Obama to cripple space program

[Badger]

Very good decission.

Why not just privatise NASA?

^ I agree with this! ^

Yeah, how's that Swedish space program going?

You guys stopped caring about discovering places after Vinland (or was that the Norwegians?)

[fezzyfestoon]

Why not just privatise NASA?

Anyone who buys into this idea needs to ask themselves 2 questions.

1) Do I believe space and planetary exploration and research is a waste of time and resources?

2) Would I now be willing to invest a substantial amount of money from my family, friends and self into a for profit space venture?

The obvious (non-foolish) answer to both questions is "no". There's simply no tangible short term, or even medium to long term, financial profit in space exploration and research. Those little "space tourist" ventures are marginally profitable and contribute diddly squat to research and exploration. But to say such areas of research and exploration are worthless is utterly shortsighted.

This is a basic truth libertarians don't comprehend: Just because something doesn't create short term private proftit does not mean it isn't important--even vital--to our civilization's long term prosperity and growth.

And yet proponents still can't tell us short-sighted fools what we have to gain from spending trillions of dollars to be sure there's a rock on that big hill on Mars.  Give it to the free market and see who cares.  Odds are it'll die off because there's no chance of return on investment, something our government shouldn't be doing with our money for us.

[Badger]

Why not just privatise NASA?

Anyone who buys into this idea needs to ask themselves 2 questions.

1) Do I believe space and planetary exploration and research is a waste of time and resources?

2) Would I now be willing to invest a substantial amount of money from my family, friends and self into a for profit space venture?

The obvious (non-foolish) answer to both questions is "no". There's simply no tangible short term, or even medium to long term, financial profit in space exploration and research. Those little "space tourist" ventures are marginally profitable and contribute diddly squat to research and exploration. But to say such areas of research and exploration are worthless is utterly shortsighted.

This is a basic truth libertarians don't comprehend: Just because something doesn't create short term private proftit does not mean it isn't important--even vital--to our civilization's long term prosperity and growth.

And yet proponents still can't tell us short-sighted fools what we have to gain from spending trillions of dollars to be sure there's a rock on that big hill on Mars.  Give it to the free market and see who cares.  Odds are it'll die off because there's no chance of return on investment, something our government shouldn't be doing with our money for us.

Satellite technology for starters. NASA's role in creating and maintaining it was and is crucial.

"Trillions is a tad of an overstatement, post Apollo program anyway.

At least your view is realistic, Fezzy, in that you feel there's nothing worthwhile to space exploration and research. We'll just agree to (strongly) disagree on this point.

My main beef is with those who somehow think space research is important, but think the answer is to privatize NASA when all that would accomplish is to bring such research and exploration to a screeching halt as there's no money likely to be made in it for a couple decades.

[fezzyfestoon]

At least your view is realistic, Fezzy, in that you feel there's nothing worthwhile to space exploration and research. We'll just agree to (strongly) disagree on this point.

Again, what makes it worthwhile?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

To date, except for experiments using human guinea pigs, there has been no space research done by the manned space program that could not have been conducted far more cheaply by the unmanned space program.  (That wouldn't necessarily be the case if we were willing to accept the same level of failure in manned space launches as we do in unmanned space launches, but I don't see that ever being the case.)

[JSojourner]

Why not just privatise NASA?

Anyone who buys into this idea needs to ask themselves 2 questions.

1) Do I believe space and planetary exploration and research is a waste of time and resources?

2) Would I now be willing to invest a substantial amount of money from my family, friends and self into a for profit space venture?

The obvious (non-foolish) answer to both questions is "no". There's simply no tangible short term, or even medium to long term, financial profit in space exploration and research. Those little "space tourist" ventures are marginally profitable and contribute diddly squat to research and exploration. But to say such areas of research and exploration are worthless is utterly shortsighted.

This is a basic truth libertarians don't comprehend: Just because something doesn't create short term private proftit does not mean it isn't important--even vital--to our civilization's long term prosperity and growth.

And yet proponents still can't tell us short-sighted fools what we have to gain from spending trillions of dollars to be sure there's a rock on that big hill on Mars.  Give it to the free market and see who cares.  Odds are it'll die off because there's no chance of return on investment, something our government shouldn't be doing with our money for us.

I basically agree, Fez. I do understand that some important research is done in space -- and supposedly, it cannot be done planetside. Supposedly, this research is vital to finding cures and/or treatments for certain diseases. At least, that's what I have been told by supporters of the space program. If so, I am a little more friendly to this kind of spending.

But if they are justing blowing smoke...which is always possible...then I tend to regard space exploration as an in-ground swimming pool. I really COULD spend my money on one. And it would have some benefits. But feeding my family, sending my daughter to school, paying my debts, saving for a new home and charitable giving take priority over a pool.

[dead0man]

People don't seem to grasp that NASA includes both a human spaceflight program (which isn't really about science) and an unmanned space program which is all about science (e.g., Mars rovers, Hubble Space Telescope, WMAP, etc.).  The two are only tenuously connected.  You can easily have one without the other.  By all means, privatize the former if you like, but the latter is something that simply will never get funded without $ from the government.

To date, except for experiments using human guinea pigs, there has been no space research done by the manned space program that could not have been conducted far more cheaply by the unmanned space program.  (That wouldn't necessarily be the case if we were willing to accept the same level of failure in manned space launches as we do in unmanned space launches, but I don't see that ever being the case.)

What these two said.  Obama only killed the manned space mission, which really isn't all that important past the "oh cool, men in space" factor.  And the private space dudes have taken the manned aspect ball from NASA already. 

This isn't that big of a deal and (probably) a good thing to save money on anyway.

[Torie]

I am against manned space stuff in general beyond Earth orbiting stuff. Most of it is a stunt I suspect, to garner media attention and support. The rest is heavy science, the costs and benefits of which are way beyond my pay grade to parse.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I'm in favor of abandoning all space exploration for now.  Let them put up the satellites needed for commerce and defense and forget the rest.

[MK]

 Privatise NASA?     

And

Watch our cell phone bills, cable bills etc go higher then the moon.

[JSojourner]

I'm in favor of abandoning all space exploration for now.  Let them put up the satellites needed for commerce and defense and forget the rest.

I think we're in complete agreement.  I classify the other stuff as, "Gee...wouldn't it be nice if we could..." and "maybe one day".  But not when there is a ballooning deficit or when people are hungry, out of work, in need of insurance that doesn't bleed them dry and concerned about poisons and toxins in our air, water and soil.

[dead0man]

Privatise NASA?     

And

Watch our cell phone bills, cable bills etc go higher then the moon.

Why?  Do you think NASA "owns" all the satellites?

[MK]

Privatise NASA?     

And

Watch our cell phone bills, cable bills etc go higher then the moon.

Why?  Do you think NASA "owns" all the satellites?

I don't.   Just i believe that making NASA/all space operations Private will NOT be a good thing.

Sorry i don't trust privet sector like you libertarians/wealthsuckers seem to do.

[Badger]

People don't seem to grasp that NASA includes both a human spaceflight program (which isn't really about science) and an unmanned space program which is all about science (e.g., Mars rovers, Hubble Space Telescope, WMAP, etc.).  The two are only tenuously connected.  You can easily have one without the other.  By all means, privatize the former if you like, but the latter is something that simply will never get funded without $ from the government.

To date, except for experiments using human guinea pigs, there has been no space research done by the manned space program that could not have been conducted far more cheaply by the unmanned space program.  (That wouldn't necessarily be the case if we were willing to accept the same level of failure in manned space launches as we do in unmanned space launches, but I don't see that ever being the case.)

What these two said.  Obama only killed the manned space mission, which really isn't all that important past the "oh cool, men in space" factor.  And the private space dudes have taken the manned aspect ball from NASA already. 

This isn't that big of a deal and (probably) a good thing to save money on anyway.

I actually tend to agree with this. Manned space flights (outside shuttle missions) tend to be PR grabbers as much as scientifically based. The Apollo Program was a seminal moment in human civilization and will be remembered as such millenia from now. But until we're seriously ready to look at a Mars mission (and have a recovered economy that can reasonably support it) it's not high on the list of immediate priorities.

[dead0man]

I don't.   Just i believe that making NASA/all space operations Private will NOT be a good thing.

Yeah yeah....but why will it raise cell phone rates to the moon?  Explain in simple words even a simpleton like me can understand.

[Mr. Morden]

I'm in favor of abandoning all space exploration for now.  Let them put up the satellites needed for commerce and defense and forget the rest.

I think we're in complete agreement.  I classify the other stuff as, "Gee...wouldn't it be nice if we could..." and "maybe one day".  But not when there is a ballooning deficit or when people are hungry, out of work, in need of insurance that doesn't bleed them dry and concerned about poisons and toxins in our air, water and soil.

Would you favor defunding NSF as well?  Should the US stop all spending on basic research?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I'm in favor of abandoning all space exploration for now.  Let them put up the satellites needed for commerce and defense and forget the rest.

I think we're in complete agreement.  I classify the other stuff as, "Gee...wouldn't it be nice if we could..." and "maybe one day".  But not when there is a ballooning deficit or when people are hungry, out of work, in need of insurance that doesn't bleed them dry and concerned about poisons and toxins in our air, water and soil.

Would you favor defunding NSF as well?  Should the US stop all spending on basic research?

I don't think we said completely defund NASA, just the space exploration portion.  But Mr. M, is the NSF budget even trimmable?  I have no clue that's why I ask.

[Mr. Morden]

I'm in favor of abandoning all space exploration for now.  Let them put up the satellites needed for commerce and defense and forget the rest.

I think we're in complete agreement.  I classify the other stuff as, "Gee...wouldn't it be nice if we could..." and "maybe one day".  But not when there is a ballooning deficit or when people are hungry, out of work, in need of insurance that doesn't bleed them dry and concerned about poisons and toxins in our air, water and soil.

Would you favor defunding NSF as well?  Should the US stop all spending on basic research?

I don't think we said completely defund NASA, just the space exploration portion.

How do you define "space exploration" though?  Is it just the manned program?  Or does it include stuff like the Mars rovers?  Does it include space based astronomy like the HST?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course it's trimmable.  The US could get by without spending any $ on basic research.  Life would go on (though a lot of people would be out of work, and science departments at all major research universities would collapse).  It's just a matter of priorities.  Is it worthwhile for the government to spend some $ on basic research?

I'd say yes, but then I'm inclined toward the view "If we're not going to try to figure out how the universe works, what's the point of our civilization in the first place?"  But that's a philosophical "Why are we here?" first principles question that can't really be logically debated one way or the other.

[JSojourner]

I'm in favor of abandoning all space exploration for now.  Let them put up the satellites needed for commerce and defense and forget the rest.

I think we're in complete agreement.  I classify the other stuff as, "Gee...wouldn't it be nice if we could..." and "maybe one day".  But not when there is a ballooning deficit or when people are hungry, out of work, in need of insurance that doesn't bleed them dry and concerned about poisons and toxins in our air, water and soil.

Would you favor defunding NSF as well?  Should the US stop all spending on basic research?

In a fiscal crisis of extreme proportions, I probably would supprt the idea. With the exception of ongoing disease research. But the key here, for me, is the phrase "extreme proportions". By that, I am implying a depression...not a recession.  In a time like we are in now, I would probably prefer some cuts, some freezes or moratoria (is that the plural term), some de-funding and some smaller than usual increases.  Does that make sesne?

[MK]

I don't.   Just i believe that making NASA/all space operations Private will NOT be a good thing.

Yeah yeah....but why will it raise cell phone rates to the moon?  Explain in simple words even a simpleton like me can understand.

Ok Ok you got me.   You get rid of nasa ( making it private) , now who goings to pay for the rockets/equipment to get things up there?  Not that I'm saying some of the cost isn't already on these companies. 
 
But in the hands of private you are going to see an increase for these services.    It wont be like they are getting gov funds and they will expect a profit every year.  NASA does alot more then just blast satellites off into space.  Think about some of the things we have from weather research  to pacemakers.   


This private this private that nonsense has got to end.   


I know I've been watching too much robocop.

[cannonia]

People don't seem to grasp that NASA includes both a human spaceflight program (which isn't really about science) and an unmanned space program which is all about science (e.g., Mars rovers, Hubble Space Telescope, WMAP, etc.).  The two are only tenuously connected.  You can easily have one without the other.  By all means, privatize the former if you like, but the latter is something that simply will never get funded without $ from the government.

Hubble relied on the Space Shuttle for both launch and servicing.  The ISS also relies on manned space missions.

It's sad that Obama wants to kill NASA's core mission and make it entirely a climate change agency.  It would be better to eliminate NASA entirely.  At least we can hope this will spur private investment in space programs.

[exopolitician]

Sad, but necessary I guess.

[phk]

Someone should ask all the right-wing/'libertarian' nerds if they'd like to 'voluntarily' send in donations for Nasa. 

I would

[k-onmmunist]

Someone should ask all the right-wing/'libertarian' nerds if they'd like to 'voluntarily' send in donations for Nasa. 

I would

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

How do you define "space exploration" though?  Is it just the manned program?  Or does it include stuff like the Mars rovers?  Does it include space based astronomy like the HST?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course it's trimmable.  The US could get by without spending any $ on basic research.

First off, Mr. M, as I said earlier, other than defense and commercial satellites, scrap EVERYTHING else.  I'd just like NASA to be a taxi service for defense and commercial purposes.

As to the NSF, honestly, I can't answer it.  I really am not that acquainted with what they do, but I doubt I'd favor any elimination of certain research.  And they probably have a drop in the bucket budget compared to NASA.