Jared Isaacman

And it gets really hard to get that machine rolling again.

And I say all this in relation to China, because they're doing the same thing now, where instead of trying to repurpose facilities and resources that have kind of lost their way to some extent over the years, they're literally doing the same thing of just setting up shop here, setting up a location here, all in optimal locations, all getting the right

people and talent and then resourcing it accordingly and willing it into existence.

It's basically doing exactly what we did during the Manhattan Project, during the Great Space Race, and doing it now having learned exactly, you know, our approach to it.

Puts us at a disadvantage.

Man, it's just...

Yeah, look, we need to get back to the moon.

Not, you know, I wouldn't have mind if 35, because some people can take the position of like, we already did it.

We did it long ago.

And I have two reasons to go.

One of them is, hey, we don't know what we may find that has economic or scientific or national security value like helium-3 that could change the balance of power here on Earth if we get it wrong, but mostly because we said we're going to do it.

You know, you can't go back.

Every president for 35 years has said, we're going to return to the moon and have a path to Mars.

And as taxpayers, we spent $100 billion trying to do it.

The moment you say that, you've just committed the nation and our resources, our national prestige to getting something done.

And if you fail to do it, there are ramifications.

There's consequences to it.

If we never said that, if 35 years ago we said, you know what, we've done it, and we wish the Chinese and the Russians the best, and we'll celebrate when they get there, but we're setting our sights on Mars, then it wouldn't bother me as much.

I would still think we should do it because we don't know what we might find that could change things, but we didn't.

We said we're going to do it, and now we spent 35 years and a lot of money doing it.