Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RKV
I think Easterbrook makes a lot of good points here. He is no Luddite. He is saying that if you are going to do it then do it right. Unlike some other posters here I think a mix between manned and unmanned capabilities is in order. The symbiotic relationship between shuttle and ISS was never a good thing. We have a perfectly good space station provided by the Creator, it is called the moon. Lets get on with the business of building the next generation family of reusable vehicles.

Unfortunately, privatization is unlikely to succeed. Space is a failed marketplace because there are no identified businesses in space that return a sufficient ROI without significant resources added by government. R&D in a failed marketplace which is important to national interests has always been the province of government, and always will be. The "investments" made by NASA have been poorly thought out and even more poorly executed. That doesn't mean that we pull a China and burn all our ships and forbid exploration. You can see the results of that policy on their history and development.

95 posted on 02/02/2003 7:39:10 AM PST by Movemout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Movemout; Man of the Right
Unfortunately, privatization is unlikely to succeed. Space is a failed marketplace because there are no identified businesses in space that return a sufficient ROI without significant resources added by government. R&D in a failed marketplace which is important to national interests has always been the province of government, and always will be.

The first trips of Columbus were economic failures with lives lost. The first North American colonies were economic failures for a long while (until they discovered that tobacco, a New World plant, was a good cash crop), and the early colonies had high loss of life. The early colonists paid the price, and their descendents reaped the rewards.

The Earth is too small a basket to put all our eggs into. We have limited resources, and finite living space. We also have occasional world-wide catastrophies that really mess things up. The long-term survival of the human race requires us to have access to space resources (energy, mineral, etc), and some money spent in that direction seems like a better investment than in propping up our failed public schools and social-welfare policies (which is where the Democrats would like to put the money)

The technological sophistication that the space programs sponsored in the 60's, led to the technological dominence of the US through the 70's and 80's (until Clinton and company started giving away the store in the 90's).

What we need is for private business to have incentives to create cheaper and safer avenues into space, and for the government to get the regulators (EEOC, OSHA, etc) and the trail lawyers off their backs

294 posted on 02/02/2003 10:16:45 AM PST by SauronOfMordor (To see the ultimate evil, visit the Democrat Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]

To: Movemout
We have a perfectly good space station provided by the Creator, it is called the moon.

You can't do microgravity stuff on the moon. We need both space stations and Lunar stations.

370 posted on 02/02/2003 1:28:33 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson