Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

onethatcares

(16,166 posts)
Sat May 19, 2012, 11:26 AM May 2012

space x funding

why are we taxpayers paying 400=600 million in order to allow the privatization of the space industry and why doesn't spacex have to pay to use the Cape Canaveral launch sites?

As a government agency, NASA has already developed orbital and re entry vehicles to service and supply the ISS and here we are paying for a private companys screw ups.

Is there an upside to this?

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
space x funding (Original Post) onethatcares May 2012 OP
Because the private sector won't cost taxpayer money. MannyGoldstein May 2012 #1
So when SpaceX goes IPO, the 1% can cash in. Starry Messenger May 2012 #2
Not paying to use Cape Canaveral is part of the efficiency that privatization brings. Brickbat May 2012 #3
None of those pesky unions either. Starry Messenger May 2012 #4
so it's a win/win for all of us, onethatcares May 2012 #5
Cheaper access to space, reinvigorated competition to get into space. backscatter712 May 2012 #6
but they have done little except onethatcares May 2012 #7
They've already launched the Falcon 9 twice, the Dragon once. backscatter712 May 2012 #8

Starry Messenger

(32,342 posts)
2. So when SpaceX goes IPO, the 1% can cash in.
Sat May 19, 2012, 11:52 AM
May 2012

I hope Elon doesn't get bored playing spaceman anytime soon. I have grave misgivings about the space program being privatized. At least we still kind of have one, I guess.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
6. Cheaper access to space, reinvigorated competition to get into space.
Sat May 19, 2012, 12:55 PM
May 2012

Maybe I'm the only person who actually likes SpaceX here.

Let's face it. The Shuttle cost well over one billion dollars per launch, it was maintenance-intensive, it was dangerous. It accomplished great things, but it's time to move on.

The government alternatives like the SLS promise to fare little better - they're using the old methods that have the government contractors feeding at the trough and flushing money down the toilet.

But I'm quite impressed with what SpaceX has accomplished. They've built the Falcon 1 and the Falcon 9, they built the Dragon, they've done it for a fraction of what other launch systems cost.

onethatcares

(16,166 posts)
7. but they have done little except
Sat May 19, 2012, 02:22 PM
May 2012

fail to launch successfully.

Meanwhile the Chinese are kicking our asses along with the Russians when it comes to continuing government sponsored space exploration.

I believe it is the Chinese that have already figured to have the first station on the moon and to use it to exploit

whatever resourses are there.

Hell, we're going backwards here.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
8. They've already launched the Falcon 9 twice, the Dragon once.
Sat May 19, 2012, 03:00 PM
May 2012

And the only thing that kept them from another launch is a minor engine glitch. They'll try again on Tuesday.

They've made a huge amount of progress, for pennies on the dollar when compared to the Shuttle.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»space x funding