your comment implies I’m bitter and jealous of her fortune, and therefore putting shit on her. Not true at all.


      What makes you think I want a “share of these massive profits”? that’s your game mate, not mine. See I have these things called ethics and morals, something they obviously didn’t teach you at business school. I don’t want to partake in the environmental raping off our country thanks. If mining is the only industry that can prop up this economy then I will tolerate it, but only when the profits are redistributed FAIRLY.
      Natural resources belong to everyone, and my theory is the “massive profits” you speak of, should be funnelled back into the community from which they came, not into some billionaires rather large back pocket. I’m not saying she shouldn’t profit (and profit well) from her investments and efforts, she should, but 20 billion and the forecast for up 100 billion in the future is nothing but pure greed my friend. So no, I won’t be buying shares.

    • JT says:

      11:19am | 16/02/12

      @TC ‘‘Your comment implies I’m bitter and jealous of her fortune, and therefore putting shit on her. Not true at all.’‘

      Yes it does. In fact you sound like an incredibly twisted bitter fool who demands the theft of profits and has not the faintest idea what mining is.

      Mining is not something that simply props up an economy. It is the very foundation of our civilisation. Almost every single product you use on a daily basis has its originals in mining.

      “Natural resources belong to everyone”

      No they do not, they belong to the states. My house does not belong to you and the minerals in the ground do not belong to me (even the ones under my house). Don’t like it, change the constitution but to claim otherwise is a lie.

      “but 20 billion and the forecast for up 100 billion in the future is nothing but pure greed my friend. So no, I won’t be buying shares.”

      blah blah blah. Whether it is $2 or $20 billion or $100 billion, the profits rightfully belong to her and her investors (shareholders).  Your claim of greed is nothing but spite on your end.

    • Tim says:

      11:43am | 16/02/12

      JT,
      of course you are correct which is why the government should install the original Resource Rent tax as proposed in the Henry review.
      This will ensure that the States and Federal government get the adequate and most efficient compensation for the minerals owned by the states.

      I’m sure you’ll be on board right?

    • Jet says:

      12:14pm | 16/02/12

      TC says:11:48am “See I have these things called ethics and morals, something they obviously didn’t teach you at business school. I don’t want to partake in the environmental raping off our country thanks”

      Hope you don’t own a car and get off your computer - you’re using electricity.

    • JT says:

      12:26pm | 16/02/12

      @Tim
      ‘‘I’m sure you’ll be on board right?.’‘

      If we are talking the absolute original tax proposal by Henry; yes. Any other corrupted mangled by Labor variation; no.

    • Rose says:

      02:05pm | 16/02/12

      I think you’ll find it has nothing to do with the tall poppy syndrome but everything to do with the fact that she comes across as a selfish bitch every single time she opens her mouth. You are talking about a woman disliked by her father and her children, ( most mothers could get away with disallowing a chef/ housekeeper and still have the kids to lunch on Sunday, because most kids respect their mothers, hers obviously don’t!).
      If it is the tall poppy syndrome then would you say the palpable dislike of Gillard and Abbott is also due to the tall poppy syndrome? Because obviously it has nothing to do with their personal short comings so it must be the public’s fault.
      Face it, people do not like her because she is not likeable, its just that simple!

    • SD says:

      04:37pm | 16/02/12

      Bad to see that it’s now acceptable to suck up to and even be ‘sympathetic’ to the ‘poor’ billionaires. Yea poor her, having to put up with paying a bit of tax! Attacking someone for the sake of it is one thing, that’s TPS, but having a go when they deserve it, is not tall poppy syndrome!

    • stephen says:

      07:58am | 16/02/12

      One day Gina will be on the moon, carving Poems into the rock.
      Seti will see her flaying hammer and sweat dribble down her smock.
      The Mineral’s Council will wonder why she’s never in her chair,
      When Ragbir rings the Pope, ‘she’s on an asteroid, up there’.

      The rich get all the fun, the poor can only hope to think
      that eventide at noontime at Lunar base
      is when you’ll miss Gina, her torso, if you blink.

    • Dan says:

      08:06am | 16/02/12

      Hey Gina if you’re really interested in saving your reputation, how about fixing stuff here in Australia first before you decide it’s a good idea to bugger off to space?

    • M says:

      08:40am | 16/02/12

      Hey Dan, Gina isn’t going to the moon, it was sugggested she should by a punch contributor.

      Or is that somehow lost on you?

    • F. Prefect says:

      09:08am | 16/02/12

      You know you’ve officially entered the twilight zone when the richest person in the country, whose own children have to sue her to get some pocket money, is lecturing you, in execrable Vogon poem form no less, about world poverty.

    • Ashamed says:

      09:14am | 16/02/12

      The envy in this thread is disgusting.

    • acotrel says:

      09:14pm | 16/02/12

      So it is OK t o buy privilege from politicians, and hold them to ransom by owning a big part of a newspaper ? ?

    • nossy says:

      09:14am | 16/02/12

      Well Daniel I sent her a Valentine and heard nothing back! “Up yours honey” -  nossy could have taken you to places you’ve never been! We could have made “lurve” high over the Kimberleys looking down on our Billions and wondering “what are the poor people doing today?”  Alas its not to be Gines my love. P.S. I shall extend my Valentine for one more week - hurry now!  hahahah

    • Nilbog says:

      12:39pm | 16/02/12

      You must be fugly…

    • nossy says:

      12:49pm | 16/02/12

      @Nilbog   hahhaha I sent a pic of Brad Pitt fella!

    • Dan says:

      09:17am | 16/02/12

      Do it….please, please do it. What’s $99 billion between friends anyway?

      Gina, I know you are obsessive about your public profile and media coverage. Either you, or one of your evil henchmen, are reading this thread very carefully.

      Do it!

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      09:29am | 16/02/12

      She’s a traitor and secessionist. Her advocacy for a Northwestern Australian special economic zone is a precursor to straight out and out secession…....

    • St. Michael says:

      12:04pm | 16/02/12

      Big deal.  Here in the West we’ve been trying to ditch you unproductive latte-drinking fools since Federation, and nobody’s let us do so yet. smile smile

    • Ashamed says:

      09:29am | 16/02/12

      Daniel, the initial theme of the article holds merit, though I am sure you are really having a dig at her. But people have only themselves to blame when it comes to “rich” looking out for themselves. Look at the sheer envy and distaste toward her for being rich in the comments. The expectation that she does all this at HER expense alone, for the benefit of envious, hateful people would have me wanting to invest anywhere else but Australia. We should be thankful we have someone so rich and influential globally, who could help push Australia further onto the world stage.

      But nope….much easier to sit back, hate her for her wealth, and provide armchair expertise on how she should spend her wealth.

      Disgusting.

    • Daniel Piotrowski

      Daniel Piotrowski says:

      11:11am | 16/02/12

      Nah I don’t think I was hating on her. I reckon if you’re sitting on 100 billion, wouldn’t you want to do something big/historic with it? That’s an unimaginable amount of money. I couldn’t even think what to do with a billion.

    • Ashamed says:

      11:36am | 16/02/12

      Cheers Daniel. The first sentence was intentionally addressed to you. Knew I should have added a break there. The rest was in reflection of the comments herein.

      I haven’t followed her, but given people like Gates and Branson, once they’ve done their “main business” they step out of the everyday and move onto such worthwhile causes. I don’t mean to defend her, but she is still in the flow of her current business now no?

      As originally stated, I agree with the theme of the article, but find such efforts, using commenters here as case samples, a waste of such merit. I would go as far to say, it would make a good running theme of articles for the Punch where we get to choose how to invest such capital. Say like this one, we focus on establishing a base on the moon. If you do run with it, I hope it doesn’t get ruined by the envy like this one.

    • Ashamed says:

      11:55am | 16/02/12

      On a side note, let’s not confuse net worth with actual, readily useable, capital.

      Personally I’d like to see a primary through to tertiary nuclear industry be established in Australia where we control the entire flow. But will leave that for a secondary topic on the theme.

    • Blind Freddy says:

      11:56am | 16/02/12

      @Ashamed

      Gates and Branson made their own money using their own wits- not their daddy’s. They are not comparable..

    • Daniel Piotrowski

      Daniel Piotrowski says:

      12:07pm | 16/02/12

      No worries! It’s a good point.

    • Ashamed says:

      01:29pm | 16/02/12

      Thank you Freddy for your contribution by providing your comment as an example serving to derail the topic at hand through your own envy of Gina. I do believe, however, the thread is about WHAT to do with the money, not how/who earned it.

      Sometimes I think the punch is blocking the wrong people.

    • M says:

      09:34am | 16/02/12

      I’d love to sign on to such a venture. Imagine being the first person to earn a wage on another terrestrial body.

    • subotic says:

      10:04am | 16/02/12

      And Gina’s body IS very terrestrial.

      In a Mother from Alien terrestrial kinda way….

    • Trevor says:

      09:43am | 16/02/12

      As enthusiastic as I am for such space exploration, leaving the running of a lunar mining enterprise to the private company, or arguably anyone, would be frought with danger.

      What would be the effects on the earth if, in 100 years, a large percentage of the moons mass had been removed? Would the tides still wax and wane? Would the tilt of the Earth be affected, ending the seasons? A lot to consider, and I wouldn’t even trust a government with the smartest mathematicians and scientists to pull it off.

      Also, what about if a ten thousand tonne load headed for Earth lost control? We would be risking massive ‘asteroid’ impacts with every load!

      But the rest of the solar system should be up for grabs though…

    • St. Michael says:

      12:54pm | 16/02/12

      Not really a PhD in astrophysics, but there’s a couple of things: I doubt the tilt of the Earth would be affected, mostly because it isn’t clear that the Moon has any effect on the Earth’s tilt at all—I think the current theory is that the Earth’s own slightly imperfect shape is what gives it its tilt, and the positions of other celestial bodies have some slight effect on it.  The other thing is that the Moon affects tides, certainly, but the overwhelming gravitational effect due to relative mass is from the Earth—the sheer mass of the Earth on spacetime is what causes it to orbit the Earth, not the other way round.  Reducing the Moon’s mass isn’t likely to change the Earth’s gravitic effects, though I guess it would probably moderate tides.

      In terms of relative mass…the Moon weighs in at 0.0123 times the size of the Earth, so it’s about one hundredth the weight of Earth.  The Earth’s weight is (no pun intended) astronomical: 5.9722 × 10 to the power of 24 kg, and the entire mining efforts of humanity from roughly 4,000 BC to the present haven’t made a dent in the Earth’s gravity as far as anyone can tell; if the Earth’s mass had been drastically affected you would expect the planet to slowly move closer to the Sun, since there’s less mass to oppose the Sun’s gravitic effect.

      I’ll concede it’s blue-skying to some extent since theoretically in the future we’d be able to move vast quantities more of minerals due to the Moon’s lower gravity, but astrophysics ain’t like (oh dear) greenhouse gas calculation.  They have equations for this sort of thing. smile

      On the prospect of a “Rinehart Impact” you suggested, someone—can’t find the article now—once proposed the idea of “smurfing” it instead—rather than sending stuff back to Earth in one big shipment, you send lots of tiny little shipments using nanomachines.  Indeed this might be one of the ways to avoid the godawful fuel/weight ratios we have to deal with in getting stuff into space: rather than build a base by taking materials from Earth to the Moon, send a big flight of nanomachines programmed to build it from minerals on the Moon itself.

      The real question is—what’s on the Moon that we couldn’t get down here that much cheaper? People have mentioned titanium and helium-3, the latter of which is going to be very, very useful if we make fusion reactors a reality.  But otherwise there ain’t that much that’s incredibly useful we can get from the Moon which we need for modern technology here on earth: carbon, alumina, silica, some nitrogen, hydrogen (these materials being very useful for colonisation, though.)

    • St. Michael says:

      01:28pm | 16/02/12

      And you all know I double posted because I wanted to add emphasis. smile

    • Trevor says:

      02:09pm | 16/02/12

      Thanks St Michael

      I watched the latest version of Orson Wells’ ‘The Time Machine’ just recently and in that movie they were mining the moon and accidentally destroyed it with all sorts fo dire ramifications for the human species, eventually resulting in the divion of the species into two separate groups.

      Re the ‘Rinehart Impact’ a case might be made that the dangers of such an event could spur manufacturing of finished products in situ on the moon? Gina could import all the cheap labour she wanted then, dependant on the Galactic Union’s bargaining powers of course!

      But as other posters have noted, a big attraction for a human presence on the moon would be a launching pad to the rest of the solar system. Mining would just be an added bonus.

      Mining Mars, now that would make the world’s first trillionaire…

    • St. Michael says:

      02:41pm | 16/02/12

      @ Trevor: “Mining Mars, now that would make the world’s first trillionaire…”

      And it’d probably reveal that alien air-making artifact hidden inside a mountain on Mars.  We’d have more miners who look like Ah-nold, and more three-breasted prostitutes.  We could even have Arnie throw Rineheart, er, Cohaagen, out into the airless Mars atmosphere! Sign me up!

    • Simon says:

      03:52pm | 16/02/12

      Trev, hope there wasn’t millions worth of minerals under it though!

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      09:50am | 16/02/12

      Everything about her screams pathological greed and narcissism. Can I hear an Australian of the Year?

    • Trevor says:

      10:23am | 16/02/12

      C’mon SSR, didn’t you get the memo?

      Obscene wealth makes up for any personal shortcomings that they might have (and Gina has more than a few). The Packers are another case.

      It’s all in the Capitalist Manifesto…

    • Blind Freddy says:

      09:54am | 16/02/12

      She inhereted her wealth- so far I haven’t seen any indication that she is capable of anything other than making herself even richer.

    • marley says:

      10:04am | 16/02/12

      She inherited the company, not the wealth.  The company was in deep financial trouble when she took over.

    • Michael says:

      10:05am | 16/02/12

      Inherited a 4 billion dollar company, what is it worth today?

      How are you doing by comparison? smile

    • Pierre Robes says:

      10:36am | 16/02/12

      Don’t be stupid marley
      The value of her inheritance was in the mining leases.

    • Trevor says:

      02:40pm | 16/02/12

      I inherited a shack in downtown Moranbah in 1967.

      Just sold it for $800K!

      I’m a financial genius! Accolades please.

    • year of the dragon says:

      03:03pm | 16/02/12

      Trevor says:03:40pm | 16/02/12

      “I inherited a shack in downtown Moranbah in 1967. Just sold it for $800K! I’m a financial genius! Accolades please.”

      Yep, holding a property for 45 years is exactly the same as running a multi-billion dollar international business.

      You are a genius.

    • Trevor says:

      04:31pm | 16/02/12

      YOTD, I specifically nominated Moranbah as a metaphor for the minimg industry vis-a-vis Chinese demand.

      I wasn’t even born then, funnily enough I was born in the year of the dragon!

      I wish this story were true, but alas. I hold such property speculators with a similar view to those (myslef included) who rightly argue that Gina is no genius for merely owning assets that are suddenly in high demand.

      Destiny or dumb luck, take your pick. But she is certainly no genius.

    • SD says:

      04:44pm | 16/02/12

      Only 4 billion? Yea poor thing, had to ‘work hard’ to build it up. Allowing for inflation and increased demand I’d say it would have gone up that much if she sat on her hands all day. I know she’s a hero to you Liberal scumbags though. If she had a trillion and you earnt 50k a year, you’d still love her, as long as you believed the fantasy that you too can be like her. D**kheads!

    • Randal says:

      05:02pm | 16/02/12

      Ah, I think you will find she inherited 75 million after the spat with Rose and control of the mine, and good old Lang was worth 150M at his death.

      Yes that original mining operation with Rio proved very successful, and certainly a healthy leg up, but it has been the decisions she has made and the further investments across other mining operations that has made her wealth.

      You may not like her opinions, you may not like her as a person, but please stop this bollocks about it was “all handed to her”, as it certainly was not as nothing could be further from the truth.

    • CJ says:

      10:00am | 16/02/12

      Gina Rineart is a brilliant miner:

      “It’s mine. It’s mine. Mine. Allllll mine!”

    • MattyC says:

      10:56am | 16/02/12

      Could it be that the only person capable of stopping Gina is a dapper english spy with a weakness for martinis and the fairer sex?

    • Pandabater says:

      11:25am | 16/02/12

      1. The price for Iron Ore has been going down & will continue to go down which will decrease her “worth”. She may be a mere billionairess in the future.
      2. If we had a decent minig tax the government could easily afford it.
      That is all.

    • Randal says:

      11:49am | 16/02/12

      I can understand all the anger and resentment towards Gina Rinehart.

      How dare she find success by working hard to turn a company that was crippled by debt into a multi-billionaire business; Creating 10’s of thousands of jobs through her investment in this country; Drive Australia’s mining boom and export markets; Whilst paying billions in taxes and royalties.

      Worst of all she is a ‘CONSERVATIVE WOMEN’, can you believe that, not just hard working and successful, but yes a ‘CONSERVATIVE WOMEN’ of all things.

      Who does she think she is, and she definitely deserves no acknowledgement of her success in breaking the ‘glass ceiling’ in the mining industry. Instead she deserves gags about her weight and appearance with jokes about being ‘exported’ to the moon. I mean come on that sort of behaviour is only a ‘disgrace’ and called ‘sexist’ if it’s committed against a women of the ‘left’, everyone knows that.

      Sorry gotta run, I have to hit another blog so I can write horribly offensive things about Sarah Palin, yes I know another ‘conservative women’ they seem to be everywhere these days!

    • Joel B1 says:

      12:07pm | 16/02/12

      Well said R.

      (bet Daniel hasn’t got the guts to publish my little take on his “h8n”)

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      12:18pm | 16/02/12

      I give stuff all about her money. If she wants to play politics (and her funding of anti mining tax and anti carbon tax lobby groups and purchase of media interests does indicate that she does indeed want to play politics), then she deserves all she gets. By her own actions she has declared herself open season, same as any other political figure of the right or left.

    • Randal says:

      03:11pm | 16/02/12

      And of course Shane, and if she was using her money for ‘good’, you know like funding ‘pro climate action groups’ or funding worthwhile causes like ‘Refugee Advocacy’ I have no doubt you would be out there arguing the same, telling all that “She gets what she deserves”... because it’s about ‘undue influence’ for you and not her political stance.

      Nice work Comrade… I think we may have fooled them… Wink…Wink

    • Tim says:

      04:08pm | 16/02/12

      Yeah,
      how dare people complain that she use her influence to have laws made to suit her and her financial interests as well as buying media interests to spin things her way.

      Those bloody whingers just need to work harder so they have billions of dollars. Then they can influence politicians and the media in exactly the same way.

    • Randal says:

      04:46pm | 16/02/12

      Well said Comrade Tim, and lets work together to implement laws to ensure that only people who have the ‘right’ (you know just like you and me) views can hold a public opinion… Imagine how easy mining taxes, carbon taxes, green programs, death duties, wealth tax, and open borders would be if only we could control the media.

      I know its seems tough, it will be a great struggle, but we can get there comrade, and once we have the media sorted we can then look at ways of stripping the ‘evil doers’ (those with too much money) of their wealth so we are all finally on an even playing field.. all dirt broke but happy grin

      Thanks be to Lenin that people like you are in this country Timbo!

    • SD says:

      04:50pm | 16/02/12

      I bet you hate Gillard because she has bad hair and her voice is nasally too! Conservative women ARE vile. Women are meant to be nurturing, being mothers and all. Conservative women generally equals nasty! Equals, worse the conservative man, man you expect to be an idiot!  What’s ‘working hard’ being the boss and having others do the work? Digging holes is hard work isn’t it? Should a hole digger be paid billions then?

    • Tim says:

      05:54pm | 16/02/12

      Randal,
      Stop talking rubbish you fitlthy communist.

      The only people who should be able to decide government policy and laws are the rich.
      They shouldn’t have to pay tax because they’re clearly superior to everyone else.
      And they should be able to import labor from overseas with impunity. It’s not like those lazy Australians will work 14 hours a day for ten bucks an hour. Bloody unions should be banned.

      And who cares about the environment, the bloody trees can look after themselves.

    • Randal says:

      09:09am | 17/02/12

      Hear…Hear Comrade Tim and SD.

      Lets pay everyone the same, whether they are the boss or the hole digger, control the media to ensure it only reports what we want it to say, and off to the Gulag anyone who disagrees with us!

      Who cares if this type of government always fails, it’s about principles, well of course only our principles not anyone else’s, but why quibble over small details.

      VIVA the Revolution!

    • Joel B1 says:

      11:52am | 16/02/12

      I heard that was an ongoing lefty hate campaign against Rinehart when she (rationally) decided that AGW was a green scam.

      Lift your game Daniel, surely you could make fun of her weight?

    • Daniel Piotrowski

      Daniel Piotrowski says:

      01:49pm | 16/02/12

      h8ers gon’ attack w8

    • Genek says:

      12:20pm | 16/02/12

      What a pity we can’t send her to the moon

    • Mattb says:

      12:49pm | 16/02/12

      “But there’s one more, less grandiose, reason why Rinehart might want to become Queen of The Stars: wealth.”

      “queen of the stars”, ha, she looks more like “Jabba the Hut, from Star wars”....

    • Disco Stu says:

      04:34pm | 16/02/12

      Even the righties on Sky News thought she was horrible. Must say something about her!

    • Mickey T says:

      05:41pm | 16/02/12

      She can do what she wants with the Moon, just keep her away from Antarctica.

    • Joel says:

      12:46am | 17/02/12

      cool article mate, except for the whole moon pursuit.

    • jimbo says:

      08:26am | 17/02/12

      All the people who are rushing to be more right wing and fascist than each other should not forget that the Australian people actually own all the minerals in the ground. And that makes them douchebags for handing them over almost for free to bloated monkeys like Gina Reinhart. She does say thank you or give back anything she doesn’t have to. You are being taken for a ride douchebags

    • Nett on Net says:

      08:32am | 17/02/12

      Good to see the old Aussie “Tall Poppy Syndrome” is alive and flourishing. How the hell do you any of you people know what Gina spends her money on? Not everyone calls a camera crew when they donate to a worthy cause. She had to fight a very public battle with a gold digging “step mother” (and yes I know for a fact from some close friends of the family that Rose was a gold digger and he take over was very well planned). I feel sorry for Gina and I think she works hard and is a smart cookie. Still her family can’t leave her alone as all they can see is the money.  She may be rich in dollars but probably poor in people she can trust at the moment. Leave her alone she has had enough heartache to last a lifetime. Just because she has money does not mean she deserves all the negativity.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

#markwebber just wasted petrol faster than everyone else in monaco #f1

Anthony Sharwood

In my sports column on The Punch tomorrow: why Eurovision was easily the best game on the weekend. Mummy bloggers, you'll like this one!

Daniel Piotrowski

The Logies could learn a lot from Eurovision #lamethings#sbseurovision

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @ellehardytweets: Already despondent about the next fifty one weeks. #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter