NASA or privatized space flight?

privatized.....

it might be sloppy at first and will need some regulations for safety sake, but undoubtedly privatized is the way to go.

its much quicker and cheaper and could grow rapidly.

Nasa works well as a strict scientific research division, but private companies would help in many other ways such as logistics, entertainment, and rentals and create numerous new markets for jobs and in our economy from supporting businesses and/or direct results.

once multiple organizations can easily fly, the cost of space travel in obviously drop due to competitive rates.

I guess over all I wouldn't disassemble NASA. In some cases, they might make a good mission control and comm link to earth back on the planet and might make for good educators, trainers, and scientists on board ship, but the meat behind the missions would be from the cheaper parts, ships, crew members, fuel and overall logistics supplied by the private company.

maybe nasa could pay the companies to build for them.

(I'd be glad to pay taxes for that as long as it makes it easier for me to get up in space)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRCx45riU8g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCSRi_1ID9A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8XaJbwwT68&feature...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1WKpMpqaaY&feature...

can you say $ $ $ and * * *

You're right, there is nothing wrong with privatized space travel. As a matter of fact, I think it's great. But that doesn't mean that the government shouldn't be involved in space exploration. There was a time where only the best of the best were allowed to be sailors, and that has changed. But the United States still has the best ships and navy in the world. For a while only the elite were allowed to travel by airplane, and that has changed. But the United States still has the best air force and aircraft in the world. And if space is to be privatized, that too will be a positive change, but that alone is not enough of a reason for the United States to essentially shut down its own independent space program. Obama likes some NASA programs. He increased funding for NASA programs to study global warming, for example. Everyone likes green energy, especially solar technology. But solar power would still be in the dark ages without NASA. The moon is an abundant source of Helium-3, a potentially extremely valuable and clean energy source. And who is opposed to energy independence in America these days? Are we really ready to surrender that too? Without the rocket technology developed by NASA, we wouldn't have ICBMs (a necessary deterrent even for a dove as the USSR developed them first), we wouldn't have satellites, we wouldn't have the GPS system. All of these are incredibly important tools for national security that shouldn't be left to the private sector alone. You don't need to be a paranoid jingoist to be worried about the next advance in science and technology being Russian or Chinese. America's most valuable export is its technological innovation. It's the one export America is really, really good at. Just look at computer technology and the internet, all developed in America. We do not want to give that up or surrender it. Privatized space travel is great, but it's important to keep an independent American space program alive.

Several thumbs up to Clavius (but I only get one).

Bottom line - you don't have to look any further than how things are being done. If private sector was the way to go, we'd already have that. Private companies do what they do because it makes money.

And, where do you think the "data and resources" that NASA brings back go?? It's not disappearing into a vault somewhere. Human beings work here. The salaries support families. NASA doesn't actually build very much stuff - private companies (like Boeing) do that. So, in fact, private companies are already involved in a big way.

I think Govt agencies have its place and will develop technologies and setup programs for things no one else will. See the tracking of NEOs for instance. For a while it got attention from a private space advocacy group but NASA is currently on the action too (Spaceguard) with several other national agencies. Such an effort though important will never turn a profit.

However, I also believe that our presence in space to the levels required, will only arise if abundant economic opportunities for private companies posit themselves.

What's been said so far presents a fairly distorted view of the private sector.

First, you have to capitalize the operation. Private companies are not being restrained. They don't require being "let loose," because they are already free to pursue space exploration if they want. The problem is that private companies with public ownership have a fiduciary responsibility to attempt to make a profit. Shareholders expect a return on their investments. Space exploration doesn't produce product of much intrinsic value (see below). And I as a shareholder certain don't want to wait decades for my investment to finally turn a profit. Yes, someday we will be able to mine the Moon, but I don't want my investment NOW to wait until I'm dead to mature.

Second, it creates commercial competition in an expensive field. Space exploration is expensive enough that you don't want to duplicate any effort than we have to. Even prosperous countries can't produce enough investors to support multiple space-exploration infrastructures. A more efficient use of resources is required.

Third, you're relying on the notion that private companies will be altruistically willing to share what they discover. Much of my scientific work has been done for private companies. They don't share. Science done by a private company is used to enhance that company's share of the market, and almost never sees the light of day. And that's the way the shareholders want it. They paid for the research, and they want it used in a way that returns their investment.

Most of what space exploration produces now is knowledge. Right now a scientist can get a copy of publicly funded research for usually less than $20 and is free to share it with his colleagues. What is he supposed to do when Lockheed charges $25,000 for a scientific paper resulting from their research, whose findings cannot be shared or referred to in his writings?

Both. but lets don't live in a fantasy world, for the goverment will never ever allow space exploration privatized. It is very clear that big bad brother has and does put a stop to this as it begins. Other wise this would already have happened many years ago.

This is easy. NASA is a US govt. agency: hence, it is fatally flawed. Our govt. has never done anything better than the private sector. So how about this... make NASA private!

Beans on Toast are a good source of High Biological Value Protein