Where else is there to start from? We do not have access to the resources in space nor do we currently have any facilities in space to enable the construction of facilities in Earth orbit!
The answer is simple! We start from where we are, now! We gain access to the resources in space by placing the facilities there that make it possible! It's not going to come to us, we have to go to it - and that's a lot easier to do mechanised, throwing back procedes!
I'm pretty sure this has been well covered, multiple times.
Lets pretend you've a more conventional means to come up with the rediculous numbers involved with funding a ground lift operation. You can obtain everything you need, and can pay to get it up there. Even with magical future materials, you're still looking at a few megatonnes just in the thermal dissipation hardware, not any of the fuilds that are more likely than not required to circulate it, which will weigh even more, or the sensor network or any supporting equipments. Start adding this weight in, and the radiation shielding, the superstructure, everything required for biostasis - there'd be requirement to lift tens of tonnes of compressed breathable air via your method, water is a tonne per cubic meter and you'd need lots of cubic meters of that for a sizable population About 0.36 per person, acros the current 168897 people signed up would suggest requirement of about 60,802 tonnes of water. etc. You're obviously not lifting this in one go, so the only other option is multiple smaller launches. To look as NASA's SLS, or the Falcon 9 Heavy systems comming into play shortly then thats a lift payload of about 70 tonnes. So that's 142856 lifts per megatonne, and there's likely to require a couple of hundred megatonnes of lifting total. Lets be fair to your madness and suggest these magical future materials which are somehow more reliable than the known present resources manage to drop this to 100 megatonnes total lift, and seriously you're looking at that just in thermal dissipation alone, more - then that's a minimal 1,428,571 lifts, assuming nothing goes wrong across any of them, required total. There can be several weeks between them, launch site dependant, for the rendevouz window to re-align - even using multiple launch sites geographically distributed and with an infinite budget to "just keep launching" then the absolute best that can be hoped for is five or six launches a week. Lets be kind and say seven, and assume this rate can be regularly maintained - that one will add up - which pulls up to 204082 weeks, or 3925 years - As a best case senario. Defintely, you'll be pulling that off before anything I can get done.
Seriously, do a feasibilty study on it or quit making yourself look stupid. I'm not sure where you got the impression that I have done no feasibility studies, everything I'm talking about maths up nicely.
You continually cite arrogance simply because I do not crumble into irrational fears over easily solved problems, many of which have been long since solved. I can build something "unsinkable" - the only thing that would threaten it would have equal chance of destroying the Earth or any other habitational environement so this within itself isn't a unique "danger". Just becase I can consider this, doesn't mean I'd not consider the possibililty of failure, at any point or in any system and not already have at least three countermeasures in place, as well as redundant systems. Not everyone is quite as simple or as eager to fail as yourself.
Indeed, any "rocket" destined for astroidial intercept would likely be leaving Earth, until we have developed a "space based defence system". This is precisely why efforts should be pushed specifically towards the development of this system. You don't cry you haven't got a hammer, you tie a rock to a stick and get hitting until you can fabricate a more sensible tool. Such a system would sensibly starting with improving long range detection techiniques by deploying multiple additional hardware specifically seeking for such, sharing this with other similar initatives as trade for access to their data, eventually deployed to such a number that anything moving in the solar system is detectable. By the time such an initative is likely to have sensors in place in a similar belt to, but independant of the Earth, then it's more than feasible to have bits of LEO scrap cobbled together and ready to fuel, reducing cost and time of intercept. You don't need to wait for weather and launch windows are commonly easier from orbit. If systems like the EM-Drive are viable for use then we can intercept more, earlier, and park them ready for mining in the case of the larger ones, and the smaller ones for gravel fragment types can be towed directly to processing.
The job itself frequently is the motivation for folks to work, as evidenced by all the low/no pay work - like charity work, long term carers - as long as they recognise the value in what they are doing it will get done. When you start getting people doing things and this isn't their main motivation then this is where you will see the more nefarious facets of behaviours to manifest. Doing something you hate just to be able to eat, or have somewhere to sleep isn't the way to get the optimum production. It's a way to foster hatred, incite rage, and breed apothy towards the outcome of what they are doing. Continually fighting themselves commonly results in depression and a large contributing factor to the current rates that are prevelant in most "developed" countries. Being prepared to do something they otherwise would not in the persuit of this money is already exhibing behaviour that suggests it should be trivial to either coerce or fund them into misperforming their duties or something more dangerous. They have proven themselves compromised.
Yes, absent a monetary system most won't turn up for their current job - and you could potentially argue similar for UBI-esque schemes that are more likely than not about to become globally commonplace, the thing is, in most cases what they are doing really doesn't need to be happening. It's all a consequence of other things, which if actually required could feasibly be automated for the most part(reducing what needs to be done to a managable load to those who would like to do so) but absented the requirement for money, a lot of roles will vanish and those which remain are likely to significantly adjust. And yes, the nation will provide for anything the citizens need or require. To think otherwise in space isn't going to have good long term consequences. It isn't good once people start hoarding food, air, water etc.
Worry isn't productive, consideration is. It's not worry that provides for the production of backup systems - worry is what stops you from even starting - consideration, of failure specifically, is what results in backup systems. Worry leads to fear, consideration leads to solutions. Testing is what assures it's fit for purpose.
Not knowing how to make your medication shouldn't be a disabling variable, as long as you know what you'd require. The machine does the rest. It's likely even personal hardware of such ilk to be linked to the medical systems so would likely know what you'd require, and potentially have it ready and waiting.
Eagerness doesn't change the fact that you would not just entertain the notion, but actively select it! In a heartbeat! As opposed to finding another solution that made sense! What you must do to survive is what you must do, but when this comes at the cost of another, especially an innocent it's not entirely acceptable! Considering further this is taking place in a theoretical monetaryless environment, you'd not be attacking the other citizens to gain money, that's futile behaviour and a massive logic fail even for you. The only logical reason behind such a move would be that have this pretty unique thing you require. Chances are, they have it because they too require it. At which point you've entered a "my life is worth more than yours" stance and just proven that it isn't. For them to have this, and you not, suggests further that the adequate resources - as evidenced by them still having some - you have been given have been needlessly squandered and now you expect other people to suffer for your mistakes. As opposed to just going and getting some more.
Factoring further dependance of finances, and generating further desire by floating larger numbers in other places you actively increase the chances of "selling out". As previously mentioned, requiring fiscal compensation is already evidence of potential for corruption - from there it's just what number it takes to do it. As there's always someone somewhere earning more, then this fuels desire for what they have.