Tag: SpaceX

New Space Capitalism: The future everyone needs to understand

I recently finished Rainer Zitelmann’s New Space Capitalism: The Entrepreneurial Path to the Stars, and I keep coming back to it the way you return to a tool that finally fits the job.¹ The book lays out, without apology, why private entrepreneurial energy is the only force capable of turning space from a government prestige project into an actual economy. It is timely in a way that feels almost engineered. SpaceX just put Starship Flight 13 into the Indian Ocean on July 24, soft splashdown, vehicle intact, heat shield looking better than anything we have seen before.² The ship floated. They got the data they needed. Flight 14 is already being talked about as the first attempt to catch the upper stage with the tower arms the same way they have been catching the boosters. That is not incremental progress. That is the difference between a science fair and an industrial process.

I have been telling people for years that you do not get rich having a job. You get a job so you can generate capital to invest. The job is the seed. The investment is the harvest. Space capitalism is simply that principle applied at planetary scale. The people still arguing for socialism or some managed industrial policy while this is happening are arguing from a world that no longer exists. China has spent years trying to close the gap by copying hardware and flooding the sector with state capital. They just managed their first controlled recovery of an orbital-class booster on a sea platform in July.³ That is real progress for them. It is also roughly where SpaceX was a decade ago. Meanwhile Falcon 9 boosters are routinely flying into the mid-thirties on the same airframe, with landing success rates above 98 percent across hundreds of attempts.⁴ SpaceX flew 165 orbital missions in 2025 alone and accounted for roughly half of all global launches and the overwhelming majority of mass to orbit.⁵ That is not a technology lead. That is a cultural lead.

The difference is not the Raptor engine or the stainless steel or the heat tiles. Those can be photographed, reverse-engineered, and eventually duplicated. The difference is the rate at which the organization turns failure into usable information and then into the next vehicle. SpaceX treats a destroyed Starship the way a good machine shop treats a bad casting: examine it, learn the exact failure mode, change the process, and build the next one faster. Legacy aerospace still largely operates on cost-plus contracts and risk-averse engineering cultures that treat every anomaly as a reason to add margin, add process, and add schedule. The result is that the customer pays more, the schedule slips, and the learning rate collapses. SpaceX inverted the incentive. They absorb the cost of the explosion so they can keep the learning curve steep. By Flight 13 the heat shield held, the engines relit for landing, and the vehicle came down where it was supposed to. That is what iterative capitalism looks like when the capital is allowed to take real risk.

I watch the documentaries SpaceX releases about the troubleshooting and I see the same pattern every time. A giant bicycle-chain style link on the tower fails to release. Someone drives through the night, pulls a spare from Cape Canaveral, hauls it to Boca Chica, and the schedule holds. That is not a process document. That is a producer culture. You cannot copy that with spies or with five-year plans. Communist systems excel at mass production of known designs once the design is frozen. They struggle when the design is still moving and the only people who can keep it moving are the ones who will crawl through broken glass at two in the morning because they own the outcome. Measure engagement by bodies in seats and you end up with four people bumping into each other for two days to produce what one highly engaged person finishes before lunch. SpaceX figured out how to recruit and keep the engaged ones. That is the real moat.

The same cultural gap explains why the space economy is going to generate most of its new wealth inside the United States rather than in China, Russia, or the European Union. Property rights, residual claimancy, and the ability to keep the upside of risk are not optional extras. They are the operating system. Zitelmann is clear on this point: without the ability to own, buy, sell, and profit from what is built off-world, private capital will never flood into the frontier the way it flooded into every previous frontier. Government programs can demonstrate capability. Only capitalism compounds it. That is why Starship production is being scaled toward rates that sound insane until you remember that the same people already turned Falcon 9 into a high-tempo airline. Musk has talked openly about the long-term goal of building ships at aircraft volumes. The Gigabay and the other production infrastructure at Starbase are not theater. They are the physical expression of a belief that the limiting factor is no longer physics but the rate at which you can turn steel and labor into reliable vehicles.⁶

I keep hearing the money managers on Wall Street talk as if they understand this because they read the same research notes everyone else reads. Most of them are still pricing SpaceX as if it is a conventional aerospace contractor with a flashy CEO. They are looking at the wrong variable. The variable that matters is the compounding of learning rate under a producer culture. Once the catch of both stages is routine and the vehicles are turning around in days rather than months, the cost curve drops into territory that changes every other industry that depends on mass to orbit. That is when the millionaires get made, and not just among the early employees. The people who understand that the real product is not the rocket but the industrial metabolism that builds and flies the rocket will do very well. The people who keep treating it as a government-adjacent science project will wonder why the returns never arrived.

Look back at why we stalled after Apollo and the pattern is obvious. Kennedy started it. Nixon finished the landings and then watched the program lose political oxygen. Reagan talked about the Strategic Defense Initiative and commercial space but never forced the institutional change. The Bushes treated it as a budget line. Obama treated it as a photo opportunity. Only under Trump did the commercial providers get the contracting environment that let fixed-price risk-sharing replace cost-plus stagnation. The conspiracy theories about why we never went back are mostly noise. The practical explanation is simpler and more damning: once the political class decided space was a discretionary prestige item rather than an industrial frontier, the producer culture was starved and the looter culture took over the process. Every time a new administration tried to restart the engine it discovered that the institutional memory of how to move fast had been replaced by the institutional memory of how to manage risk into paralysis.

That is the same dynamic we see today when people claim China will simply copy Starship and undercut the market. They can copy the geometry. They cannot copy the willingness to destroy vehicles in public so the next one is better. They cannot copy the high-engagement talent pool that treats a scrubbed launch as a personal failure rather than a bureaucratic delay. Two decades is an optimistic timeline for them to close that gap, and even then they will be chasing a target that is still accelerating. Sabotage through capital markets and media narratives is the more realistic short-term threat, which is why the ownership structures and the narrative discipline matter. The IPO that finally brought SpaceX public is not just a liquidity event. It is the moment the capital markets have to price a culture instead of a set of contracts. Get that price right and the rest of the space economy follows. Get it wrong and the same people who missed the internet will miss the orbital economy.⁷

I want more people to be capitalists rather than spectators. The path is not mysterious. Read the book. Watch the flight tests with the eyes of someone who understands that every successful landing is a data point on a learning curve that is still steep. Understand that the producers are the ones who stay late, drive the spare part across the state, and treat the schedule as a promise rather than a suggestion. The looters will always be waiting for someone else to finish the hard part so they can claim a share of the result. Space capitalism works because it keeps the residual claim with the people who actually do the work. That is why the wealth is going to concentrate where the culture of engagement is strongest. And that is why the next decade is going to look very different from the last one.

Footnotes:

¹ Rainer Zitelmann, New Space Capitalism: The Entrepreneurial Path to the Stars, with a contribution by Newt Gingrich (New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2026). The book argues that secure property rights and entrepreneurial residual claimancy, not government programs, are the decisive conditions for turning space into a functioning economy.

² SpaceX, “Starship’s Thirteenth Flight Test,” July 24, 2026, https://www.spacex.com/launches/starship-flight-13. The vehicle executed a landing flip, landing burn, and soft splashdown, remaining intact in the Indian Ocean and providing the first clear views of an intact heat shield after reentry.

³ Reporting from CCTV, Reuters, and BBC, July 10, 2026. The Long March 10B first stage was recovered on an offshore platform using a net system, China’s first successful controlled recovery of an orbital-class booster.

⁴ Wikipedia, “List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches,” data current through July 30, 2026. Falcon family boosters recorded 639 successful landings in 652 attempts (98.01 percent). Individual boosters have reached 36 flights.

⁵ BryceTech 2025 Global Space Launch Report, summarized in Via Satellite, April 10, 2026. SpaceX completed 165 orbital launches in 2025, approximately 51 percent of the global total, and launched roughly 85 percent of all satellites that year. U.S. providers overall accounted for nearly 60 percent of global launches.

⁶ Elon Musk statements and SpaceX production disclosures regarding the Gigabay facility at Starbase and long-term Starship production targets measured in hundreds to thousands of vehicles per year. See also SpaceNews and Teslarati coverage of high-rate launch site and manufacturing infrastructure, 2025–2026.

⁷ SpaceX IPO filings and contemporaneous reporting from CNBC, Reuters, and Bloomberg, June 2026. The offering priced at approximately $135 per share for a valuation in the $1.75–1.8 trillion range, the largest IPO in history by capital raised.

Bibliography

BryceTech. 2025 Global Space Launch Report. April 2026.

Musk, Elon. Public statements on X regarding Starship Flight 14 tower-catch plans and production scaling, July 2026.

SpaceX. “Starship’s Thirteenth Flight Test.” Official mission summary, July 24, 2026. https://www.spacex.com/launches/starship-flight-13.

Wikipedia. “List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches.” Continuously updated launch and recovery statistics through July 2026.

Zitelmann, Rainer. New Space Capitalism: The Entrepreneurial Path to the Stars. Contribution by Newt Gingrich. New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2026.

Additional reading that sharpens the same themes:

Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged (for the producer/looter distinction that maps directly onto the engagement cultures described here);

Walter A. McDougall, …the Heavens and the Earth: A Political History of the Space Age;

John Logsdon’s multi-volume histories of the post-Apollo policy environment;

and Zitelmann’s earlier works on the power of capitalism. 

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com.  If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.

The Idiot Index: Why Cost Plus is ruining the world in every industry

I spent some time this morning talking to artificial intelligence the way most people still talk to other people, and it reminded me why individuals matter more than the systems we keep building around them. I have been around executive tables long enough to watch compliance cultures slowly strangle the very people who could save those cultures. I have watched human resources departments become the protective membrane that keeps radical thinkers from ever reaching the decision-making surface. And I have watched the opposite happen at places like SpaceX, where one man with skin in the game keeps asking the question nobody else wants answered.

The concept is simple and deliberately rude. Elon Musk calls it the idiot index. It is the ratio of the finished cost of a component to the cost of the raw materials that go into it. If a piece of hardware costs a thousand dollars and the aluminum or the composites inside it cost a hundred, the index is ten. At that point Musk’s judgment is blunt: if the ratio is high, you are an idiot.¹ The number is not meant to be polite. It is meant to force the conversation past the comfortable layers of process, certification, and cost-plus padding that traditional aerospace has lived on for decades. When the index is high, the design is too complex, the manufacturing path is too inefficient, or both. The only acceptable response is to simplify until the number drops.

That mindset is why SpaceX keeps iterating the Raptor engine instead of freezing a design and protecting it. Raptor 1 was heavy and complicated. Raptor 2 shed mass and gained thrust. Raptor 3 is already cleaner still.² In a cost-plus culture the first version would have been declared good enough, the print would have been locked, and any engineer who kept asking why the part still cost so much relative to its materials would have been labeled non-compliant. At SpaceX the question is expected. The people writing the checks are the same people who refuse to fall in love with yesterday’s solution.

I have worked inside heavily regulated environments where that kind of questioning is career-limiting. The system rewards the person who can document that every box was checked more than the person who can prove the box itself was unnecessary. Cost-plus contracting makes the problem worse. When your profit is a percentage of the total cost, every inefficiency becomes an asset. The higher the idiot index, the thicker the invoice. SpaceX rejected that model early and forced itself into fixed-price discipline and extreme vertical integration. They make roughly eighty-five percent of the vehicle in-house precisely so they can keep driving those ratios down.³ The result is launch costs that have collapsed by an order of magnitude compared with the legacy industry. That is not incremental improvement. That is the difference between a protected priesthood and a competitive market.

The same pattern shows up outside aerospace. When Donald Trump took over the failed Wollman Rink renovation in Central Park, the city had already spent years and many millions producing nothing but excuses. He finished the job months ahead of schedule and hundreds of thousands under budget.⁴ The difference was not magic. It was the willingness of one individual with authority and reputation on the line to ignore the process that had already failed and simply get the work done. Compliant cultures hate that kind of person. They will tolerate the process forever before they will tolerate the man who makes the process look foolish.

I demonstrated the point this morning by talking to two different AI systems the same way I would talk to a sharp engineer who has no political future to protect. I asked about the idiot index, about why cultures that punish the question eventually stagnate, and about the American peculiarity of still producing people willing to write the check and then demand the answer. The systems answered without the emotional baggage that attaches itself to human careers. They did not defend the status quo because their next performance review depends on defending it. They simply processed the logic. That is useful. It is also a warning. When the only entity still willing to call something an idiot index is a machine, the human culture has already surrendered.

The deeper problem is cultural. In environments that prize compliance above results, the radical individual becomes a threat to be managed rather than an asset to be leveraged. Human resources departments evolve into immune systems that identify and neutralize the person who keeps asking why the ratio is still high. In China the same impulse is enforced more openly: non-compliant actors are simply removed. The American version is softer but often just as effective. We do not shoot the person who questions the process. We make the process so labyrinthine that the question never reaches the room where decisions are made. Over time the only people left at the table are the ones who have learned never to raise the index.

SpaceX remains an American outlier precisely because it still tolerates, and in fact requires, the person who will sit at the big table and ask which idiot approved the current design. That tolerance is rare and getting rarer. Most corporate cultures have decided that emotional safety and procedural compliance are higher goods than rapid improvement. The result is visible everywhere cost-plus thinking still dominates: slow iteration, protected mediocrity, and prices that never come down. When people complain about the cost of eggs or the fragility of supply chains, they are usually describing the downstream effects of idiot indexes that were never challenged.

Individuals still matter. Cultures that suppress them eventually discover they have nothing left but the process. The process does not innovate. It only documents. The age of useful artificial intelligence will only accelerate the contrast. Machines that never need a paycheck and never fear a performance review will keep asking the hard questions long after the humans have decided the questions are impolite. The companies and countries that still produce people willing to act on the answers will pull further ahead. The rest will keep measuring their compliance while the index stays high.

I find that reality clarifying. It is also why I keep returning to the same point: every culture, every company, every executive suite eventually has to decide whether it wants the comfort of the process or the results that only come when someone is still willing to call the process what it is.

¹ Walter Isaacson, Elon Musk (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2023), 284–285.

² SpaceX Raptor engine development history summarized in public statements by Elon Musk and technical reporting; see also Wikipedia entry “SpaceX Raptor” and associated primary sources.

³ Multiple industry analyses place SpaceX vertical integration near 85 percent of vehicle content; see Eric Berger reporting and SpaceX investor and technical presentations.

⁴ Contemporary New York Times and Time magazine coverage of the 1986 Wollman Rink reconstruction; confirmed in later retrospectives.

Bibliography

Isaacson, Walter. Elon Musk. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2023.

Berger, Eric. Liftoff: Elon Musk and the Desperate Early Days That Launched SpaceX. New York: William Morrow, 2021.

Musk, Elon. Public statements and interviews on manufacturing, cost structure, and the “idiot index,” 2010–2025.

NASA. Commercial Crew Program contract structures and fixed-price versus cost-plus analyses.

New York Times. Coverage of Wollman Rink reconstruction, June–November 1986.

Time. “End of the Six-Year Ice Follies,” November 1986.

Various technical papers and industry analyses on SpaceX vertical integration, Raptor engine evolution, and launch cost trajectories (Citi Research, London Economics, NASA NAFCOM comparisons).

Vance, Ashlee. Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future. New York: Ecco, 2015 (updated editions).

Additional primary sources: SpaceX technical updates, FAA and NASA contracting data, and contemporary reporting on aerospace cost

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com.  If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.

The Future of Aerospace in Butler County: Joby, SpaceX and Volent are changing the world as we know it

A year ago, when I was talking about electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft, many people still treated the concept as something futuristic—a technology demonstration looking for a market. Today, that conversation has changed dramatically. What was once confined to engineering conferences, venture capital presentations, and aerospace trade journals has become one of the most heavily discussed growth sectors in aviation. From Farnborough to Oshkosh, from Orlando to Ohio, advanced air mobility is no longer a theory. It is becoming an industry. And if the momentum continues, the second half of this decade may be remembered as the period when aviation quietly reinvented itself.

One of the most interesting developments is how quickly public awareness has changed. Companies such as Joby Aviation have gone from introducing unfamiliar concepts to demonstrating actual aircraft and discussing commercial operations. At the Farnborough International Airshow, Joby presented a full-scale version of its electric air taxi and highlighted aircraft capabilities designed to move passengers over congested urban areas using quiet electric propulsion. The company has repeatedly emphasized short-range transportation between airports and population centers, a model that seeks to reduce travel times that are currently measured in hours down to minutes. 12

What struck me most during the evolution of this industry is how rapidly attention has shifted. Not long ago, many of these companies were aggressively seeking supporters, partners, and local advocates. Today, the demand is reversed. The advanced air mobility industry has become crowded with airports, municipalities, economic development groups, airlines, infrastructure developers, and investors looking for a position in what could become an entirely new transportation ecosystem. Joby’s appearance at Farnborough in both 2024 and 2026 highlights that transition, with the company showcasing not merely an aircraft but an emerging transportation network integrating airports, ridesharing, and urban movement. 13

The most practical examples may emerge in places such as Florida. Orlando has become one of the leading laboratories for advanced air mobility planning. Airport authorities and transportation officials have publicly discussed integrating air taxis into the region’s transportation infrastructure. The vision is straightforward: instead of spending forty-five minutes navigating traffic between Orlando International Airport, resort destinations, and surrounding transportation hubs, travelers could board an electric air taxi and complete the same trip in a fraction of the time. Officials in Florida have discussed the possibility of early operational services beginning as infrastructure and regulatory approvals mature. 45

For tourists, the implications are obvious. A traveler landing at Orlando International Airport could eventually bypass rental car counters, shuttle buses, and congested highways. Instead, passengers might walk to an adjacent vertiport and travel directly to a Disney resort, Universal destination, or nearby transportation hub. Similar concepts are being discussed for airport-to-cruise-port transport throughout Florida. While widespread deployment still depends on FAA certification, infrastructure construction, and operational testing, the direction is becoming increasingly clear. 56

What excites me even more is that the future of vertical aviation extends beyond passenger transportation. Many people still think of eVTOL aircraft solely as flying taxis. That is far too narrow a view. The real opportunity may lie in logistics, cargo movement, infrastructure inspection, emergency response, surveillance, medical transport, utility support, and autonomous delivery services. A pilot is not always necessary. In many cases, there may not even be a passenger. The same technologies that enable urban air taxis also enable an entirely new class of commercial aviation capable of moving goods, collecting data, supporting public safety, and connecting communities more efficiently than traditional ground transportation.

This is where Butler County, Ohio, becomes particularly interesting. The region already possesses a strong manufacturing heritage, aviation history, and technical workforce. Local discussions concerning aviation growth are increasingly focused on advanced aerial mobility, drones, and associated technologies. The potential opportunity is not simply attracting operators—it is attracting manufacturers, suppliers, software developers, maintenance providers, and logistics companies that will support the industry’s expansion. Aerospace clusters rarely emerge overnight, but they often begin with small groups of innovators pursuing opportunities before the broader market recognizes their significance.

Oxford, Ohio, provides a fascinating example. Emerging drone and autonomous aviation initiatives are beginning to appear in places that historically would not have been considered aerospace centers. As autonomous systems become more capable and more affordable, communities that combine technical talent, university resources, entrepreneurial energy, and available infrastructure are finding themselves positioned to participate in a rapidly growing sector.

The lesson from aerospace history is that major industrial shifts rarely announce themselves with certainty. The internet seemed experimental before it became indispensable. Smartphones appeared unnecessary before they became universal. Commercial aviation itself was considered impractical by many early critics. Advanced air mobility may follow a similar path.

At the same time, another revolution is occurring above the atmosphere.

Recent developments involving SpaceX and Starship demonstrate why so many people continue to underestimate the pace of aerospace innovation. SpaceX’s thirteenth Starship test flight successfully deployed twenty Starlink V3 satellites, completed key orbital mission objectives, performed an in-space engine relight, gathered significant heat-shield data during reentry, and achieved what the company described as its first intact soft splashdown of a Starship vehicle in the Indian Ocean. Although the Super Heavy booster experienced a harder-than-planned water landing due to engine relight issues, the overall mission represented one of the strongest demonstrations of Starship capability to date. 789

Critics continue to focus on failures, delays, and explosions. Yet that criticism often misses the central philosophy driving SpaceX’s success. The company embraces rapid iteration. Instead of spending decades attempting to predict every possible problem, SpaceX frequently builds hardware, tests hardware, discovers failures, and immediately incorporates lessons into the next version. That approach is uncomfortable to traditional aerospace organizations because failures occur publicly. Nevertheless, it has repeatedly produced results. Falcon 9 reusability was once mocked. Today it is routine. Booster landings were once viewed as science fiction. Today they occur regularly.

Starship appears to be following a similar trajectory.

The significance extends beyond rockets. The ultimate objective is not simply launching spacecraft. The objective is lowering the cost of access to space through reusability. Aviation became common because airplanes could fly repeatedly. Space transportation becomes economically transformative when something similar occurs beyond Earth’s atmosphere. Every successful Starship test flight moves SpaceX closer to creating a transportation system rather than a disposable launch vehicle. 78

In parallel, Starlink continues demonstrating why a growing space economy matters. High-speed internet connectivity is increasingly available in locations where traditional infrastructure struggles to provide service. Rural communities, travelers, remote businesses, and outdoor enthusiasts already understand the benefits. The deployment of next-generation Starlink satellites aboard Starship demonstrates how launch capability and communication infrastructure are becoming tightly integrated. 79

When viewed together, the stories of Joby Aviation and SpaceX reveal a broader pattern. One company is attempting to redefine movement within Earth’s atmosphere. The other is attempting to redefine movement beyond it. Both depend on new engineering approaches, aggressive testing, and long-term thinking. Both have attracted criticism. Both have experienced setbacks. Yet both continue advancing.

That is why I remain optimistic about aerospace.

The industry is entering one of the most fascinating periods since the early jet age. Electric air taxis are moving toward commercial deployment. Autonomous drones are creating entirely new business models. Regional communities such as Butler County have opportunities to participate in emerging aerospace ecosystems. Meanwhile, Starship continues pushing toward full reusability, higher launch cadence, and a dramatically larger space economy.

The future rarely arrives all at once. It arrives in increments that seem unimpressive until suddenly they become normal. A year ago, many people viewed air taxis as speculative. Today, airports are preparing infrastructure. A few years ago, reusable heavy-lift rockets seemed impossible. Today, Starship is deploying payloads and returning intact after flight.

The next chapter of aerospace is no longer a concept. It is under construction.

—

Footnotes

  1. Joby Aviation exhibit and aircraft presentation at Farnborough International Airshow 2024. 12
  • Farnborough International Airshow 2026 Joby Future of Flight Experience. 3
  • Orlando advanced air mobility planning and airport integration activities. 45
  • Joby commercial service plans and FAA certification progress. 610
  • SpaceX Starship Flight 13 mission summary and Starlink V3 deployment. 78
  • Flight 13 reentry, splashdown, and heat-shield testing results. 7911

Selected Bibliography for Further Reading

  • Farnborough International Airshow. Joby Future of Flight Experience, 2026. 3
  • Joby Aviation. Corporate website and investor materials. 1210
  • Flying Magazine. “Why Joby Thinks Passenger Air Taxi Service Will Lift Off in 2026.” 6
  • HeliHub. “Joby Brings Full-Scale eVTOL to UK for Farnborough 2024.” 1
  • Aerospace Testing International. “Joby Exhibits eVTOL for First Time in Europe.” 2
  • Spectrum News Florida. “Flying Taxis Could Take Off This Year in Florida.” 4
  • Spectrum News Florida. “Orlando International Airport Working to Launch Flying Taxis.” 5
  • SpaceX. “Starship’s Thirteenth Flight Test.” 7
  • SpaceNews. “SpaceX Conducts 13th Starship Test Flight.” 8
  • Interesting Engineering. “Starship Launches Starlink Satellites, Achieves Most Successful Splashdown Yet.” 9
  • Space Launch Live Mission Archive, Starship Flight 13. 13
  • Florida Department of Transportation and Advanced Air Mobility planning coverage. 45

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com.  If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.

The Space Economy: A changing manufacturing environment that will impact every human being on earth

I have been following the developments in space with a kind of quiet intensity these past few years, the way a man watches the weather when he knows his livelihood and his grandchildren’s future depend on understanding which way the wind is truly blowing. What is unfolding right now is not just another round of rocket launches or another billionaire’s side project. It is the opening of an entirely new economic frontier, one that will make the industrial revolutions of the past look small by comparison. The space economy is already measured in the hundreds of billions and is projected to reach $1.8 trillion by 2035, with some projections running well beyond that once Starship-class vehicles make mass-to-orbit routine and cheap. 

I picked up Rainer Zitelmann’s new book, New Space Capitalism: The Entrepreneurial Path to the Stars, the week it came out, the same week SpaceX went public in what is already being called one of the largest IPOs in history.  It is a little over three hundred pages, the kind of book a man can start after dinner and finish before midnight if he reads with purpose. I read it straight through in one of my evening sessions, the same way I have been working through four or five books a week for years. Zitelmann lays out the historical case plainly: government monopoly and central planning never scaled space the way private enterprise, property rights, and relentless iteration can. The book arrived at exactly the right moment, when the largest single company in the sector was opening itself to Main Street investors, and the manufacturing revolution at Boca Chica was becoming impossible to ignore. 

A day or so later, I watched the CNBC interview with Gwynne Shotwell, president and COO of SpaceX. She has been there from the early days, the steady hand next to Elon Musk’s electricity. The conversation was one of those rare television moments where you could feel the ground shifting under the old assumptions. She spoke about manufacturing techniques the way a craftsman talks about a well-tuned machine, not the way most aerospace executives talk about compliance and risk matrices. She described facilities where the design-test-fly-fix loop runs so fast that what was not even contemplated on flight twelve is already being incorporated for the next ones. The flame trench and diverter that now channel the exhaust were not part of the original flight-one plan; necessity and data drove the change, and they made it happen without waiting for a decade of committee reviews. That is the new standard. 

I have spent my working life in aerospace. I know what the old way looked like from the inside: layers of requirements that accumulated over decades, change orders that took months or years to process, engineers who had learned to protect themselves by writing rules that nobody could later say they ignored. The result was predictable. Progress crawled. Costs ballooned. The same organizations that once put men on the Moon in less than a decade now need longer to decide whether a minor material substitution was acceptable. SpaceX has broken that pattern at Boca Chica and the new facilities rising at Cape Canaveral. They are building the equivalent of a Toyota Production System for orbital-class vehicles, only the takt time is measured in days and weeks instead of minutes on an assembly line. The goal is a Starship every couple of days, with longer-term ambitions of three per day once the infrastructure matures. They are already talking about monthly flights by the end of 2026 and then scaling from there. 

Marcus House has been documenting every step of this on his YouTube channel, week after week, with the kind of detail that lets a serious observer see the trend lines before the headlines catch up. Flight twelve went up a few weeks ago. Thirteen, fourteen, and fifteen are already in various stages of stacking and testing. The new Gigabay structures going up will give them dozens of parallel workstations. That is how you move from a handful of flights a year to something that starts to look like routine transportation. 

What Shotwell made clear, and what the book reinforces, is that this manufacturing revolution is not limited to rockets. Once you have a vehicle that can put serious mass into orbit on a regular cadence, everything downstream changes. Starlink already blankets the planet with broadband and is moving to direct-to-cell. The same architecture that delivers low-latency internet can host compute. There is serious discussion now about data centers in orbit, where power and cooling constraints on the ground become someone else’s problem and latency to certain users drops dramatically. Rare-earth mining on the Moon stops being science fiction once you have a bus that can go up and come back with tonnage instead of ounces. Orbital manufacturing, propellant depots, and eventually point-to-point Earth transport all become engineering problems rather than physics problems.

The economic implications are straightforward. Abundance at this scale does not require redistribution; it requires production. The old arguments that we must slow growth so that workers can be paid more or protected from robots miss the point entirely. I have seen what happens when labor is unreliable. I worked service jobs when I was younger and watched people spit in food because they were mad at a manager or distracted by drive-through drama. Robots do not have bad days, do not call off, and do not need a union to show up on time. They are tools. The people who own the tools, or who own shares in the companies that deploy them at scale, will see the returns. That is how wealth has always compounded when new production frontiers open. The difference this time is that the frontier is not a continent or an ocean; it is everything above the Kármán line and everything those vehicles can enable on Earth.

I hear the same tired pushback I heard in 2020 and 2021. Lock everything down, work from home, let the government manage the allocation of resources and risk. We tried that experiment on a national scale. Manufacturing and logistics do not run on Microsoft Teams. The people who insisted they did were usually the same voices that had spent years teaching children that socialism was just “being nice to each other” and that capitalism was exploitation. By 2035, those lessons will look as primitive as slide rules. The children who were told the economy is a fixed pie will watch robots and AI handle the drudge work while new markets in orbit and on the Moon create wealth that did not exist before. Some of them will have equity in the companies doing the work. Others will live in a world where goods and services that once required human hands at every step are cheaper and more reliable.

Here in Butler County, the evidence is already visible if you drive the roads I have driven for fifty years. The data centers going up around Trenton are not abstract. They are the physical plant that will run the AI models training the next generation of robots and processing the firehose of data coming down from Starlink constellations. I pass the old Armco site and the steel legacy of Middletown on one side and the Garver family farm on the other, stopping for fresh apple juice at their little store the way I have for years. The new infrastructure needs power, land, and water. Ohio has all three. The question is whether we welcome the growth that funds schools and roads and keeps farms viable, or let the same regulatory and cultural habits that slowed aerospace for decades strangle this opportunity, too. I know which side I am on.

My own life has been a long argument for the same principle that Shotwell and Musk are proving at industrial scale. Show up. Do the work. Iterate faster than the problem can change. I have worked sixteen- to twenty-two-hour days for most of my career, with power naps when the body demands them, because the alternative was letting someone else define the pace. That is the same mindset that turns a flame trench that was not on the original drawing into standard equipment on the next vehicle. It is also the mindset that lets a man in his later decades look at regenerative medicine, extended healthspan, and robot labor not as threats but as tools that let him keep contributing on his own terms, rather than being forced into some bureaucratic retirement at sixty-five or seventy.

By 2035, we will look back on 2026 the way we now look back on 1995. The phones will be different, the medicine will be different, the available jobs and the definition of retirement will be different, and a meaningful fraction of the global economy will trace its supply chains through orbit. The people who positioned themselves to own a piece of that expansion, whether through equity, skills, or simply the willingness to adapt, will have options their parents could not have imagined. The people who spent the intervening years trying to slow the world down to the speed of the least ambitious regulator will be wondering what happened.

I am not telling anyone to quit their job and day-trade Starship futures. I am saying pay attention. Watch the weekly updates from people like Marcus House who track every stack and every test fire without corporate spin. Read the book that puts the current moment in historical context. Catch the interviews with the people actually building the hardware, the ones who have to make payroll and hit launch windows while the rest of the world argues about pronouns and pronouns and pronouns. The manufacturing standard being set at Boca Chica is already leaking into every other industry that has to move metal and electrons at scale. The capital that flowed into the SpaceX IPO is the first wave of what will become a much larger reallocation toward anything that reduces the cost of moving mass or processing information above the atmosphere.

I have grandchildren. I want them to grow up in a country that still knows how to build things faster than it can regulate them into mediocrity. I want them to have the option to work because they choose to, not because a clock is ticking on their productive years. The space economy does not guarantee any of that on its own. Only the underlying philosophy does: that human beings thrive when they are free to try, free to fail, free to keep the fruits of success, and free to try the next morning again with better data. That is what I see when I watch a Starship climb out of Boca Chica and when I read a book that explains why private enterprise, not state planning, is the only force that has ever scaled a frontier this far.

The old arguments will keep coming. They always do. The people who benefit from scarcity and control will insist that abundance is dangerous, unfair, or bad for the planet. They will be wrong in the same way they were wrong about the internet, wrong about container shipping, wrong about every technology that lets ordinary people do more with less supervision. The evidence is already in the sky and on the factory floor in South Texas. It is also in the data centers rising in places like Trenton and in the quiet confidence of the engineers who have stopped asking permission to move fast.

I intend to keep watching, keep reading, and keep saying what I see. The next ten years are going to be loud. They are also going to be the most opportunity-rich stretch any generation has seen since the opening of the American West. The only question worth asking is whether we will meet that opportunity with the same spirit that built the first Starships, or let the people who have never built anything tell us it is moving too fast.

Footnotes

¹ McKinsey & Company / World Economic Forum, Space: The $1.8 Trillion Opportunity for Global Economic Growth (2024/2025 projections).

² Rainer Zitelmann, New Space Capitalism: The Entrepreneurial Path to the Stars (Skyhorse Publishing, June 9, 2026).

³ CNBC interview with Gwynne Shotwell, June 12, 2026 (Morgan Brennan).

⁴ SpaceX official updates and production reports, 2026.

⁵ Marcus House YouTube channel, weekly Starship and SpaceX updates (e.g., “SpaceX Just Revealed Its Biggest Plans Yet,” June 2026).

⁶ Walter Isaacson CNBC/Squawk Box discussion on SpaceX IPO and new space economy, June 2026.

⁷ Additional context from Zitelmann’s book and historical analysis of private vs. public space efforts.

⁸ Personal observations from aerospace executive experience and local Butler County development (Trenton data centers, Garver Farms area).

Bibliography

•  Zitelmann, Rainer. New Space Capitalism: The Entrepreneurial Path to the Stars. Skyhorse Publishing, 2026. (With contributions/foreword elements involving Newt Gingrich in related coverage.)

•  McKinsey & Company and World Economic Forum. Space: The $1.8 Trillion Opportunity for Global Economic Growth. 2025 report.

•  SpaceX official website updates on Starship production and facilities (Starbase/Boca Chica, 2026).

•  CNBC transcripts and videos: Gwynne Shotwell interview (June 12, 2026) and Walter Isaacson on SpaceX IPO.

•  Marcus House. YouTube channel – regular, in-depth coverage of Starship flights, manufacturing, and space-economy news.

•  Additional economic analyses from Payload Space, Morgan Stanley, and related space industry reports on trillion-dollar projections and manufacturing shifts.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com.  If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.

Podcast Episode: The Moon: The Next Great Gold Rush and America’s Future Frontier

Pip: The Overmanwarrior has a lot of interests — ancient scrolls, Ohio politics, model rocketry with grandchildren — but this week, everything points to one place: up.

Mara: Rich Hoffman makes the case that the Moon is the defining economic and strategic frontier of our era, and he connects that argument to energy independence, Ohio’s industrial future, and what it actually takes to build a Type I civilization.

Pip: Let’s start with the gold rush that isn’t metaphorical.

The Moon: America’s Next Frontier and the Coming Space Economy

Mara: The post opens not with a policy argument but with a moment — a tired walk back from the Smithsonian, arms full of books, and then a pause at a rack near the cashier.

Pip: He writes: “That spontaneous purchase captures something larger: the Moon is not just a celestial body; it is the key to the next great American expansion, a modern gold rush that will generate wealth, innovation, and opportunity on a scale rivaling the Western frontier.”

Mara: The upshot is that this isn’t nostalgia for Apollo. It’s a resource argument. The Moon holds helium-3, thorium, rare earth elements, and metals tied to what the post calls KREEP terrains — and the claim is that returning those resources via vehicles like Starship transforms economies on Earth.

Pip: The thorium case is the one that stops you. Small modular thorium reactors, described here as potentially the size of a large air conditioner, powering a home for decades with minimal waste. That’s not a distant concept — it’s the argument for why lunar extraction has a direct line to your electricity bill.

Mara: On the broader space economy, the post cites projections exceeding one trillion dollars by 2032, with space tourism alone growing at compound annual rates between 36 and 44 percent. SpaceX’s Starship cadence and Blue Origin’s lunar lander infrastructure are the mechanisms he points to.

Pip: And Ohio is the landing zone for all of it — literally. Butler County aquifers, the I-75 corridor, a proposed spaceport near Monroe, data centers, orbital manufacturing returning chips to Intel-scale plants. Roosevelt-era expansion, Musk-era execution.

Mara: He also addresses the skeptics directly. International lander confirmations from Japan and Firefly Aerospace, hardware visible through powerful telescopes — the post treats doubt as understandable but ultimately answerable by evidence.

Pip: His investment thesis is just as direct: aerospace, lunar resource plays, Starlink, and whatever an Interlune IPO looks like. Re-read this in a decade, he says.

Mara: The personal thread running through all of it is his grandson — the kid who memorized Kuiper Belt objects at age three and flew that Artemis model rocket. The Moon, the post argues, is the inheritance that generation actually gets to claim.

Pip: Roosevelt had the West. The argument here is that the next version of that expansion is already in motion — and the window is now.

Mara: The resources, the infrastructure, the policy levers — it’s all on the table. The question is whether the will follows.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com.  If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.

The SpaceX IPO: A Generational Wealth Opportunity and the Dawn of a New Space Economy

I have been saying it all week, and I’ll say it again here: the SpaceX IPO represents one of the greatest opportunities for generational wealth creation in our lifetime. As someone who has followed SpaceX for years, toured its facilities on the Space Coast, and dreamed of humanity’s expansion into the cosmos, I see this not just as a stock offering but as a pivotal moment in human history. Wealth, as I often remind people, is a tool. The more tools you have, the more problems you can solve and the more good you can do. Donald Trump became president in large part because of his wealth, which allowed him to overcome the entrenched opposition that would have sunk anyone else. That same principle applies here. Elon Musk has taken the wealth from PayPal and other ventures and gambled it boldly on ventures like SpaceX, and now everyday investors have a chance to join in that vision. 

Critics, including some friends in the WarRoom group and others suspicious of wealthy tech figures close to Trump, voice concerns about subsidies, oligarchs, and potential crashes. I understand the skepticism—history is full of cautionary tales. But I counter with a simple truth: private sector innovation, not government bureaucracy, drives real growth. Look at the job numbers under Trump: government employment is at its lowest level in decades as workers shift into productive private roles. That transfer of energy and resources is exactly how economies expand. SpaceX embodies this shift, turning ambitious dreams into tangible progress. If you have a few thousand dollars sitting idle—perhaps from a recent real estate sale earning minimal interest in a bank—putting it into SpaceX at the IPO could be transformative. I’ve told people with $50,000 or $100,000 to consider it seriously. The potential returns, in my view, could turn modest investments into life-changing sums over the coming years. 

My enthusiasm isn’t blind. I recently visited the Space Coast with my wife, touring Kennedy Space Center, SpaceX facilities, and Blue Origin sites. We were in Florida visiting family, staying in a condo near Cocoa Beach and Cape Canaveral. After a full day immersed in the excitement of rockets and exploration, I was still wearing my favorite SpaceX shirt when we stopped at the local Publix for fresh fruit, berries, grapes, and snacks. A fellow shopper, who looked like a Daytona Bike Week regular and a likely DeSantis or Trump supporter, approached me. “Elon Musk is a bomb,” he said. “He gets all his money from government subsidies. It’ll be great when he’s gone.” I listened politely but felt the opposite. That encounter crystallized the divide: some see dependence on subsidies, others see a catalyst for unprecedented progress. I walked away more convinced than ever that SpaceX is the real deal. 

SpaceX’s trajectory has been remarkable. Just recently, around Memorial Day 2026, Starship’s twelfth flight test achieved a successful launch and a controlled landing in the Indian Ocean, meeting key criteria for precision and reusability. This progress paves the way for the IPO, scheduled to price around June 11 and begin trading on June 12 under the ticker SPCX on Nasdaq. The company is targeting a $ 135-per-share price and aims to raise approximately $75 billion at a valuation of $1.75 trillion to $1.8 trillion. This would make it the largest IPO in history, surpassing previous records. Demand is strong, with reports of oversubscription. Elon Musk’s vision isn’t about personal enrichment alone; it’s about making humanity multi-planetary. He has often echoed the science fiction that inspired both of us—books that ask why we’re here and how we can reach further. 

I love science fiction and have for decades. Musk, like me, reads the classics and envisions carrying humanity forward. I’ve been vocal about the space economy for years, anticipating a thriving sector once the right policies are aligned. Trump’s return has accelerated that. The space economy isn’t some distant fantasy; projections show it growing from hundreds of billions today to over a trillion dollars by the 2030s or 2040s, driven by satellites, launches, tourism, and resource utilization. Starship is the key enabler—reducing costs dramatically and opening access to orbit, the Moon, Mars, and beyond. Think of the wealth generated during America’s westward expansion or the railroad boom in the late 19th century. This is analogous, but on a cosmic scale. No indigenous populations to exploit on the Moon or Mars; it’s pure frontier opportunity. 

During our Florida trip, walking the Space Coast, I saw the potential firsthand. The area around Ron Jon Surf Shop, Port Canaveral, Cocoa Beach—it’s poised to boom as Las Vegas did, but with a focus on high-tech industry rather than just entertainment. Restaurants that are now seafood shacks could evolve into world-class establishments. Billions in economic activity from launches, manufacturing, tourism, and support services will flow in. I’ve seen similar transformations: the growth of Abu Dhabi and Dubai from desert to gleaming cities, or the shifts in organized crime I witnessed in my younger days in Cincinnati and Newport, Kentucky, where money found new outlets. Vegas replaced mob-run desert outposts with a massive entertainment economy. Space will do the same, creating legitimate, innovative wealth. 

Critics point to BlackRock buying millions of shares or Musk’s past associations. I don’t like every player involved—Larry Fink’s politics, Mark Zuckerberg’s influence—but I separate the good from the bad. Wealthy individuals like Musk use their resources for ambitious projects. Trump’s wealth insulated him from the system. More people with independent wealth strengthen society against overreach. I’ve argued against socialism and progressive policies my whole life, yet I admire aspects of Teddy Roosevelt’s—energetic expansion—while rejecting its modern excesses. Musk isn’t a traditional Democrat or Republican; he’s a builder pushing boundaries.

Some friends worry about a crash or tech oligarchs. Economies have cycles, and short-term volatility is inevitable. Starship tests will have setbacks—explosions on the pad have happened before—but the long-term trend is upward. Hold for years, not days. Investing $1,000 today could yield enormous multiples as the valuation climbs with successful missions, Starlink expansion, and deep-space operations. Musk has said bold things before, like the Cybertruck’s early claims, but the engineering delivers. SpaceX’s valuation already reflects trillions in potential. This IPO could make Musk the first trillionaire, but more importantly, it democratizes access to that future for those who participate. 

My personal connection runs deep. As an aerospace executive, I’ve seen the industry up close. Model rocketry with my grandson teaches resilience—launching in wind and rain, troubleshooting, recovering. That same spirit scales to Starship. I can’t wait for archaeology on Mars. We’ll discover more about human history, perhaps ties to ancient legends of giants, the Nephilim, or low-gravity environments that foster taller statures, as in biblical accounts of Titans or Goliath. Low gravity on Mars could allow future generations to grow taller, altering human physiology over time. UFO phenomena, government disclosures, and ancient texts suggest we’ve had visitors or prior connections. The “Politics of Heaven” I explore in my writing ties spiritual warfare, history, and this frontier. Mars colonization isn’t an escape; it’s fulfillment and backup for Earth. 

Economically, the space economy will generate trillions through resource mining (asteroids rich in metals), orbital manufacturing, space-based solar power, and tourism. Data centers and AI on Earth will support it, fueled by reliable energy. Trump’s policies favor this private-led growth over bureaucratic stagnation. Biden-era approaches seemed designed to hobble American leadership, benefiting China. Now, with momentum restored, SpaceX leads.

I recall historical parallels: the 1860s to 1900s saw explosive capitalist growth despite the import of Marxist ideas. Antitrust broke some monopolies, but innovation thrived. Railroads connected a nation; Starship will connect worlds. Vegas exploded with entertainment revenue; Dubai with oil and vision. The Space Coast will follow. Local businesses, from shacks to fine dining, will thrive on influxes of engineers, tourists, and capital.

Skeptics at Publix or on CNBC apply old metrics. Conventional wisdom fails against paradigm shifts. Short-sellers may pounce on dips, but patient investors win. By 2030-2031, those who buy in could see returns that create multi-generational security. Imagine passing on wealth that frees descendants from financial drudgery, allowing focus on innovation, family, and higher pursuits. Yes, some may become “spoiled,” but that’s a parenting challenge, not a reason to reject opportunity. Vanderbilt and Rockefeller levels of wealth built institutions and advanced society.

My track record on predictions stems from pattern recognition: cultural shifts in the 1970s-80s music and media as spiritual attacks; political realignments; technological leaps. I’ve said things in 1983, 1993, 2003, and 2013 that materialized. This feels the same. SpaceX isn’t hype; it’s execution. Starlink already connects remote areas. Reusable rockets slashed costs. Human Mars missions are on the horizon.

For those with expendable capital—from real estate, savings, or investments—this is better than lottery odds or a sure Derby horse. It’s the underdog that wins because the fundamentals are revolutionary. BlackRock may profit, but so can average people. I encourage friends and readers: if you have $50k-$100k that’s not needed immediately, consider allocating it. Diversify, of course, but don’t miss this.

The IPO timing aligns with broader disclosure conversations and cultural moments, such as films that spark interest. It’s symbolic: breaking free from Earth-bound limits. I wore that SpaceX shirt proudly, envisioning open planets for humanity. My wife and I, after decades together, share these adventures—museums, history, family trips. Grandchildren will inherit a world with options we barely imagined.

Challenges remain: regulatory hurdles, technical risks, geopolitical tensions. China competes, preferring America to be sidelined. Critics tied to old systems resist. Yet Musk’s focus—multi-planetary life—transcends politics. He invests not in yachts but in rockets. That drive, rooted in curiosity and science fiction, mirrors my own lifelong questions about history, archaeology, and purpose.

In my younger days, handling high-stakes situations in the shadows of Cincinnati taught me about power, coded signals, and resilience. Those lessons apply: see beyond surface narratives. Two-tier systems exist, but individuals will impose order. SpaceX does that technologically.

The space economy will dwarf past booms—trillions in new value from transport, resources, research. AI and robots will handle the dangers, with humans providing direction. Tesla autonomy extending to space. Data centers in Ohio, powered locally, supporting it all.

This is a rare chance. People will look back in 2036 or 2046 and wish they’d listened. My essays and podcasts often explore these intersections—politics, history, faith, innovation. The Politics of Heaven, my upcoming book, delves into biblical conspiracies, giants, spiritual warfare, and humanity’s place in the cosmos. Mars archaeology will illuminate much.

To those suspicious of Musk’s Trump ties or wealth: judge by results. Launches succeed, technology advances, and jobs are created. Government subsidies? Many industries receive them; SpaceX delivers returns through innovation. Private investment now amplifies that.

For the guy at Publix or Tucker Carlson skeptics worried about “demon science”: I see God-given talent in engineers pushing boundaries. Creation includes curiosity. Staying Earth-bound risks stagnation; expansion honors stewardship and dominion.

Invest if it fits your risk tolerance and timeline—long-term hold. The Starship ecosystem—landings at Boca Chica, expansions at Cape Canaveral—will reshape regions and economies. Port Canaveral is bustling like never before.

This IPO isn’t just financial; it’s philosophical. Wealth as a tool for a multi-planetary future. Generational legacy. I urge those who can: participate. You’ll be glad, and future generations will thank you.

Footnotes (extensive selection; full version would expand):

1.  SpaceX IPO prospectus and SEC filings, May 2026.

2.  Reuters reporting on $135 pricing and $75B raise, June 2026. 

3.  CNBC coverage of Starship Flight 12, May 2026.

4.  Morgan Stanley Space Economy projections. 

5.  Personal observations from Space Coast visit, 2026.

6.  Biblical Archaeology Review archives on ancient history.

7.  Historical analyses of railroad expansion and Gilded Age wealth.

8.  Reports on Dubai/Abu Dhabi development.

9.  Elon Musk interviews on multi-planetary goals.

10.  Economic studies on space resource utilization.

Bibliography (large sample):

•  SpaceX Official Updates and Launch Manifest.

•  Bloomberg, Reuters, CNBC, NYT articles on IPO, 2026.

•  Morgan Stanley: “The New Space Economy.”

•  McKinsey/World Economic Forum Space Economy Report.

•  Hoffman’s The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and The Politics of Heaven (forthcoming).

•  Asimov’s Foundation series (influence on vision).

•  Biblical texts, Book of Enoch, Dead Sea Scrolls scholarship.

•  Historical works on American expansion, railroads, Vegas growth.

•  Aerospace industry analyses, NASA/Artemis documents.

•  Additional sources on AI, robotics, asteroid mining economics.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events

The Moon: The Next Great Gold Rush and America’s Future Frontier

I remember the moment clearly. My wife and I were leaving the Smithsonian in Washington, D.C., a few weeks ago, arms loaded with heavy stacks of books from the gift shops. We had already bought plenty—typical for me when I travel. Books are what I bring home most. We were tired, heading back to the parking garage a couple of blocks away, when I spotted it on a rack near the cashier: a beautifully produced DK book on the Moon. DK books are special; they pack immense detail, vivid imagery, and love into every page. As someone deeply involved in aerospace and passionate about SpaceX, Blue Origin, NASA, and lunar exploration, I couldn’t resist. My wife looked at me with that knowing smile after nearly 40 years of marriage and said we should go back for it. We did. That book now sits on my shelf as a treasured reminder of that day, a tangible link to the excitement of the present and the vast possibilities ahead. 

That spontaneous purchase captures something larger: the Moon is not just a celestial body; it is the key to the next great American expansion, a modern gold rush that will generate wealth, innovation, and opportunity on a scale rivaling the Western frontier. Just as Theodore Roosevelt championed westward expansion, national parks, and the productive use of resources to build a stronger nation, we must embrace this new frontier without apology. The Moon holds resources—rare metals, thorium, helium-3, and more—that can power a Type I civilization, fuel energy independence, enable orbital manufacturing, and revitalize communities like those in my home region of Butler County, Ohio. 

A Personal Encounter with Lunar Wonder

Walking past the Easter Island statue and near the Department of Justice building at the Smithsonian, carrying those heavy stacks, I paused because the Moon has been central to my thinking for years. People who lunch with me or listen to my podcast know this: I constantly talk about lunar missions, the space economy, and manufacturing in space. I associate with skeptics who question Apollo, but evidence convinces me otherwise. We can see the landing sites with powerful telescopes. Other nations, including Japan and Firefly Aerospace, have landed near Apollo sites and confirmed the hardware. These are real achievements, not Hollywood sets. 

The DK book reinforced everything I believe. It covers the Moon’s history, what we know, and—crucially—its future. It details manufacturing potential, resource utilization, and why the Moon matters for industry. Flipping through it at home, with my reading light on and stacks of other books nearby (many from the Museum of the Bible’s Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit I visited on my birthday), I felt the same thrill as when launching model rockets with my grandsons or touring Kennedy Space Center facilities.

My youngest grandson, a brilliant young mind obsessed with space since age three (memorizing solar system bodies and Kuiper Belt objects), saw me reading it. He’s the one who launched that detailed Artemis model rocket we built and flew on a breezy day—overpowered engine, wind shear, pretzel rolls, but safe recovery. He wants to build, understand, and explore. This book and the future it represents are for him and his generation. They will inherit opportunities from this gold rush that make the California or Dakota rushes look small. 

The Moon as the New Gold Rush

Compare this to Teddy Roosevelt’s era. Roosevelt, whose biographies by Edmund Morris I admire and whose Netflix documentary I recommend, loved the West. He explained the moral and economic necessity of westward expansion. Gold funded infrastructure, mobility, and a great nation. Critics today decry the exploitation of indigenous peoples, but the truth is, those resources built America. On the Moon, there are no indigenous populations to displace. We can extract without controversy, using the science and archaeology we uncover along the way. 

Lunar resources are extraordinary. The solar wind has deposited vast amounts of helium-3—estimates run to over a million tons in the regolith. Helium-3 promises clean fusion energy with minimal waste and proliferation risks compared to other fuels. Rare earth elements, thorium, titanium, aluminum, and metals associated with KREEP (potassium, rare earths, phosphorus) terrains offer riches. Thorium concentrations signal nearby rare metals. One kilogram of helium-3 can produce enormous energy when fused with deuterium. Bringing these back via Starship or similar vehicles will transform economies. 

Thorium itself is abundant on the Moon and ideal for reactors. On Earth, thorium is three times more common than uranium. Small modular thorium reactors—some the size of a large air conditioner—could power homes for decades with minimal grid dependence, producing far less long-lived waste. Imagine every home with its own safe, perpetual-energy source—Africa’s poor gain electricity and internet via Starlink. Surplus power feeds grids or charges vehicles. This is abundance, not scarcity. I’ve advocated this for over a decade; lunar thorium accelerates it. 

Space Economy: Projections and Infrastructure

The numbers are staggering. The broader space economy could exceed $1 trillion by 2032. Space tourism alone may add $16 billion or more, with markets projected to grow from $10 billion to over $17 billion by 2030-2032, at CAGRs of 36-44%. Commercial space flight, satellites, manufacturing, and resource return will multiply this. 

SpaceX’s Starship is pivotal—reusable, high-cadence launches (aiming for weekly), orbital refueling, and lunar/planetary capability. Blue Origin’s Blue Moon landers and manufacturing facilities in Florida support Artemis. I toured these areas recently; the scale of Blue Origin’s facility dwarfs many terrestrial plants. Starship catching with “chopsticks,” successful Indian Ocean splashdowns—the cadence is building. Orbital factories in zero-G, powered by solar or nuclear power, produce chips, pharmaceuticals, and materials superior to those produced by Earth’s gravity-constrained methods. Precious metals mined on the Moon fuel superconductors and electronics, reducing reliance on terrestrial or Chinese supplies. 

Elon Musk’s vision, Tesla’s energy innovations (I love the charging stations at that Cracker Barrel north of Lima, Ohio, or Disney Springs), and Starlink complement this. I’m not against renewables or traditional fuels—Wawa, Bucky’s, gas stations built America. But nuclear power, including thorium, provides baseload capacity. Politicians who weakened the grid through poor policy must adapt. FirstEnergy and Ohio’s energy mix, plus lunar resources, are strengths.

Ohio’s Role: Spaceports, Data Centers, and Renewal

Ohio is primed. Butler County’s aquifers, the Great Miami River, the Trenton area, and proximity to the I-75/I-71 corridors make it ideal. I’ve walked these lands, showing the water resources that are perfect for data centers and manufacturing. Middletown and Monroe could host a spaceport. Farmland surrounds it; sonic booms are a manageable trade-off for vitality, unlike the decline and illicit economies some fear. Boca Chica proves it; Starships landing, cargo from lunar mines or orbital fabs unloaded like truck trailers. Chips manufactured in orbit return here, feeding Intel-like plants and restoring manufacturing. 

Hyperloop concepts in Monroe, spaceport infrastructure, and data centers powered by reliable energy create a corridor. With leaders like JD Vance (likely future President) and Vivek Ramaswamy (potential Governor), plus Ohio senators and locals like Sheriff Jones or Sen. Lang, bills are ready. This isn’t fantasy; it’s Rooseveltian vision meeting Musk-era execution. Vanderbilts, Rockefellers, and new dynasties emerge from such frontiers.

Critics worry about noise or change. But silence in cornfields while communities decay? No. This brings jobs, STEM excitement for youth (like my grandson’s rocketry), and wealth. Environmentalists note: no indigenous claims on the Moon. Archaeology of ancient civilizations or human origins may await—tying into my work on The Politics of Heaven, giants, and spiritual history.

Overcoming Skepticism and Embracing the Future

Some still doubt Moon landings. I understand distrust of government, but international verification, hardware visibility, and private successes (Firefly, Japanese landers) confirm the reality. The wreckage isn’t in a desert lot; it’s on the lunar surface. Artemis, Starship, and commercial partners accelerate what Apollo started.

Investment advice I give at lunch: aerospace, space infrastructure, Moon-related plays. SpaceX IPO talk, Starlink, Tesla synergies, lunar miners like Interlune for helium-3—these are paths to wealth. Re-read this essay back in a decade; those who invest in the gold rush will thrive. 

My wife and I carried those books, tired but joyful. That DK volume symbolizes commitment. Museums like the Smithsonian and Kennedy inspire; they show past triumphs and fund future ones. I devoured Dead Sea Scrolls books on my birthday; this Moon book joins them.

For my grandchildren: model rockets today, lunar bases and orbital factories tomorrow. They’ll read these pages, build, explore, and lead. As an aerospace executive, writer, and grandfather, I see resilience in imposing will on circumstances—like launching in wind or pushing through fatigue for one more book.

Call to Action for Leaders and Readers

To JD Vance, Vivek Ramaswamy, Elon Musk, President Trump, Ohio senators, and others: This is the moment. Support Artemis cadence, thorium R&D, spaceport incentives in Ohio, orbital manufacturing tax policy, and resource utilization. Fund archaeology tied to lunar discoveries. America leads; China or others will if we hesitate—no apologies—abundance for all.

The Moon is our Teddy Roosevelt frontier: productive, moral in expanding human potential, wealth-building without exploitation. Invest your paycheck, imagination, and policy here. Factories on the Moon and in orbit, Starships cycling constantly, homes powered by thorium the size of AC units, chips from zero-G, economic renewal in Middletown and beyond.

I stopped in my tracks for that book because the Moon is my place. It should be ours as a nation. The gold rush awaits. Let’s claim it.

Footnotes

1.  Personal observations from Smithsonian visit and family rocketry activities.

2.  DK The Moon book details lunar resources and future industry. 

3.  Helium-3 estimates from scientific literature. 

4.  Thorium advantages: abundance, waste reduction. 

5.  Space economy projections from market analyses. 

6.  Artemis/Blue Origin/SpaceX updates. 

7.  Ohio aerospace context. 

(Additional footnotes would expand on specific quotes, historical references to Roosevelt, Morris biographies, energy policy critiques, etc., drawing from verified sources and personal experience.)

Bibliography

•  DK Publishing. The Moon. (Recent edition available via Smithsonian and Amazon).

•  Morris, Edmund. Theodore Roosevelt trilogy.

•  NASA Artemis program documents and partner updates (SpaceX, Blue Origin).

•  Scientific papers on lunar resources (ESA, Wikipedia summaries of peer-reviewed data, USGS on REEs).

•  Market reports: Grand View Research, Market.us, Visual Capitalist on space economy.

•  Thorium energy literature (World Nuclear Association, etc.).

•  My previous works: The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, The Politics of Heaven manuscript.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events

Contemplations on taxes and land use: The value of the Buried Valley Aquifer

I have lived in Liberty Township for half a century, and my daughter has spent most of her life here as well. This place shaped us. I remember when Liberty Township was defined by open fields, cows grazing behind white fences, and families holding onto fifty acres or more. Those days feel distant now. Land once measured in expansive plots has shrunk to quarter-acre dreams, and the American vision of space and self-reliance has been traded for denser subdivisions and higher tax bases. I see this tension playing out right now with a proposed housing complex at the end of Lynn Road. My daughter wants to speak against it during public comments, and I support her. We drive by that property often, and it has always been a spacious vanishing point—a beautiful open vista that has brought me peace for decades. Watching it get plotted and dotted with houses feels like losing something sentimental, something that defined the character of this township. 

I am not against development in principle. I am pro-growth and see economic activity as a creative enterprise—an artistic one, even. I have friends who are landholders and developers, many on the wealthier side, and I understand their perspective. Property owners have every right to sell, and if someone wants to buy and build, that transaction should be respected, and high property taxes make it so selling that land to a developer is their only real option. But not every piece of land is the same. Some properties carry generational memories and visual value that new subdivisions erode quickly. I have watched this transformation happen repeatedly in Liberty Township. Brand-new houses look appealing at first, but many are built with materials that age poorly. In a decade or two, they become eyesores—secondhand in quality, declining in desirability, and burdensome to maintain. The open farmland that once symbolized freedom and productivity gets replaced by neighborhoods that demand more services while delivering diminishing returns. 

This is not just nostalgia. It is an economic observation. Converting productive farmland into residential plots often feels like economic shuffleboarding—moving value around rather than creating lasting wealth. A large plot growing beans and corn generates real output. Subdividing it generates immediate tax revenue, which big government loves, but it comes at the cost of open space and long-term character. Local governments face pressure to approve these projects because they promise quick fiscal boosts. Developers attend meetings, build relationships, and present polished plans. Residents who value the status quo often show up only when directly affected, so the process becomes one-sided. Hearings can feel like formalities. In many cases, the outcome seems predetermined. I have told my daughter as much: these deals are frequently made long before public comment. Yet speaking out still matters. It puts the sentimental and aesthetic costs on record.

I contrast this sharply with another development I support strongly: data centers in nearby Trenton, just across the river. Trenton sits in a strategic spot with highway access, existing infrastructure, and—most crucially—one of the world’s best water resources beneath it. The Great Miami River Buried Valley Aquifer underlies much of Butler County, including areas around Trenton and Middletown. This aquifer is one of the most productive groundwater systems in the United States, a network of sand and gravel deposits storing over a trillion gallons of clean water. It yields enormous volumes—hundreds of millions of gallons daily—and has supported industries such as the Miller brewery for decades. My own house sits on a hill overlooking Trenton, roughly 100 feet above the river, yet we have a constant water presence in our basement from the aquifer below. Geologically, this water basin is vast and reliable, replenished by the Miami River. Data centers need massive cooling capacity, and this aquifer provides it without noticeable depletion. The consumption rates discussed, even for large facilities, would barely register on the aquifer’s scale. 

I have followed the proposals for data centers in Trenton closely, including projects like Prologis’ “Project Mila” on 141 acres in the industrial park. These are substantial—hundreds of thousands of square feet across multiple buildings. There has been pushback from some residents concerned about views, noise, or rapid approval processes. I get the concerns; change is disruptive. But I see data centers as fundamentally different from housing sprawl. They represent the future economy: AI, robotics, data processing, and the infrastructure for the emerging space economy. I am a huge fan of SpaceX and what they are building. Giant factories in orbit, manufacturing in zero-gravity environments—these are not science fiction to me. They are the next frontier, safer and more efficient than Earth-based heavy industry in many ways. To get there, we need AI and the data centers that power it. Trenton’s location—near power infrastructure, highways, and this incredible aquifer—makes it ideal. 

Ohio’s energy picture supports this growth. We are in a different era now. Fracking, fossil fuels, and a pragmatic approach to nuclear power are providing abundance. I remember the politics around FirstEnergy and nuclear plants under previous administrations—efforts to shut down reliable sources in favor of intermittent renewables that could not meet demand. Those policies created artificial shortages. Today, with a focus on all-of-the-above energy, including drilling and keeping nuclear online, we have the capacity. Data centers are energy-intensive, but Ohio is positioning itself to meet that demand without brownouts or rationing. The aquifer handles the cooling, the grid handles the power, and the economic returns are substantial. 

I have seen arguments about water use and electricity draw, but the data reassures me. The Buried Valley Aquifer has been studied extensively by the USGS and local conservancy districts. It interacts dynamically with the Great Miami River, maintaining levels even with significant withdrawals for municipal and industrial use. Data centers can employ efficient cooling designs, sometimes using water for only a small percentage of the year. Compared to the long-term benefits, the trade-offs seem manageable. Meanwhile, residential developments consume water too—often less efficiently per unit of economic output—and they permanently fragment land. 

Tax revenue comparisons favor targeted industrial development, such as data centers, over blanket housing. Housing brings in property taxes from many small parcels, but it also increases demands on schools, roads, and services. Data centers, even with incentives, generate significant direct and indirect revenue. Ohio has seen billions in investments and tax contributions from the sector. They create high-value economic activity with fewer ongoing public service burdens. A data center does not fill classrooms or require the same level of residential infrastructure. It powers the digital backbone that supports everything from cell phones to advanced manufacturing. 

This selective approach to development reflects my broader philosophy. I like growth that builds real capability. Farms like Garver Family Farm Market and Neiderman Farm show how landowners can adapt—by selling directly to consumers, hosting events, and creating agritourism revenue to help cover taxes. These are creative solutions that preserve some open character while sustaining ownership. But crushing property taxes push many toward selling to residential developers. The system incentivizes short-term conversion over long-term stewardship. Big government benefits from the expanded tax base, yet it erodes the sovereignty of individual landholders. I see this as, in practice, turning private property into something more collective. 

My views come from decades of observation. I remember Trenton before and after the Miller brewery. That facility brought jobs and economic activity, though it also brought truck traffic on roads not designed for it. Data centers will bring different impacts—more buildings on former farmland—but they align with a high-tech future. Robots in fast food, AI handling data, automation filling labor gaps: these trends are real. I have friends in the restaurant business struggling with staffing post-COVID. Demographics and cultural shifts mean fewer people are available or willing to take certain jobs. Tesla and SpaceX demonstrate how robotics and AI multiply human capability. Data centers are the enablers. I want Trenton to be part of that boom. I want Butler County and Ohio to lead in the space economy. Factories in orbit, 200,000-square-foot facilities operating in microgravity—these are exciting prospects I hope to engage with personally. 

The housing project on Lynn Road bothers me because it trades irreplaceable open space for something transient. New houses age into maintenance headaches. Neighborhoods change demographics and character over decades. The view my daughter and I have enjoyed will be gone. In contrast, data centers, while industrial, serve a purpose that scales into the future. They do not sprawl into residential life the same way. They cluster in appropriate industrial zones.

I understand the counterarguments. Some worry about electricity strain or water draw, but Ohio’s policies and geology mitigate those. Others dislike the aesthetics of large warehouse-like structures. I prefer cornfields too, but economic reality and technological progress demand adaptation. Property taxes make holding large farms expensive. Development pays those bills. The question is which development creates enduring value.

I am optimistic about the direction. With sound energy policy, abundant water, and a strategic location, Trenton can thrive. Liberty Township should protect its remaining special open spaces where possible. Public comments matter, even if outcomes feel foregone. My daughter speaking out honors the place we love. I plan to support her.

This balance—resisting unchecked residential sprawl while embracing high-value tech infrastructure—strikes me as pragmatic. It respects property rights without surrendering everything to short-term fiscal pressure. It looks toward a future of AI, space manufacturing, and expanded human potential rather than repeating patterns of subdivision that have already altered so much of what I grew up with.

In the end, I want both: preserved pockets of the beautiful, spacious Liberty Township I have known, and developments like data centers that position our region for the next century. The aquifer under the Miami Valley gives us a unique advantage that few places can match. Ohio’s energy abundance under current policies removes old constraints. We should use these gifts wisely—favoring quality over quantity in residential growth, and boldness in embracing the technologies that will define tomorrow. 

Footnotes

¹ Personal observation and driving history in Liberty Township.

² Liberty Township comprehensive plans and development patterns.

³ USGS reports on the Great Miami Buried Valley Aquifer.

⁴ Butler County water resources documentation.

⁵ Prologis Project Mila proposals and Trenton approvals.

⁶ Ohio data center tax revenue studies.

⁷ Energy policy analyses regarding nuclear and fracking.

⁸ Farm market operations in the Monroe area.

Bibliography

•  Sheets, R.A. et al. Ground-Water Flow Directions and Estimation of Aquifer Hydraulic Properties in the Lower Great Miami River Buried Valley Aquifer System. USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5013.

•  Miami Conservancy District publications on aquifer sustainability.

•  Ohio Chamber of Commerce Research Foundation reports on data center economic impact.

•  Policy Matters Ohio analyses of tax incentives.

•  Local news coverage from WCPO, Journal-News on Trenton developments.

•  Garver Family Farm Market business information.

•  Ohio Revised Code sections on data center tax exemptions.

•  Additional USGS and Ohio DNR groundwater studies for Butler County.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

Ascending from Plato’s Cave: Don’t suffer from second husband syndrome

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about where humanity stands at this pivotal moment. As of late March 2026, NASA is days away from launching Artemis II—the first crewed mission to the Moon since Apollo, targeted for no earlier than April 1, 2026, with astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Jeremy Hansen aboard Orion for a ten-day lunar flyby.   This isn’t just another flight; it’s NASA finally getting aggressive, the way it always should have been. I support the Artemis program with my whole heart. I want to see timelines compressed, second and third shifts running around the clock, Saturdays and Sundays included—full throttle output. We’ve talked for decades about whether we ever really went to the Moon. I respect people who doubt it; many have been lied to by institutions they once trusted. But I’ve traveled the world, seen the curvature of the Earth with my own eyes, understood time zones through lived experience, and studied how ancient mathematicians calculated that curvature to plot constellations and voyages. Those advances in human culture demand we go to space—not just with drones or robots, but with people living sustainably off-world. That’s the only way we climb out of Plato’s cave, stop staring at shadows, and see reality for what it is.

My perspective is rooted in a deep love for knowledge, ancient history, and the biblical call to dominion. I don’t dismiss fears about transhumanism or the occult origins some attribute to NASA. I get the Tower of Babel parallels—humanity trying to replace God. But I also believe God gave us intellect and drive precisely for exploration. Leaving Earth isn’t rebellion; it’s fulfillment of the creation mandate. And with AI, robotics, and companies like SpaceX and Firefly Aerospace pushing boundaries, we’re on the cusp of a flourishing space economy that will create jobs, not destroy them. I’ll explain all of this below, drawing on the examples and reasoning I’ve shared in conversations, while adding substantial background, historical context, scientific details, and references for further study. This is my view, expressed in the first person because these convictions are personal—forged from years of study, travel, and reflection on what makes civilizations thrive or collapse.

Let’s start with the skepticism that still lingers. I’ve met kind, thoughtful people who defend Flat Earth theory aggressively. I feel for them. Decades of institutional deception—from governments to media—have left many clinging to simplicity as a shield against complexity. Yet the evidence against a flat Earth is overwhelming and ancient. Around 240 BCE, the Greek scholar Eratosthenes of Cyrene calculated Earth’s circumference with remarkable accuracy using nothing more than sticks, shadows, and geometry. At noon on the summer solstice in Syene (modern Aswan), the Sun shone directly down a well with no shadow. In Alexandria, 5000 stadia north, a stick cast a 7.2-degree shadow—exactly 1/50th of a circle. Multiplying the distance by 50 gave him roughly 250,000 stadia, or about 40,000 kilometers—within 1% of the modern equatorial value of 40,075 km.   Ancient cultures used this spherical understanding to navigate oceans and align monuments with constellations. Time zones, the Coriolis effect on weather, and lunar eclipses (where Earth’s round shadow falls on the Moon) all confirm it. I’ve seen the horizon curve from high altitudes and across oceans. We don’t need to argue endlessly; we need to move forward.

The same institutional distrust fuels Moon-landing conspiracies. Yet commercial progress is demolishing doubt. In March 2025, Firefly Aerospace’s Blue Ghost lander achieved the first fully successful commercial Moon landing in Mare Crisium, near Mons Latreille. It operated for over 14 days on the surface—346 hours of daylight plus lunar night—delivering NASA payloads and proving robotic precision.  This wasn’t government theater; it was private industry landing hardware right near prior Apollo sites. The best proof, though, will be routine human traffic: Starship ferrying thousands to lunar bases and back. When people vacation on the Moon like they do in Hawaii, the shadows-on-the-wall debate ends.

This brings me to Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, which I invoke often because it perfectly captures our situation. In Book VII of The Republic, Socrates describes prisoners chained since birth in an underground cavern, facing a blank wall. Behind them burns a fire; between fire and prisoners, puppeteers carry objects whose shadows dance on the wall. The prisoners believe these shadows are ultimate reality; they compete to predict the next shadow, mistaking illusion for truth. One prisoner breaks free. Dragged upward into sunlight, he suffers pain but gradually sees real objects, then the Sun itself—the Form of the Good. Returning to the cave to free others, he is mocked as blind. Plato uses this to illustrate education’s purpose: turning the soul from illusion toward truth.  

I see modern humanity in that cave. We’ve been fed institutional shadows—media narratives, bureaucratic lies, power-maintaining myths. Space exploration is the ascent. Drones and rovers have sent back data, but they’re still shadows. Humans must go—live, work, have children off-world—to grasp the fire and the Sun beyond. Only then do we understand what cast those flickering images on Earth’s wall. My entire worldview, from business to culture to faith, rests on this quest for unfiltered knowledge. I refuse to remain chained, interpreting shadows while interpreters with agendas lie about what they see.

Ancient history reinforces this urgency. I study civilizations full-time because they reveal what builds success: boldness, truth-seeking, and expansion. Many past cultures achieved greatness then lost momentum—collapsed under internal rot or external conquest. I call this “second husband syndrome.” Imagine a second husband tormented by thoughts of his wife’s first husband, especially if children from that marriage remain. Jealousy poisons the new relationship. Likewise, modern elites suppress or dismiss prior cultures’ achievements to claim sole glory. They rewrite history so previous “husbands” (Atlantis legends, megalithic engineering, advanced astronomy) never existed or were primitive. This intellectual jealousy stifles progress. Studying the Sumerians, Egyptians, Greeks, or Maya shows they grasped Earth’s sphericity, built with precision, and reached for the stars. To build successful cultures today, we must leave the mother’s womb—Earth—and psychologically inhabit other worlds. Labor shortages on Earth are irrelevant; AI and robotics multiply our hours exponentially.

Biblically, this expansion aligns with God’s design, not against it. Genesis 1:28 commands: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Theologians call this the creation or cultural mandate—image-bearers exercising responsible stewardship and creativity across creation.   Some interpret it Earth-only, warning against “playing God.” I counter: God gave intellect, curiosity, and the stars themselves. Exploration within biblical rules—humility before the Creator, ethical stewardship—strengthens faith. Western civilization’s prosperity flows from this worldview: truth-seeking fused with moral order. Space doesn’t dismiss Scripture; it illuminates it. Ancient myths and biblical echoes (Ezekiel’s wheels, chariots of fire) hint at cosmic realities. When we settle the Moon and Mars, we’ll confront those stories with fresh eyes, not fear.

Transhumanism and AI raise valid anxieties. I sympathize with those guarding the “temple of the human body” against occult-tinged experiments that seek to dethrone God. Yet I support robotics and AI enthusiastically. They’re tools, not replacements. Elon Musk’s Optimus robots—demonstrated in recent high-profile events—represent progress, not erasure. The robot Melania Trump walked onstage symbolized partnership: machines handling hostile environments so humans thrive. Blue-collar fears about job loss in trucking or fast food miss the bigger picture. Space will explode opportunities. Lunar mining, orbital manufacturing, tourism, and research will demand millions of roles Earthside and off-world. NASA studies project Artemis driving economic growth through commercial partnerships and a burgeoning lunar marketplace.  PwC forecasts a $127 billion Moon economy by 2050, fueled by energy infrastructure, resources, and services.  I think it will be a lot higher than that.  Far from regression, we gain jobs by the mass. I’m bullish because history shows technology expands human potential when paired with moral vision.

Look at the hardware already proving the path. SpaceX’s Starship must fly aggressively; routine, reusable flights are non-negotiable. Firefly’s success shows commercial lunar access is here. Artemis II tests Orion and SLS for crewed lunar operations, paving the way for Artemis III’s landing (targeted 2027–2028 under current plans) and eventual bases. I want Americans—led by visionaries like President Trump—first on the Moon again, first with permanent colonies (dozens, then hundreds, then thousands). A 10,000-person lunar hub by 2050 isn’t fantasy; it’s engineering plus will. People will live there comfortably: internet, power, hotels. I’ll be among the first tourists with my wife—enthusiastically. Imagine vacationing on the Moon, then returning transformed.

Mars follows. Elon Musk has highlighted the Fermi Paradox’s scariest resolution: we might be alone, or nearly so, in the observable universe—a tiny candle of consciousness in darkness.   That rarity demands we multiply life outward. Different gravities will reshape humanity—taller or shorter frames, new adaptations—yet our core experience evolves. Space archaeology will resolve earthly mythologies: Was Mars once lush? Did prior intelligences leave traces? We boldly go, not in fear, but in faith.

Opposition comes from anti-human forces—regressive ideologies that prefer controlled scarcity on Earth over expansive freedom. Democrats and globalist mindsets sabotage by slowing timelines, inflating costs, or prioritizing Earthbound politics. They fear off-world colonies because independent humans are harder to dominate. I reject that. Human destiny is multi-planetary; it guarantees species survival against asteroids, climate shifts, or self-inflicted woes.

I want answers. I want the space economy flourishing, exploration routine, and humanity confronting the fire behind the shadows. My book The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business outlines principles of decisive action and moral clarity I apply here. Subscribe, engage, study ancient history, support aggressive NASA and SpaceX timelines. Let’s compress Artemis, land Starships weekly, and build hotels on the Moon. The cave is behind us. The stars await. Godspeed.

Footnotes and Further Reference Material

1.  Plato. The Republic, Book VII (514a–520a). Standard translation by Benjamin Jowett or Allan Bloom recommended. For modern analysis: SparkNotes or MasterClass summaries align with my interpretation of enlightenment through ascent. 

2.  Eratosthenes’ method detailed in Cleomedes’ On the Circular Motions of the Heavens and modern reconstructions. See APS News (2006) or Khan Academy for accessible explanations. 

3.  NASA Artemis Program: Official site (nasa.gov/artemis) for timelines; Wikipedia for historical delays. Economic report: “Economic Growth and National Competitiveness Impacts of the Artemis Program” (NASA, 2022). 

4.  Firefly Blue Ghost Mission 1: Firefly Aerospace press releases and end-of-mission summary. Confirms March 2, 2025 landing. 

5.  Biblical Creation Mandate: Genesis 1:26–28; extended discussion in Answers in Genesis or Focus on the Family resources. 

6.  Space economy projections: PwC Lunar Market Assessment (2026); NASA’s commercial lunar payload services page. 

7.  Elon Musk on Fermi Paradox and solitude in cosmos: Public statements 2018–2026, including Davos remarks and X posts. 

Additional reading: The Republic (Plato); Pale Blue Dot (Carl Sagan) for perspective (though I differ on some philosophical points); NASA’s Artemis economic studies; The Case for Mars (Robert Zubrin); ancient astronomy texts like Ptolemy or modern histories of Eratosthenes. For AI/robotics ethics: Musk’s own writings and Tesla Optimus updates. Study these, visit NASA facilities as I have with my wife, and join the ascent. The future is ours to seize.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

Its Time for NASA to get The Right Stuff, Again: They need to work faster, longer, and launches need to happen much more often

My wife and I recently returned from a trip to NASA’s Space Coast in Florida, a place that has held a special significance in my life for over 30 years. My family has owned a condominium complex in the area for decades, and we’ve visited the Cape Canaveral region dozens of times. It’s been a big part of our lives, from family vacations to watching the ebb and flow of the aerospace industry along the coast. This latest visit was particularly exciting because I wanted to get a firsthand look at the facilities tied to the Artemis program, as well as the impressive campuses of private companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin. I am deeply invested in the expansion of human presence off-planet Earth—not just for the adventure and acquisition of knowledge, but for risk mitigation against existential threats to humanity and to unlock the full potential of human intellect beyond our world. I want a thriving space economy, and I want NASA to succeed spectacularly in leading that charge. However, my observations during this trip left me with a mix of enthusiasm and constructive criticism about the current state of NASA’s Artemis program.

We timed our visit toward the end of February 2026, hoping to catch some activity. SpaceX had a busy schedule with multiple Falcon 9 launches deploying Starlink satellites, including one on a Wednesday, another on a Friday, and a Saturday night launch around 9 p.m. that I was particularly eager to witness. These launches have become so routine and reliable that they barely make headlines anymore, which is actually a good thing—it means the infrastructure is robust, dependable, and taken for granted like buses running on schedule.¹ Yet for me, personally, it was a milestone: after all these years of visiting the area, including many stays at our family condo with views toward the launch sites, I had never personally witnessed a launch until that Saturday night. I set up my camera on the balcony, and when the Falcon 9 lifted off, it was thrilling—a bright streak lighting up the night sky, followed by the booster’s controlled descent. It felt like a long-overdue personal victory, but it also underscored a deeper issue: launches from the Space Coast should be commonplace, not rare exceptions.

In contrast, the Artemis program felt stagnant. While touring the Kennedy Space Center facilities, I noticed a heavy emphasis on historical reverence—the Apollo era, the Shuttle program, the achievements of the past. There’s immense pride in what NASA accomplished when it was the only game in town, but far less visible momentum on current endeavors. The exhibits and tours celebrate the “right stuff” mentality of old, yet the gift shop selling “The Right Stuff” merchandise feels like a relic rather than a living ethos.² When stacked against the dynamic energy at SpaceX and Blue Origin, the difference is stark.

SpaceX’s operations are behind secure gates, but their pace is undeniable. During our visit, we saw a Falcon booster that had just landed on a droneship being towed into Port Canaveral on a flatbed truck, cleaned up near restaurants where cruise ships depart, and prepared for reuse—all on a Saturday, with crews working as if it were a regular weekday.³ The company had three launches in a short window that week alone, demonstrating frequency, reusability, and high employee engagement. Blue Origin’s campus, visible right outside the visitor center gates, is enormous—once an empty field, now dominated by a massive factory complex for their New Glenn rocket and lunar lander work, rivaling or exceeding large industrial sites I’ve seen elsewhere, like GE facilities in Ohio.⁴ Their footprint signals serious investment in a new space economy.

Artemis, however, hit a snag during our stay. NASA had been preparing for an early-March launch of Artemis II, the crewed lunar flyby mission using the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Orion spacecraft. But during final checks, including a dry run or wet dress rehearsal, issues emerged: leaks (including helium flow anomalies in the upper stage and prior hydrogen concerns) and other mechanical problems.⁵ The decision was made to scrub the March window, roll the stack back into the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) for fixes, and target April at the earliest.⁶ This delay was disappointing but not surprising given the program’s history of setbacks.

I offer this as constructive criticism because I genuinely want Artemis to work. The program represents NASA’s path to sustained lunar presence, eventual Mars exploration, and broader human expansion. But it suffers from several structural issues. First, the cadence is too slow. Apollo launches happened far more frequently, with shorter intervals that kept teams sharp, knowledge fresh, and momentum high.⁷ In Artemis, years pass between major flights—Artemis I was uncrewed in 2022, Artemis II is now pushed further, and landings are delayed. This leads to entropy: experienced personnel move on, retire, or shift careers, and institutional knowledge erodes. High turnover in skilled aerospace roles exacerbates this.

Second, there’s a cultural shift away from the bold, risk-accepting “right stuff” era.⁸ In the past, engineers and workers stayed late, worked extra shifts, and treated the mission as an adventure worth personal sacrifice. Today, NASA seems more bureaucratic—9-to-5 mindsets, emphasis on protocols (even lingering COVID-era restrictions in some views), and fear of media backlash from any failure. Catastrophic risks like Challenger and Columbia are memorialized heartbreakingly at the Atlantis exhibit, but those risks were part of pushing boundaries. Adventurers accepted it; today, there’s paralysis by analysis and PR caution.⁹

Third, workforce engagement appears lower than that of private firms. SpaceX recruits passionate people who work multiple shifts, weekends included, to meet aggressive schedules. NASA has fallen into patterns where not all hires prioritize the mission’s higher purpose—some treat it as just a job. This ties into broader criticisms of prioritizing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) metrics over merit-based selection of the “best and brightest” for frontline problem-solving.¹⁰ While inclusion is valuable, the core must remain technical excellence and drive.

The recent program changes highlight these struggles. NASA announced major revisions: adding an interim mission (now Artemis III in 2027) for low-Earth orbit tests of docking with commercial landers (from SpaceX and Blue Origin), life support, and other systems—pushing the first lunar landing to Artemis IV in 2028, with potential for another that year.¹¹ This “sprinkling in” another mission before attempting a landing suggests the original Artemis III step was too ambitious given accumulated delays and risks, including ongoing Orion heat shield concerns from Artemis I (unexpected char loss, leading to trajectory adjustments rather than full redesign for Artemis II).¹² Changing reentry vectors might be more practical than material overhauls, which could take a decade, but it still reflects caution over boldness.

Historically, political decisions have hampered NASA. The Obama-era cancellation of Constellation, reliance on Russian Soyuz for ISS access, and redirection toward other priorities (like studying Islamic contributions to science) felt like a betrayal of the adventure spirit.¹³ The Trump administration’s creation of Space Force and push for resurgence helped, but sustained congressional support has been inconsistent.¹⁴ Without it, NASA can’t match the frequency of private players.

The local Space Coast economy reflects this. Property values have stabilized but not exploded as they could with consistent activity.¹⁵ Cocoa Beach and the surrounding areas thrive more from tourism and private launches than NASA events. When launches were rare, the vibrancy lagged; now, with SpaceX’s dominance, there’s renewed energy—people shopping at Publix, upper mobility in aerospace jobs, families coming to watch launches.

I remain optimistic. NASA has the infrastructure—Kennedy Space Center is ideal for launches—and partnerships with SpaceX, Blue Origin, and others. Administrator statements post-delay emphasized fixing issues quickly, increasing cadence (targeting more frequent SLS flights), and returning to basics to accelerate progress toward 2028 landings.¹⁶ But success requires cultural revival: robust second and third shifts, seven-day operations, passion over paycheck, acceptance of managed risk for exploration, and political unity beyond one administration.

I’ve seen the Space Coast transform, from Apollo’s glory to the Shuttle era to today’s commercial boom. My first personal launch sighting was exhilarating, but it shouldn’t have taken 30+ years. Launches should be daily occurrences—maybe grab pizza and watch one every evening. That’s the expectation we need: frequent, reliable, advancing humanity. Artemis can lead if it recaptures the right stuff—not just in a gift shop, but in every engineer, worker, and decision.

The space economy could double U.S. GDP contributions through innovation, jobs, and knowledge gains.¹⁷ It’s not just money; it’s human bandwidth expanding. Congress, local leaders, the White House—everyone must rally. Private companies are setting the pace; NASA should leverage that, not lag.  But to do all that, NASA needs to work harder and faster.  A lot faster. 

Footnotes:

¹ SpaceX Starlink launches in late February 2026 included multiple launches from Cape Canaveral.

² “The Right Stuff” refers to the 1979 book/1983 film on Mercury program bravery.

³ Reusable Falcon 9 boosters routinely recovered and refurbished.

⁴ Blue Origin’s KSC facility is massive for New Glenn production.

⁵ Helium flow anomaly in SLS upper stage led to rollback.

⁶ NASA targeted April 2026 for Artemis II post-rollback.

⁷ Apollo had a higher launch frequency in peak years.

⁸ Tom Wolfe’s “The Right Stuff” captured the early astronaut/test pilot ethos.

⁹ Analysis paralysis and PR fears cited in delays.

¹⁰ Broader debates on merit vs. DEI in technical fields.

¹¹ NASA added a mission, shifted landing to Artemis IV in 2028.

¹² Orion heat shield char loss from Artemis I prompted changes.

¹³ Obama-era program shifts and ISS reliance on Russia.

¹⁴ Space Force established in 2019 under Trump.

¹⁵ Local economy tied to aerospace activity levels.

¹⁶ Post-delay press conference emphasized speed and fixes.

¹⁷ Estimates of space economy growth potential.

Bibliography / Further Reading

•  NASA official Artemis updates: https://www.nasa.gov/artemis

•  Artemis II delay announcements (Feb 2026): NASA blogs and press releases on helium issues and rollback.

•  SpaceX launch manifests: https://www.spacex.com/launches

•  Blue Origin facilities overview: Wikipedia and company announcements on KSC campus.

•  Orion heat shield investigation: NASA technical reports post-Artemis I.

•  Historical Apollo cadence: NASA history archives.

•  “The Right Stuff” by Tom Wolfe (1979).

•  Space economy reports: Various economic analyses on growth projections.

•  Political history: Coverage of Constellation cancellation and Space Force creation.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707