The US Space Retreat: The Shuttle Era Is Over. Will the Next Man on the Moon Be Chinese?

[Angelomen77]

Hell I'll live on the moon to hell with the 10 bllion dollars I'll go for free

[SuperGuitarman69]

If Space X could build something that can take passengers who have never been to outer space the opportunity to go? Then there is your market... And, people will for the first time ever not have to pass the "ok" by government to get to experience space... Now tell me again how turning it over would be bad? Hell a private company would have a T ball tournament for kiddies on the moon in 10 years.. Government hates being embarrassed. Although NASA was a good program, private should get a shot.

[south6bt]

What people have to realize is the US is about to default. We're talking about people who live next door to you, people who may be your family or friends going without money in August. They can't pay their rent, they can't pay their debts and it is clear that private entities fail to have compassion when it comes to money. NASA is literally only one of many things that money has to be taken from. The space program is unimportant when it comes to real people being put on the streets.

[Mauser712]

Needs "Jerry Pournelle" in the tags.

[Gkorman555]

Government lives to make more government. They don't care about wise spending, because it's not their money. I love the idea of NASA. I grow up in our space age, but I've always thought it was too slow and cost too much. How much further would we be if you let the private sector actually free to develop an actual industry?

[MrConservative608]

From 2:50 to 3:30, WTF! We have $14,300,000,000,000.00 in debt and we are talking about spending MORE money?!

[Panpiper]

@MrConservative608 They are talking about 'replacing' a bureaucracy that costs 15 billion 'each' year with a single prize of 10 billion that likely would not be collected for more than 10 years. That is a MASSIVE budget cut.

[MrConservative608]

@Panpiper OK its less money. People get out of debt by spending less than they make. The total federal budget is around $3.5 trillion while we take in about $2.4 trillion in taxes. In order for us to reduce our debt, we have to reduce the budget at least $1.15 trillion. Even if we eliminated NASA, that is a total savings of 7.79% of the budget. We NEED to ELIMINATE ENTIRE FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS that are NOT NECESSARY! Colonizing the moon is not necessary.  Let private industry sink or swim.

[Panpiper]

@MrConservative608 Every one of those departments have VAST constituencies that will fight tooth and nail if you intend to simply eliminate them, including NASA. Having one department that you can cut and appease 90% of the constituency with a different approach that requires less than 10% of the money is a political godsend right now.

Of course, this is all just theorizing, as we both well know that NO departments will be so much as cut, let alone eliminated.

[kingz8ter]

@MrConservative608 Look up Helium 3, it is a power source that burns much like coal except it burns cold and can stay lit for an extremely long amount of time. It is a very rare compound on earth but the moon is surprisingly covered with it just a few feet below the surface. The even better news is that with just a truck load, you can power the whole united states, for a year. How does that sound for making money?

[MrConservative608]

@kingz8ter Good. So put your own money towards it and leave mine alone. If it is really profitable to go to the moon then the private sector will have no trouble coming up with their own money because there is already a great private incentive.

If we don't cut at least $1.15 trillion from our annual budget, we will never get out of our $14 trillion debt. If even us conservatives can't change direction in Washington, D.C., I think we will have states secede from the union!

[latveria1024]

2:37 That's not privatized.

[ZombieX13]

Why are they ending the shuttle program? I just don't get it. It's clearly not a budgetary issue as we can tell from Washington's spendthrift ways. I can't help but think they are surrendering space to the Russians and Chinese in another attempt to bury this country. As long as the US is a first world nation, a global government will be resisted. They run off production and energy from this country and now they trap us on this planet. Anyone have another answer to why they are doing this?

[rockinandout]

Jerry personally I prefer the px3s but ther x1s are solid turtle beaches

[trime1851]

We are all in deep do-do! And the shit hasn't hit the fan yet!

[beyo5]

Some people say that $10 billion isn't a lot for a space program, but an X-prize isn't intended to pay for the whole program. It's only a carrot to go along with the prestige of successfully achieving the best program. The real reward is the profit made from resource development.

[DJRonnieG]

"Man will never conquer space. He may live in it, but he will never conquer it." - Joe Kittinger

[ThunderPigRemixes]

$10 billion isn't enough for a project like a 31 person lunar colony that lasts at least three years and a day. I think that $100 billion might be enough to generate interest.

A prize for the successful mining and refining of certain raw materials might be another. Or a successful orbiting solar power station of a certain wattage.

[Panpiper]

@ThunderPigRemixes Few people have put more thought or research into this than Pournelle. If he thinks 10 billion could do the trick, I am happy to make that the prize. At 100 billion, I would balk at the expense. At 10 billion, it would be worth it for the strategic value if nothing else.

[Synapticsnap]

That has got to be the truest line ever spoken aloud in American History; "There's not enough opportunity for graft to get Congress involved". Yet American Politicians will only get worse and America's dangers will continue to grow greater because of it. America will have to rely more and more on It's Enemies for survival because the American people have lost their Will to be Free, which the rest of the World will also feel once America has self destructed, due to our own Cowardice.

[JamesErvin100]

I've often thought the idea of announcing a goal as did Kennedy about the moon but in regard to a replacement for oil in certain sectors of American life, i.e. heating, cars, etc., might be a good idea, especially with the reward of a huge cash prize. Remember Heinlein's "The Man Who Sold the Moon?" We can do this, all of it. We just need to claim back some of the money that goes to pay for Critical Pedagogy.

[Wyrmshadow]

Everyone that complains NASA is a money hole doesn't realize how little money we actually spend on NASA's budget compared to every other government program we have out there.

[bjahava]

@Wyrmshadow

Its not a money hole in the sense that we spend a lot of money in comparison. Its a money hole in that we spend money on an agency that isnt getting anything done.

That might be a little harsh on my end, from a person who doesnt know what a rocket or space shuttle is even made of. But thats why we have professionals, to be able to do things better than non professionals. And lets be frank, NASA's glory days are over, its time to try something new.

[XCritonX]

If the US can finally shut down NASA it can plug another wastefully money pit. Let the Russians waste their money.

[TravistheHuman]

If any government agency should go in space it is the military.

[justintempler]

People act like the space program is ending. It's only the manned space program that ended. If it is cheaper to replace satellites then service them it would be idiotic to keep throwing money just for the sake a few people's egos. The successor to Hubble doesn't need manned space flight.

[BH206L3]

Well the Shuttle was well a hanger queen, it took to many man hours to keep the dam thing flyable. But It did do the job intended some what. Like the first airplanes, it was a crude attempt at a reusable space craft. The Russians pretty much use the same stuff Sergei Korolev worked out. To bad his doctors killed him. A real Genius, with the little he had to work with. As for what we got out of it, for the money spent a lot, this computer for one GPS and a host of other things to boot.

[xtronics]

Other than military purposes, the government has no business taking money from wealth producers, by the threat of force, and spending it on space - not a legitimate function of government.

Government has no business guaranteeing any market. The space program was often used as an excuse to fund socialist programs.

[MrConservative608]

WTF! Space travel should be entirely privatized! This is why we will never get rid of our $14 trillion debt: because even us conservatives cannot get rid of unnecessary programs like NASA. Both Glen & Jerry in this video found nothing wrong with there being a government program to be a prize to be won for going to the moon. WTF! Private industry doesn't have their own incentives?!

[realdad32]

@MrConservative608 sounds good but if we let people go flying off into space willy nilly, how will we ever keep them all down here on earth,working, paying taxes, and under our boot heel? cant have that happen. its about control, by a far seeing govorment who doesnt want people colonizing space and being independant from their rule. its simple as that.

[MrConservative608]

@realdad32 Perhaps you misunderstand. There are already private companies that currently travel to space. The government is not preventing them in anyway going to the moon. My frustration is WTF do we need NASA for if there are private companies taking over the endeavor of space travel and WTF do we need to add to our national debt to encourage something that private business will likely accomplish on their own with their own market incentives to do so?!

[geargemartin]

@MrConservative608 Private companies build our highways but they are financed publicly. Private companies build our spacecraft and are financed publicly. I see no difference.

[MrConservative608]

@geargemartin Both highways and spacecraft should be entirely privatized.

[upyr1]

@MrConservative608 I agree- private companies won't have to handle politicans cutting their budget

[quater2002]

@MrConservative608 Right now it's not economically feasible to expect private companies to make the run for space all by themselves. This isn't an issue of Free Market V Government control. We're not less conservative because we believe that the Government might need to help incentivize private companies at this level until a sustainable profit can be found. Sorry.

[MrConservative608]

@quater2002 So, your in favor of Ethanol & Farm Subsidies? How about Electric Car Subsidies?

Yes, you are less conservative if you believe public funds should be used to interfere with the private market, especially when their is a $14 trillion national debt and you are talking about spending more government money, not less, for something that clearly should be a private sector endeavor.

[quater2002]

@MrConservative608 I am in favor of neither of the things you asked me about. I believe the Space frontier is one that is important to explore, unlike the options you presented.

It is of national interest both economically and militarily to have a strong arm in space so there is a reasonable government interest to give incentives to private companies. I don't believe government does much well; however, companies endearing to go to space need more protection and backing than most.

[MrConservative608]

@quater2002 Then back them with your own money by investing in those companies and cut unnecessary programs from the federal budget.

YOU are the reason why the federal government will always be in debt because like the Democraps, you cannot leave things to the private market place to sink or swim! Like the Democrap programs to subsidize electric cars, windmills & ethanol, you have replaced those words with space exploration.

[quater2002]

@MrConservative608 Going into space costs millions/billions of dollars and has almost no profitable outcome currently (hence why no private company is doing it). If you can't see something as simple as that, then continue to complain about me being a Democrat.

The problem is right now the free market of space is all sink and no swim. If we don't make it worth the time of companies to go into space then no one will go.

And look. No one has gone. Except other countries.

[MrConservative608]

@quater2002 Why are you insistent on forcing tax payers to fund a program with "almost no profitable outcome" by your words? Isn't that how wealth is destroyed?

Your assumption that because it costs millions if not billions that the private sector cannot generate that amount of capital is fallacious. Example: Professional sports leagues pay lots of players 7 figure salaries. How do they do this and turn a profit? Millions of people pay for tickets. That adds up. That is potential.

[quater2002]

@MrConservative608 Because this isn't just an issue of companies making money. This is a matter of national security.

Comparing a sports team making millions of dollars and a space company making millions is completely irrelevant. I am not saying that private companies never make millions of dollars. I am saying that right now, private companies in space aren't making enough money to make it profitable to go.

But this isn't just a matter of profit.

[marcabela]

@MrConservative608,

Totally agree with you. It's amazing (disturbing to say the least) - everybody around (even Republicans) speak as if it was "completely normal" (and "fiscally conservative") to have the government "involved" in giving out contracts and what not. I totally freaked out when he said "if congress would only...". Towards the last end of the video he managed to summarize the big issue with the space program - which was that it became a military and bureaucratic program.

[Panpiper]

@MrConservative608 Pournelle suggested a single prize of 10 billion, and that's it, that is the space program. The prize would likely not be collected for at least ten years. But at the end we would have a manned colony on the moon. All that for the equivalent of 2/3 of one years NASA budget. That is a MASSIVE budget cut of more than 90%.

[meteor4163]

@MrConservative608 Nasa is literally the "brain" part of the human civilization and all worldwide scientists agree on that.

[MrConservative608]

@meteor4163 How come you cannot get it through your thick skull that research bodies can exist without government funding?

This is exactly like liberals demanding that government pay to subsidize this or that without any idea that maybe they can invest in this or that outside of government funding. You want a high speed train? INVEST IN ONE!!!

[meteor4163]

@MrConservative608 I can't get that through my thick skull, sorry man. Without NASA, how with private funding would any of this have been done by now:

Send 12 men to the moon. Build the space shuttles. Send a large array of satellites such as Voyager, Galileo, Cassini, and the rovers to land on mars to explore.

It's hard to list everything. NASA is far from being unnecessary IMO.

[MrConservative608]

@meteor4163 NASA is great. They accomplished a lot and they can exist in the private sector. You probably don't even realize that there are private companies that want to go the moon.

h t t p : / / w w w . s p a c e x . c o m /

Invest money in that if you want to go to the moon, otherwise go back to Russia, commie!

[bobbytiger]

So,

Kennedy said, "let's go to the moon".

So,

we spent a million-kazillion dollars to go there.

Now,

exactly what did we get out of spending that money?

And,

some now are talking of going to Mars?

Stop the madness.

[Winky395]

We won the space race, the next war is what we need to concern ourselves with.

[hayesy316]

We don't need to go to the Moon or Mars anytime soon when we have more important concerns to deal with on the surface of our own planet. Orbital missions have important technological applications to aerospace engineering, but beyond that the current practical scientific importance is marginal for the investment involved and is largely just a big government pissing contest.

[urah2525]

It's a Compleat Retreat - Per JFK - Let's go to the moon, Per GWB - Let's go to Mars,

Per Obama - Let's make muslims FEEL BETTER - Some Mission for NASA, an agency used to dealing in real science, not the self- esteem of a people whose science is subsistence agriculture.

[AshillaBeige]

@urah2525 It's easy to say let's go to Mars. What's important is understanding fiscal and scientific limitations, something most conservatives like yourself fail to know much about - science and finance.

He may have as well said, "let's go to the Mushroom Kingdom," and stereotypical angry white guys (even if you're not, you have the mentality of one), like you would be riding that Bush dick commending his ability to dream.

It's the one of the few ludicrous things Obama HASN'T promised.

[zvi303]

What is fascinating about his description of the solid rocket booster is that Jule's Verne in the 19th century A Trip to the Moon used basically the same technology.

Also, a bit confused. Didn't Pournelle say that if we had the technology to mine the (cheap fusion) asteroids we wouln't need the metal? What is out there that we could use economically?

[Panpiper]

@zvi303 There is a higher concentration of the platinum group metals in the least of asteroidal bodies than there is in the richest ores found in earth's crust. Yes, if it costs insane amounts to do the mining, it still would not be economical. But there are ways to approach such things that would 'not' cost so much. Cheap access to orbit is by far the most necessary thing, and private industry could certainly do that better than NASA, which is actually an impediment.

[zvi303]

Thank you for having Jerry Purnele. I was always a fan of his, although Mote II had a disturbingly anti-Israeli slant.

[zvi303]

@zvi303 Pournelle

[warfossil]

The space shuttle is over, so i'm wondering, what are we using that the public doesn't know about?

[Razlo5000]

@warfossil

Nothing.

[warfossil]

@Razlo5000 it's always nothing isn't it.

[Razlo5000]

@warfossil

Yeah, because thats the truth.

[warfossil]

@Razlo5000 who's truth?

[Razlo5000]

@warfossil

Man, I'm not going to get into the tin foil hat conspiracy crap if thats where you're going.

[warfossil]

@Razlo5000 I'm sure there's a long list of things that were not real at one point in time. B2 Bomber, stealth fighter, U2 spy plane, SR71, even the atomic bomb. Should I continue. Or do you still believe that these things don't exist?

[longbeachboy57]

Smart guy...

[trottheblackdog]

Love hearing from the old dogs who know where the bodies are buried! :)