![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Whew! I go away (mostly) for just over a week and find you've all been busy while I'm gone.
First of all, a belated happy birthday to![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
moonshayde, whose birthday was last week! Would you like a birthday ficlet, even at such a late date? Your tastes are so wonderfully diverse that you'll have to give me a prompt for what you'd like. :) Keep to classic SG-1, if you don't mind; I don't like seasons 9-10 enough to be able to give Vala or Mitchell a good voice.
In other news, I am utterly squeeful about mysd_ficathon assignment! About the whole ficathon, really. I had no time to sit down at the keyboard until today, but I finally got the first part written. I know they're going to face an ethical dilemma in the second half of the story, and I'm not sure which way to go. I think I'll just get there, and let Sam and Daniel decide for themselves. The characters usually know better than I do, anyway.
I've been thinking about my least favorite thread in SG-1 canon lately: the NID and its rampant abuse of power. While that's a subject worthy of an entire essay - and one that I really hope to write someday - I do find myself wondering why the SGC was so vulnerable, especially at budget-time. If they have naquadah reactors to spare any time a team 'Gates to a planet without a DHD - and already in S3, that was so routine that they actually suggested it as a reasonable option to going to a planet that they knew didn't have a DHD, in New Ground - then why don't they have the entire building hooked up to one or two naquadah reactors, to supply themselves with all power they need? And why isn't the technology they've brought back factored into the budget, giving them enough debit to keep going from one year to the next? I'm pretty sure there's a canon reference to it costing a million dollars just to turn the lights on, or something. If that's the case, why aren't they using the technology they have to offset the costs?
I know the real answer is, "Either the writers didn't think of it, or it was easier to write conspiracy storylines than utilize actual sense." But I would love to have an in-story explanation that would actually work.
First of all, a belated happy birthday to
moonshayde, whose birthday was last week! Would you like a birthday ficlet, even at such a late date? Your tastes are so wonderfully diverse that you'll have to give me a prompt for what you'd like. :) Keep to classic SG-1, if you don't mind; I don't like seasons 9-10 enough to be able to give Vala or Mitchell a good voice.In other news, I am utterly squeeful about my
sd_ficathon assignment! About the whole ficathon, really. I had no time to sit down at the keyboard until today, but I finally got the first part written. I know they're going to face an ethical dilemma in the second half of the story, and I'm not sure which way to go. I think I'll just get there, and let Sam and Daniel decide for themselves. The characters usually know better than I do, anyway.I've been thinking about my least favorite thread in SG-1 canon lately: the NID and its rampant abuse of power. While that's a subject worthy of an entire essay - and one that I really hope to write someday - I do find myself wondering why the SGC was so vulnerable, especially at budget-time. If they have naquadah reactors to spare any time a team 'Gates to a planet without a DHD - and already in S3, that was so routine that they actually suggested it as a reasonable option to going to a planet that they knew didn't have a DHD, in New Ground - then why don't they have the entire building hooked up to one or two naquadah reactors, to supply themselves with all power they need? And why isn't the technology they've brought back factored into the budget, giving them enough debit to keep going from one year to the next? I'm pretty sure there's a canon reference to it costing a million dollars just to turn the lights on, or something. If that's the case, why aren't they using the technology they have to offset the costs?
I know the real answer is, "Either the writers didn't think of it, or it was easier to write conspiracy storylines than utilize actual sense." But I would love to have an in-story explanation that would actually work.
Tags:
no subject
I agree, absolutely, with everything you mention here: the manpower problem, supplies, and hoo boy yes the medical and scientific equipment. The reference to the naquadah reactors was only in regards to power. However, I still think that budget accounts would surely include a debit side: the technological improvements to science and the military, the medicinces they've brought back that Area 51 has learned how to synthesize, and so on.
I agree that a serious budget is strongly required, and yes, as you say, hard to conceal. But that the SGC should be so vulnerable, and such a favorite victim to any politician looking for a cheap victory? That I can't buy easily at all.
no subject
It, um, isn't all that different from what's been done to the NASA budget over the last 30 years in the real world. NASA is a tiny fraction of the US budget (less than 1% if I remember right), adds more money to the US economy than it removes (mostly through technology spin-offs) and yet the budget has been consistently cut since President Nixon and people rant all the time about how much money NASA burns.
Um, not to say that it's under attack the way SGC is or necessarily protecting Earth the way SGC does...but, there are real life parallels. Cetainly Stargate politics is a bit extreme - but also, so much of it is about control.
no subject
not in the least bitsecret, so no one actually should know enough to grouse about it.I suppose you're right, though: it's all about control. And while extreme, it's not too out there. But wouldn't it be nice if the SGC could triumph? Just once?
::mutters yet again about that bit of meta waiting to be written::