Privatising NASA
Discussion
As the US government is responsible for the annual budget allotted to NASA for space exploration and research, conflicts must arise when a decision needs to be made between economics and research development. 10 years ago the federal government approached NASA demanding that they reduce their budget and the space program was asked to find another source of funding, or else some of their projects would have to be eliminated all together. One option dealt with private industry with companies as Rockwell and Lockheed Martin who were already contracted by NASA to perform intermediary functions and construction of materials and systems for different spacecraft and other payload. It was suggested that NASA should turn over full control of these projects to those companies and this would reduce NASA’s federal expenditure and promote private industry at the same time. Other advice was that the space program as a whole should be turned over to private companies. As a result, the NASA budget problem would be totally expunged.
I fear that private industry’s objective for space exploration will focus on the pursuit of profit rather than the pursuit of knowledge and development. Continuing with that theory, privatization could lead to commercialization. Space could become polluted with advertisements. Hasty business ventures might occur without weighing all the possible long-term effects. Completely turning over operations from NASA to private businesses will compromise safety and other important engineering concerns for the sake of profit and this I believe is inevitable in the coming years.
Surely for the sake of the "greater good" is would be better to stop ALL space exploration now, regardless of the perceived value of such ventures, and concentrate the knowledge and vast budgets on current global problems and inequalities.
I fear that private industry’s objective for space exploration will focus on the pursuit of profit rather than the pursuit of knowledge and development. Continuing with that theory, privatization could lead to commercialization. Space could become polluted with advertisements. Hasty business ventures might occur without weighing all the possible long-term effects. Completely turning over operations from NASA to private businesses will compromise safety and other important engineering concerns for the sake of profit and this I believe is inevitable in the coming years.
Surely for the sake of the "greater good" is would be better to stop ALL space exploration now, regardless of the perceived value of such ventures, and concentrate the knowledge and vast budgets on current global problems and inequalities.
What are you mad? The pursuit of space exploration, both Government sponsored and private, should be encouraged. And who has the right to "ban" space exploration?
Bringing in private firms can only be good. That monstrosity called "The Space Shuttle" will be replaced by a far more efficient machine when space tourism takes off.
Bringing in private firms can only be good. That monstrosity called "The Space Shuttle" will be replaced by a far more efficient machine when space tourism takes off.
forgive me for being a bit flippant - but the vast majority of cash received by lockeed martin et al is US tax dollars anyway (payment for arms basically) - so the cash is coming from US citizens by either route - just if lockheed pay it to NASA it looks a bit better to the man in the street.
Not to mention the 'Black Ops' budget that most of the aerospace industry suck up anyway...
Not to mention the 'Black Ops' budget that most of the aerospace industry suck up anyway...
They will never let business get hold of NASA as the amount of money the US government would lose, also it would mean all the "weather satalites" would be in the public domain.
They whinge about NASA but if it was open to business they would lose control and the US government may not be at the so called fore front of space exploration.
Plus it would be completely unregulated and any tom, dick or harry could plonk what ever in space, I mean whos going to police it?
They whinge about NASA but if it was open to business they would lose control and the US government may not be at the so called fore front of space exploration.
Plus it would be completely unregulated and any tom, dick or harry could plonk what ever in space, I mean whos going to police it?
Exactly what has happened to QinetiQ - it will eventually be sold to the highest bidder, whoever it happens to be and no matter what country it originates from.
In fact, the US government blocked the complete privatisiation of DERA as it felt the Brits had far too much in the way of Top Secret technology (much of it shared with the Americans) to allow it to be sold off to just any old body. As a result, we have DSTL, which has retained the ultra-sensitive stuff and the soon to be privatised QinetiQ with the slightly less secretive stuff.
NASA actually consumes a fairly timy portion of US government funding.
Srebbe - QinetiQ is the "commercial" branding of what used to be the Royal Aircraft Establishment (plus the various other MoD "Establishments"
. In the early 1990s, it was decided that Britain's advance knowledge bank of aerospace and military data should be sold off to the highest bidder - more dosh for the Chancellor you see. However, because of the nature of information held at the RAE and the other MoD establishments, the selling off of the the whole thing has taken up to now about 14 years and not gone smoothly at all. The very fact that you had to ask what QinetiQ was shows how poorly the whole matter has been handled.
>> Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 18th October 16:57
In fact, the US government blocked the complete privatisiation of DERA as it felt the Brits had far too much in the way of Top Secret technology (much of it shared with the Americans) to allow it to be sold off to just any old body. As a result, we have DSTL, which has retained the ultra-sensitive stuff and the soon to be privatised QinetiQ with the slightly less secretive stuff.
NASA actually consumes a fairly timy portion of US government funding.
Srebbe - QinetiQ is the "commercial" branding of what used to be the Royal Aircraft Establishment (plus the various other MoD "Establishments"
. In the early 1990s, it was decided that Britain's advance knowledge bank of aerospace and military data should be sold off to the highest bidder - more dosh for the Chancellor you see. However, because of the nature of information held at the RAE and the other MoD establishments, the selling off of the the whole thing has taken up to now about 14 years and not gone smoothly at all. The very fact that you had to ask what QinetiQ was shows how poorly the whole matter has been handled. >> Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 18th October 16:57
SlvrCrb said:
Surely for the sake of the "greater good" is would be better to stop ALL space exploration now, regardless of the perceived value of such ventures, and concentrate the knowledge and vast budgets on current global problems and inequalities.
If we'd set out to solve all social problems before spending effort on exploration and technology how far do think we'd ever have got?
We'd probably stil be sitting at the back of a cave worrying over why Ug wasn't equal to, or as happy as, Gom.
On the other hand spending some resources on exploration and technology will ultimately lead to a filtering down of greater prosperity for all. Take telephones, cars and planes for example, once the preserve of obscure inventors, now making life better for millions.
cymtriks said:
Surely for the sake of the "greater good" is would be better to stop ALL space exploration now, regardless of the perceived value of such ventures, and concentrate the knowledge and vast budgets on current global problems and inequalities.
If we'd set out to solve all social problems before spending effort on exploration and technology how far do think we'd ever have got?
We'd probably stil be sitting at the back of a cave worrying over why Ug wasn't equal to, or as happy as, Gom.
On the other hand spending some resources on exploration and technology will ultimately lead to a filtering down of greater prosperity for all. Take telephones, cars and planes for example, once the preserve of obscure inventors, now making life better for millions.
Well Said
Money spent on science, no matter how theoretical is not money wasted.
We can see little practical benefit from the space programme now, but who is to say what the future holds.
As for stopping commercial exploitation of space, whatever for, if it makes us richer it can only be a good thing.
Eric Mc said:
The world is much better now with far less in the way of war, starvation and otehr disasters,
Pardon? You think the world is a safer place now, than it was in the 70s? In those days we only had Russia and the States enjoying their global knob measuring contest. While we came close, nothing actually happened. Now we have every kind of tinpot
wit trying to blow every other wit up, plus us in the process. Less starvation? Looks what's going on in the Sudan. And places like Niger.
Less natural disasters? Tell that to the peeps of the Southern US of A. And the farmers of Portugal.
>> Edited by diddyman on Tuesday 18th October 17:16
Diddyman - ever heard of "irony"?
Or do we all need the appropriate "smiley" emoticon to realise when someone is being ironic?
Of course the world is no better. That was what I was alluding to. NASA has far less money now than it did in the past but the US seems poorer in lots of ways. NASA's peak year for allocated funds (in real terms) was 1966.
>> Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 18th October 17:20
Or do we all need the appropriate "smiley" emoticon to realise when someone is being ironic?
Of course the world is no better. That was what I was alluding to. NASA has far less money now than it did in the past but the US seems poorer in lots of ways. NASA's peak year for allocated funds (in real terms) was 1966.
>> Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 18th October 17:20
JagLover said:
As for stopping commercial exploitation of space, whatever for, if it makes us richer it can only be a good thing.
But who will get actually get richer from the commercial exploitation of space? The corporations that own the "hardware". The scientists that work for them will never be allowed to share their information in the public sector and therefore the "greater good" will be compromised.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff