So Obama takes a program from a bloated, ineffective agency and gives it to the private sector.

Socialism, anyone? Anyone?

Really, wren? A private success automatically means a public failure? Lest you forget, we have NASA to thank for countless successful missions, GPS, a plethora of now-commonplace technology, and, of course, winning the space race. Not to mention all the technology that was so well built it outlived its projected lifetime--Hubble was not meant to last nearly as long as it has, we're still receiving data from the Voyager probes over 30 years after they were launched, and the Spirit and Opportunity rovers were meant to last 90 days (Spirit stopped working last year, and Opportunity is still active after over 8 years). NASA is probably the single worst government program to prop up as a failure, given its immense capability and contributions to science, culture, and our national standing over the last 50 years.

I say it again: you clowns don't know what you're talking about. Government is less efficient than the private sector in ECONOMIC TERMS. Economic efficiency does NOT relate to the quality of the product or service!

I know. It's really disappointing. And yet "defense" spending keeps on rising...

p, defense spending does not keep "rising".

In fact, get ready for thousands of layoffs at Boeing, Grummen, Lockheed and other defense contractors.

"WASHINGTON—U.S. defense contractors are preparing to disclose mass job cutbacks ahead of November elections if Congress fails to reach a deficit-reduction deal by then, industry officials said."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230350640457744865033990514...

But, no sweat, America has always been militarily strong so we'll always stay strong? Not so fast -

"Recently joint navy exercises were held in the Yellow Sea, and they were the first of such exercises. We have agreed with Chairman Hu that we will continue such cooperation," Putin said.

How many years will it take to repair the damage Obama is doing to America's defense systems and our military? Will we have enough time?

@wren: government is considered inefficient economically. That is, resources aren't allocated in the most "efficient" manner, producing fewer goods/services than a more efficient entity can. Please take a few college courses, write a treatise or two, read some books, and stop using logical fallacies (appeal to authority? Really?); then we can have an intelligent discussion.

Also, accountability? WTF are you talking about? Accountability results in resources being MORE efficiently used! You obviously have no clue what you're talking about. Yet you think you are an expert on par with world-class economists (who are themselves something less than real scientists). This would be hilarious if it wasn't one of the biggest problems with our species.

Back on the topic of NASA vs. private space exploration: I'm sure the latter can do fine, in time. The former has already proven itself. There isn't a very good argument against NASA--besides its monumental achievements, it's managed to excel with an ever dwindling budget.

Furthermore, you won't see private enterprise engaging in endeavors that benefit mankind as a whole. NASA technology has benefited us all, but Richard Branson certainly isn't going to set up a moon base purely for research, or build a space elevator to make getting up there easier, or design an orbital shipyard capable of building long-range spacecraft. ANY achievements in space beyond orbiting hotels and half-hour long trips in zero-G are going to take billions upon billions of dollars and will reap no short-term rewards to investors. You're delusional if you think businesses will invest in something so expensive with so little immediate benefit.

You failed to address who developed the GPS. Regarding economics, it's pretty simple. People get paid to work, by people who need their services. If I need to go to space, I will hire a company specializing in such. NASA was kind enough to take us to the moon. Yes, we walked on the moon. Haven't been back in how long?

Regarding NASA's benefits to mankind, did the landing on the moon benefit anyone except to be able to say, "we were there first!" Really?

As for Richard Branson, he's currently designing a hotel in space. If there was a hotel in space, I'm sure scientists would get rooms at this hotel and run their own experiments.

Regarding efficient and accountable, they are polar opposites. Government can never be efficient because they are accountable for every move they make. I know, you are in your 20's. I guess my experience working as a satellite/microwave communications (satcom/wideband 2E151) tech for the military performing as a fixed, mobile and mobile space command communications technician, the FAA and US Forest Service as a communications tech, Comsat RSI as an electronics tech and tower hand in the private sector, as an electronics tech travelling across the country, filming the legislature for a few years, and for a commissioner and governor's office makes me an idiot. You're just a loudmouth with a few college credits you received from professors that taught you "their" point of view. Many of these professors probably only ever living on public sector money's.

When you get some real world experience, get back to me.

Now, why don't you give me your resume and transcripts. Let me know who your professors were so I can see if they ever actually had to work at Burger King or served a day in the military.

@wren: I can admit I was wrong about GPS. You don't seem to be able to do the same with everything you're wrong about, though. But NASA most certainly has contributed to our lives in no small way. The fact that you don't know this is pretty startling. It's also fairly depressing you don't think increasing our understanding of the universe we live in, even if its immediate benefits aren't apparent, is a worthy goal in of itself.

http://www.wisegeek.com/how-does-nasa-research-affect-my-life.htm

As for your "hotels in space," do you even know how science works? We don't just go off and perform research on a whim, based on whatever we want. Scientists need money to perform research. They get this through grants, through universities, or through private enterprise. I'm sure they exist, but I've never met an independently wealthy scientist with his own private lab.

And no, once again, accountability and efficiency are not opposites. The same as you are not debating. You're repeating the same point over and over without evidence other than professions you've held.

It seems to me that a an adult is accountable for his credit card purchases. His teenage child is not. Who do you think would use it more efficiently?

Furthermore, even if your ill-founded hypothesis were true (which it's not!), do you think it's good for ANYONE outside of the business for not to be accountable? Good god. Let's just let businesses run around ruining people's lives, the environment, and other things for the sake of efficiency! It makes perfect sense!

You mentioned kids and credit cards. First off, your barely old enough to have your own credit card. Secondly, I have 4 kids, how many do you have? I never saw your resume...bring it!

They are opposites. If you spend all your time accounting for things, you are not functioning efficiently. If, as an electronics tech performing a PMI (preventive maintenance inspection) then I spend as much time documenting it as I did performing it, I could have performed another PMI on another radio. This just ruined efficiency by 50%. By nature, government is accountable, which is how it should be. On the other hand, what happens if that radio goes out in the private sector? A few people lose their cell phones for a few minutes. There is a small loss of profits, a few upset customers. In government a similar incident will trigger a FIA request (Freedom of Information Act) taking up even more government employee time.

Now, I agree that government should be accountable. Now on the other hand, business should be accountable to a degree, but not as accountable as government. Safety inspections should take place on oil rigs and cruise ships, but we shouldn't tell people they cannot buy raw milk if they so choose to do so. We should not tell businesses they can't serve a container of fries if it weighs over 4 oz. People need to be responsible for themselves. If they were as accountable as government, with all the lost work in documenting who goes pee when, they will have no profits.

Government also gets to be accountable because they have no competition and an unending supply of public moneys. If you make business accountable for every action, they would not be able to compete and will move overseas.....oh wait, didn't this already happen?

Obviously with you being in your '20's and spending all your time trolling the empire, you are either a serious slacker at work, work nights (not too many jobs in Juneau for nights unless you're doing night patrol), or you come from a priveleged family and still live at home.

I hit the streets working at McDonald's and an amusement park when I was almost 17. I managed to graduate living on my own, practically starving, and joined the military. Tell me what challenges you have overcome, what businesses you have owned and what regulations you had to meet to operate these businesses. Tell me what makes you credible. What colleges you went to, what professors you had, what work experience you have, what professional licenses you have, what businesses you have owned, how many children you have, what non-profits you are a part of, what volunteer work you do? What makes your oh so wise words on economics credible?

Let me guess. State worker, accounting line, priveleged family, some college classes, never worked outside the public sector. May or may not still live at home with your parents.

PP, you stated "Furthermore, you won't see private enterprise engaging in endeavors that benefit mankind as a whole." How do you think this works? Do you think either NASA does it on their own, or private enterprise does it all by themselves? NASA contracts out their work to private company, then private company does work while NASA stays out of their way. Private company does as good or better job, cheaper, faster, etc. What part of this don't you get?

@boorba - It was "peace through strength" to end the Cold War. Not so much now? Who cancelled the missile defense system in Poland?

I just heard a great quote from Hugh Hewitt regarding the Wisconsin election and the democrats defeat - "most of America is exhausted." This administration and their antics are taking a toll on all of our psyches. It'll be years of recovery ahead, if we get the chance.

Yeah, wren, I'm not going to play this game with you. Grow up. Your argument either holds water on its own or it doesn't. And yours does not. I'm not going to compare dick size with you, something you seem to pursue in every article in which we both post. I am apparently younger than you, but it seems I graduated high school first.

Let's talk about accountability in space. With a cell phone company, you get some dropped calls and irritated customers. What happens in space? People die, don't they? Yeah, they do. For the sake of profit. My previous points stand. Richard Branson wouldn't do research on the effects of zero-gravity on humans, because he wants people to come to his orbiting hotels. Finding out that zero-G is harmful, or that there are cosmic rays, or dangerous doses of ionizing radiation, would similarly cause him to lose profits. But oh no, businesses shouldn't have TOO much accountability!

Of course all of this is moot because I don't have 4 children. If you have 4 children, you obviously know more than everyone else. Thomas Edison: brilliant because of an education? Nope! He had 4 kids. Tesla? Same deal--and he paid child support on two of them!

And kpawsuh, I think there's a fundamental difference between NASA contracting out its own work and private industry taking space exploration up by itself. The former is just what NASA has been doing all along, just less expensive (and let's hope not also less safe or less durable). The latter is incapable of doing what NASA has done and hopefully will continue to do.

The missile defense system is a boondoggle.

The way to combat the BMDS is to either launch more missiles or launch decoy missiles. Both are cheaper and more relaible than the BMDS.

Both the Soviets and USA realized in the Cold War that any initiative of this sort would lead to massive build ups of ICBM which neither nation could support economically. Thus the strategy of MAD came into play. By withdrawing from the ABM Treaty the USA angered many nations, for essentially nothing. Any nation attacking the USA or its allies with a ICBM would be destroyed by the retaliation. It is insane-which is why the BMDS is being built...it should have been done as an international project in partnership with Russia and China for the benefit of all sane nations, not just the USA/NATO. China, Russia, and the USA all have easy capability to thwart any BMDS...with nukes delivered via submarine, massive numbers of ICBMs, cruise missiles, or bombers.

The US military continually goes for big bucks high tech soltiutions-fine for the advancing of military tech, but not when a simple solution to our systems exists in a very cost beneficial way.

I see NASA as the best way to get the biggest bang for the buck. We can dominate space simply by being the best in space. It is far too expensive for any third rate nation to play at. Space is the final "high ground" from which all below can be won. Leaving it in the hands of private companies is NOT the way to go. The US interests in space must be under the CIC, not a CEO.

fwiw, when Newt called for a moon colony I cheered. We need leaders with vision for space. In space lies the technologies to get us out of our Earthly problems.

Humans are at our best when we aspire to new places-be they in the physical or theoretical worlds. Space and the deep oceans are the next boundary. Our salvation as a species lies there, not in the profit motives of corporations. Who do we want to have control of that? A corporation? A totalitarian nation? Or a Republic, of, by and for the People?

I know which I want.

you've probably heard that there is no such thing as a friendly intelligence service. Are you suggesting that the US share its missile defense tech with post-soviet Russia (Putin, no less) and the Red Chinese because they are, what did you call them, sane?

Oh, my last response didn't get in until the 4:30 cut-off. You know, when you go home from work for the day.

living life is all you have done. Reach back and give yourself a big pat on the back.

I started working when I was 15, so what. Does that make me more credible than you, or do I lose some because I wasn't in the military, or didn't have children?

So far all I see, is that you're as full of yourself as some of the other long winded know it alls on this board.

Of course that's just my opinion, others may see it differently I'm sure.