The reason is NASAās budget kept getting slashed despite NASA making a profit since itās inception.
We gave them less money so progress would be slow and salaries wouldnāt be competitive and then it could be privatized like so many sectors before it.
NASAās budget isnāt the only reason SpaceX has been able to innovate faster. NASA is incredibly risk averse, as their failures reflect onto the US government and by extension their budget. Even when safety isnāt important such as with unmanned rockets, NASA doesnāt want news headlines blasting them for their rocketās tendencies to blow up. SpaceX, by being a private company, is free to take risks and have rockets explode (if theyāre unmanned that is) without much repercussions as theyāre a private company, not the US government. Theyāve had 7 unmanned rockets explode and several more reusable landerās fail in their course to develop cheaper, reusable rockets, which had NASA done themselves would have been a national embarrassment, but because it was a private company they were free to take those risks to learn from their mistakes
The whole point is that there shouldnāt be an absence. The absence is there because of the private corporations. This is another insidious tendril of capitalism.
I agree wholeheartedly. Public money is being funneled into the MIC, of which SpaceX is now an integral part. If that same money or even a significant fraction had been instead alotted to NASA since the moon landings, weād have bases on Titan already.
However, I want to see us touch the stars. And right now, itās pretty much only SpaceX that has the drive and capital to get there.
Thatās an odd question because government programs arenāt and shouldnāt be in areas to make a profit, aka act like a private company. They need to act where private sector canāt, wonāt, or canāt do it well and when there is an important stake. Eg roads, schools, healthcare, police, firefighters, etc. This is why people are telling you itās unlikely SpaceX would be around without government contracts and funding.
Privatizing a new space race is maybe the best idea the government has had in decades. NASA isnāt mothballed, quite the opposite. Theyāre doing more, faster, and with fewer costs.
Bullshit.
The reason is NASAās budget kept getting slashed despite NASA making a profit since itās inception.
We gave them less money so progress would be slow and salaries wouldnāt be competitive and then it could be privatized like so many sectors before it.
Because the wealthy canāt buy stock in NASA.
NASAās budget isnāt the only reason SpaceX has been able to innovate faster. NASA is incredibly risk averse, as their failures reflect onto the US government and by extension their budget. Even when safety isnāt important such as with unmanned rockets, NASA doesnāt want news headlines blasting them for their rocketās tendencies to blow up. SpaceX, by being a private company, is free to take risks and have rockets explode (if theyāre unmanned that is) without much repercussions as theyāre a private company, not the US government. Theyāve had 7 unmanned rockets explode and several more reusable landerās fail in their course to develop cheaper, reusable rockets, which had NASA done themselves would have been a national embarrassment, but because it was a private company they were free to take those risks to learn from their mistakes
In the absence of government funding, whatās the alternative to private companies?
The whole point is that there shouldnāt be an absence. The absence is there because of the private corporations. This is another insidious tendril of capitalism.
I agree wholeheartedly. Public money is being funneled into the MIC, of which SpaceX is now an integral part. If that same money or even a significant fraction had been instead alotted to NASA since the moon landings, weād have bases on Titan already.
However, I want to see us touch the stars. And right now, itās pretty much only SpaceX that has the drive and capital to get there.
Thatās an odd question because government programs arenāt and shouldnāt be in areas to make a profit, aka act like a private company. They need to act where private sector canāt, wonāt, or canāt do it well and when there is an important stake. Eg roads, schools, healthcare, police, firefighters, etc. This is why people are telling you itās unlikely SpaceX would be around without government contracts and funding.
Privatizing a new space race is maybe the best idea the government has had in decades. NASA isnāt mothballed, quite the opposite. Theyāre doing more, faster, and with fewer costs.