• Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    This wouldn’t be a problem if we still had NASA doing the shuttle program, or some continuation of it, rather than outsourcing our spacecraft to the cutthroat lowest-bidder private sector. Is it really any surprise that SpaceX and Boeing are blowing up on the launchpads and having quality control issues when their sole objective is to make money? If we nationalized these initiatives again and cancelled the private contracts with these crooks, there would be no incentive for profiteering and corners would not get cut as often as they do now.

    Sure, it would be a big cost to the taxpayer once again, but I think I’d rather have a reliable space program and like 2% less military budget to fund it, I think we’ll manage somehow without producing more tanks and planes that nobody is asking for.

    • Homescool@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      There is a reason we moved this to the private sector. Govt bureaucrats can’t get out of their own way and every project triples in cost, with no single person calling the shots to get the job done. Govt cannot keep up with the pace we need.

      Boeing is hot garbage.

      SpaceX has a shit face, but they are incredibly competent and effective at iterating their way to space.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      NASA blew up a fair few rockets, and lost two shuttles, so that’s not necessarily the better option.

      • Furbag@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Fair point, I don’t want to fixate on that one aspect of the colossal technical challenge that is getting spacecraft into orbit, but I’m still of the opinion that a nationalized and fully government-funded space program will always yield better results than a privatized one because there is no profit-taking incentive.