The Orange County Register has come out in favor of the new direction in space.
15 thoughts on “The Free-Market Frontier”
Thank the Arizona governor for killing the climate bill.
Well sure. That’s where SpaceX and Mojave Spaceport are located. Now if the Orlando papers come to the same conclusion, that would news …
That’s where SpaceX and Mojave Spaceport are located.
In Orange County? Who knew?
Rand,
Being in the same state is close enough for most editorial boards.
The new plan is better than the old plan but still isn’t very commercial. The government is still paying to put people in space rather than the market figuring out some “net-present-value” reason for them to be there.
Kirk,
Under the NASA Vision and Mission statements the reason for HSF is clear.
Unless you feel “Extending Life There” only refers to the bacteria that hitch rides on the robot spacecraft 🙂
As a side note, this might be a good time to push for a revision to NASA’s charter to include the human settlement of the Solar System and the development of its resources for the benefit of humanity. Its long overdue and would fit in well with President’s Obama space policy. It might also help to bring the charter into line with the public perception of what the NASA’s charter is.
Tom
What Chris L. said. Would you have busted my chops over a similar comment if the particulars were the New York Post and Long Island? C’mon.
The new plan is better than the old plan but still isn’t very commercial. The government is still paying to put people in space rather than the market figuring out some “net-present-value” reason for them to be there.
No, the government is paying to put people into space *and* the market is figuring out reasons for them to be there. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Under the NASA Vision and Mission statements the reason for HSF is clear.
Wow, Tom. This must be the first time you’ve said something good about NASA since the BVSE cratered. 🙂
Although, the page you link to seems to be a bit outdated. The vision and mission statements that appear there were written by Sean O’Keefe. They still contains the statement about “protecting the home planet,” which Mike Griffin controversially removed.
(To the best of my knowledge, General Bolden has not written a “mission statement.” His public statements show that he does believe NASA should be involved in protecting the home planet. However, he obviously does not believe that “only NASA can” do the things stated in the mission statement.)
As a side note, this might be a good time to push for a revision to NASA’s charter to include the human settlement of the Solar System and the development of its resources for the benefit of humanity. Its long overdue
“Overdue” is a loose sense of the term. It was actually done in 1988: “The Congress declares that the extension of human life beyond Earth’s atmosphere, leading ultimately to the establishment of space settlements, will fulfill the purposes of advancing science, exploration, and development and will enhance the general welfare.”
Edward,
Yes, its still the vision statement that guided VSE. I suspect it will be updated.
[[[“Overdue” is a loose sense of the term. It was actually done in 1988: “The Congress declares that the extension of human life beyond Earth’s atmosphere, leading ultimately to the establishment of space settlements, will fulfill the purposes of advancing science, exploration, and development and will enhance the general welfare.”]]]
Yep and then disposed of under Administrator Goldin. Perhaps this time it will stick.
this might be a good time to push for a revision to NASA’s charter to include the human settlement of the Solar System
A splendid task for our grandchildren’s grandchildren. To think that it has anything to do with launching astronauts today is voodoo futurology.
My local paper reprinted the Chicago Tribune’s endorsement of the plan. I have never in my life seen this paper endorse a free market option over a big government socialist proposal until that editorial reprint. Truly, hell hath frozen over and Obama must be the messiah (or the antichrist), for the seventh seal of the apocalypse has been broken.
googaw,
Seems to me that is what President Jefferson said about the Louisiana Purchase. Remember the only reason he bought it was because he wanted the port of New Orleans from the French. Of course it turned out that was the least valuable part of the deal.
But even if its our grandchildren’s grandchildren who will call space home the process needs to begin somewhere and NASA is as good a place as any to start. It will give them something useful to do in space besides just looking for bacteria and a mission the public is more likely to support.
Seems to me that is what President Jefferson said about the Louisiana Purchase.
Land that could be — and was — colonized with neolithic technology is a totally appropriate analogy, right?
the Louisiana Purchase.
More nonsensical analogies. Louisiana had been inhabited for thousands of years by natives, and for over a hundred years by Frenchmen, before Jefferson bought it from Napoleon at firesale prices as Nap was getting roundly beaten by the English etc. It was indeed purchased based on the solid long-standing commercial and military advantage of New Orleans on the mouth of the river which drains half the Continent, including the many territories and settlers the U.S. already had west of the Appalachians.
Thank the Arizona governor for killing the climate bill.
Well sure. That’s where SpaceX and Mojave Spaceport are located. Now if the Orlando papers come to the same conclusion, that would news …
That’s where SpaceX and Mojave Spaceport are located.
In Orange County? Who knew?
Rand,
Being in the same state is close enough for most editorial boards.
The new plan is better than the old plan but still isn’t very commercial. The government is still paying to put people in space rather than the market figuring out some “net-present-value” reason for them to be there.
Kirk,
Under the NASA Vision and Mission statements the reason for HSF is clear.
http://naccenter.arc.nasa.gov/NASAMission.html
Unless you feel “Extending Life There” only refers to the bacteria that hitch rides on the robot spacecraft 🙂
As a side note, this might be a good time to push for a revision to NASA’s charter to include the human settlement of the Solar System and the development of its resources for the benefit of humanity. Its long overdue and would fit in well with President’s Obama space policy. It might also help to bring the charter into line with the public perception of what the NASA’s charter is.
Tom
What Chris L. said. Would you have busted my chops over a similar comment if the particulars were the New York Post and Long Island? C’mon.
The new plan is better than the old plan but still isn’t very commercial. The government is still paying to put people in space rather than the market figuring out some “net-present-value” reason for them to be there.
No, the government is paying to put people into space *and* the market is figuring out reasons for them to be there. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Under the NASA Vision and Mission statements the reason for HSF is clear.
Wow, Tom. This must be the first time you’ve said something good about NASA since the BVSE cratered. 🙂
Although, the page you link to seems to be a bit outdated. The vision and mission statements that appear there were written by Sean O’Keefe. They still contains the statement about “protecting the home planet,” which Mike Griffin controversially removed.
(To the best of my knowledge, General Bolden has not written a “mission statement.” His public statements show that he does believe NASA should be involved in protecting the home planet. However, he obviously does not believe that “only NASA can” do the things stated in the mission statement.)
As a side note, this might be a good time to push for a revision to NASA’s charter to include the human settlement of the Solar System and the development of its resources for the benefit of humanity. Its long overdue
“Overdue” is a loose sense of the term. It was actually done in 1988: “The Congress declares that the extension of human life beyond Earth’s atmosphere, leading ultimately to the establishment of space settlements, will fulfill the purposes of advancing science, exploration, and development and will enhance the general welfare.”
Edward,
Yes, its still the vision statement that guided VSE. I suspect it will be updated.
[[[“Overdue” is a loose sense of the term. It was actually done in 1988: “The Congress declares that the extension of human life beyond Earth’s atmosphere, leading ultimately to the establishment of space settlements, will fulfill the purposes of advancing science, exploration, and development and will enhance the general welfare.”]]]
Yep and then disposed of under Administrator Goldin. Perhaps this time it will stick.
this might be a good time to push for a revision to NASA’s charter to include the human settlement of the Solar System
A splendid task for our grandchildren’s grandchildren. To think that it has anything to do with launching astronauts today is voodoo futurology.
My local paper reprinted the Chicago Tribune’s endorsement of the plan. I have never in my life seen this paper endorse a free market option over a big government socialist proposal until that editorial reprint. Truly, hell hath frozen over and Obama must be the messiah (or the antichrist), for the seventh seal of the apocalypse has been broken.
googaw,
Seems to me that is what President Jefferson said about the Louisiana Purchase. Remember the only reason he bought it was because he wanted the port of New Orleans from the French. Of course it turned out that was the least valuable part of the deal.
But even if its our grandchildren’s grandchildren who will call space home the process needs to begin somewhere and NASA is as good a place as any to start. It will give them something useful to do in space besides just looking for bacteria and a mission the public is more likely to support.
Seems to me that is what President Jefferson said about the Louisiana Purchase.
Land that could be — and was — colonized with neolithic technology is a totally appropriate analogy, right?
the Louisiana Purchase.
More nonsensical analogies. Louisiana had been inhabited for thousands of years by natives, and for over a hundred years by Frenchmen, before Jefferson bought it from Napoleon at firesale prices as Nap was getting roundly beaten by the English etc. It was indeed purchased based on the solid long-standing commercial and military advantage of New Orleans on the mouth of the river which drains half the Continent, including the many territories and settlers the U.S. already had west of the Appalachians.
as good a place as any
Oh my, now there’s a solid justification. 🙂