Space Exploration: Who won?

Home Archive Politics Space Exploration: Who won?
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Jul 23, 2011 5:20 AM
The American taxpayers won.

American space exploration should be privatized. If the Russians are making $50 million per person to send them to the international space station, my guess is sooner or later commercial enterprises might want to tap in on that market.

They'd do it far more efficiently and economically than NASA.

With due respect to NASA I salute the agency for their accomplishments in particular the moon landings and technological offshoots of the space program, but it's time to pass the baton.
Jul 23, 2011 5:20am
BGFalcons82's avatar

BGFalcons82

Senior Member

2,173 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:45 AM
Yeah, the Ruskies will win the space war, but we will win the race to reach out for more Muslims to love us.
Jul 23, 2011 7:45am
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:51 AM
BGFalcons82;838682 wrote:Yeah, the Ruskies will win the space war, but we will win the race to reach out for more Muslims to love us.
True. The Bammer says so:

[video=youtube;tCAffMSWSzY][/video]
Jul 23, 2011 7:51am
Tobias Fünke's avatar

Tobias Fünke

formerly "sjmvsfscs08"

2,387 posts
Jul 23, 2011 3:16 PM
believer;838668 wrote: With due respect to NASA I salute the agency for their accomplishments in particular the moon landings and technological offshoots of the space program, but it's time to pass the baton.

NASA's objective is research, nothing more. I agree that space shuttles can be done more efficiently by corporations (you don't think they'll get the Halliburton treatment though?), but you cannot fully privatize NASA because corporations want profits, not to lose money on D&R. Of course you'd have to accept that the government isn't there to make a profit...
Jul 23, 2011 3:16pm
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Jul 23, 2011 4:04 PM
Tobias Fünke;839039 wrote:NASA's objective is research, nothing more. I agree that space shuttles can be done more efficiently by corporations (you don't think they'll get the Halliburton treatment though?), but you cannot fully privatize NASA because corporations want profits, not to lose money on D&R. Of course you'd have to accept that the government isn't there to make a profit...
Not suggesting that NASA should simply disappear. I have no issues with NASA sending up relatively inexpensive research satellites, etc.

But as a space taxi service? Not so much.
Jul 23, 2011 4:04pm
I

I Wear Pants

Senior Member

16,223 posts
Jul 23, 2011 5:36 PM
The NASA budget is embarrassing. We have no vision anymore.
Jul 23, 2011 5:36pm
A

Al Bundy

Senior Member

4,180 posts
Jul 23, 2011 5:58 PM
I Wear Pants;839183 wrote:The NASA budget is embarrassing. We have no vision anymore.

It would be nice to have luxury to spend more on NASA, but we have much more important needs than that.
Jul 23, 2011 5:58pm
THE4RINGZ's avatar

THE4RINGZ

R.I.P Thread Bomber

16,816 posts
Jul 23, 2011 6:20 PM
Apparently the Massillon City Schools English department didn't win. Nice spelling in the thread title.
Jul 23, 2011 6:20pm
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
Jul 23, 2011 6:29 PM
Al Bundy;839216 wrote:It would be nice to have luxury to spend more on NASA, but we have much more important needs than that.

Like welfare? oh wait.
Jul 23, 2011 6:29pm
coyotes22's avatar

coyotes22

Go Tigers

11,298 posts
Jul 23, 2011 6:48 PM
THE4RINGZ;839256 wrote:Apparently the Massillon City Schools English department didn't win. Nice spelling in the thread title.

haha, oops
Jul 23, 2011 6:48pm
tk421's avatar

tk421

Senior Member

8,500 posts
Jul 23, 2011 6:52 PM
The NASA budget doesn't even make up 1% of the total budget anymore. That this country can't "afford" to give the agency that went to the moon 1 freaking % is bullshit. I'm not saying NASA does everything right, but we spend so much money on shit that doesn't do anything, complete and utter waste, that anyone who says the NASA budget needs to be cut is out of touch.

As for the space station, I believe that SpaceX, an American company by the same guy doing Tesla, has contracts with NASA to send supplies and eventually astronauts to the station at a significant reduced cost.
Jul 23, 2011 6:52pm
coyotes22's avatar

coyotes22

Go Tigers

11,298 posts
Jul 23, 2011 6:57 PM
I wonder if food stamps and welfare were eliminated, if that would free up a few extra bucks for NASA
Jul 23, 2011 6:57pm
tk421's avatar

tk421

Senior Member

8,500 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:00 PM
coyotes22;839305 wrote:I wonder if food stamps and welfare were eliminated, if that would free up a few extra bucks for NASA

We send more money overseas to ensure we are "liked" than we do on space exploration.
Jul 23, 2011 7:00pm
A

Al Bundy

Senior Member

4,180 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:07 PM
tk421;839302 wrote:The NASA budget doesn't even make up 1% of the total budget anymore. That this country can't "afford" to give the agency that went to the moon 1 freaking % is bull****. I'm not saying NASA does everything right, but we spend so much money on **** that doesn't do anything, complete and utter waste, that anyone who says the NASA budget needs to be cut is out of touch.

As for the space station, I believe that SpaceX, an American company by the same guy doing Tesla, has contracts with NASA to send supplies and eventually astronauts to the station at a significant reduced cost.
So we should waste money on NASA because we waste money on other things?
Jul 23, 2011 7:07pm
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:12 PM
Al Bundy;839316 wrote:So we should waste money on NASA because we waste money on other things?
That apparently is the reasoning.
Jul 23, 2011 7:12pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:13 PM
Al Bundy;839316 wrote:So we should waste money on NASA because we waste money on other things?

I don't agree with that line of thinking, either, but at least on NASA we got some decent returns on the investment. That said, we don't need the federal govt to allocate our taxes (and then some) to things that are done far more efficiently and effectively by the capital markets. Maybe when space exploration and other NASA related stuff was in its infancy it made sense to subsidize, but I can agree it's probably time to hand-off that baton.

There's also perhaps a little too much focus on the federal govt when taxes is really an issue for ALL taxes, including state and local (which many are in just as much trouble financially). Some of that is we need to eliminate the redundancies, like education for instance. I'm not saying eliminate the govt from education (although this could probably be debated), but doing a shitty job at both the state and federal level isn't an efficient or effective way to go about it.

It's one thing when the govt uses the tax code to subsidize or incentivize certain business sectors or areas of the economy (and despite what some may say, there's some good work that has been done there)....It's quite another when the govt decides to throw its own hat into the ring and run a "business" that would quickly be shuttered by any company run halfway well.
Jul 23, 2011 7:13pm
tk421's avatar

tk421

Senior Member

8,500 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:15 PM
What exactly does NASA do that is such a waste? Enlighten me, please.
Jul 23, 2011 7:15pm
A

Al Bundy

Senior Member

4,180 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:17 PM
tk421;839327 wrote:What exactly does NASA do that is such a waste? Enlighten me, please.

The Mars rover was pretty much a waste. Unless you like billion dollar cool pics.
Jul 23, 2011 7:17pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:19 PM
tk421;839327 wrote:What exactly does NASA do that is such a waste? Enlighten me, please.

Can you instead provide the returns on those investments? Does it turn a profit? Or is it wrong to define "waste" as anything that loses money? That's different from things like defense and roads that may not generate revenue but are a necessary social expense.
Jul 23, 2011 7:19pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:20 PM
Maybe because of NASA Obama knows the alien invasion is imminent and that's why he doesn't care about how much the govt spends.
Jul 23, 2011 7:20pm
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:23 PM
tk421;839327 wrote:What exactly does NASA do that is such a waste? Enlighten me, please.
NASA put humans on the moon, launched communications & weather satellites in orbit, developed technologies that we now use on a daily basis, etc., etc.

What's a waste is that like any other federal agency NASA's expenditures almost always far exceed budget and like any other government agency it is prone to the whims of politicians and bureaucrats beholden to politicians.

There's no getting around it.
Jul 23, 2011 7:23pm
coyotes22's avatar

coyotes22

Go Tigers

11,298 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:27 PM
gut;839331 wrote:Can you instead provide the returns on those investments? Does it turn a profit? Or is it wrong to define "waste" as anything that loses money? That's different from things like defense and roads that may not generate revenue but are a necessary social expense.

which is why the post office should be privatized as well, but the libs bitch about that, whenever a GOP mentions it. o, thats right, its a union job.

but, now it is ok to privatize nasa? im confused.
Jul 23, 2011 7:27pm
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Jul 23, 2011 7:33 PM
coyotes22;839344 wrote:which is why the post office should be privatized as well, but the libs bitch about that, whenever a GOP mentions it. o, thats right, its a union job.

but, now it is ok to privatize nasa? im confused.
The PO needs privatized too. Better yet farm it out to FedEx, UPS, etc.
Jul 23, 2011 7:33pm
Little Danny's avatar

Little Danny

Senior Member

4,288 posts
Jul 23, 2011 11:52 PM
The Klingons won.
Jul 23, 2011 11:52pm