In the absence of any evidence that it will produce the desired effect. I might as well suggest that cutting out red meat is part of the solution.
I find your faith in NASA is disturbing. In the absence of any evidence that it will return man to the moon within decades you still believe our journey into space has to happen on NASA's timetable. More than that, you don't believe there is profit to be had in space exploration. As for your red meat comment, were you referring to herring?
I indicated no faith in NASA. You have a horrible propensity for inventing things on your screen and pretending other people have said them.
It ideally would happen with private companies jumping in, however you have still not given a single reason how shutting down NASA would encourage private companies to jump into the business. This isn't about whether or not the US government should be financing space exploration, it's about, it's about your apparent claim that the fact they do so is holding back private enterprise.
Private space flight will only be space tourism, unless the private donor wants to lose a LOT of money. There is no money to be made from exploration and science. The only money that could be made is from mining/resourcing and thats probably still centuries off being fanancially viable.
By launching satellites and probes themselves instead of contracting out to do it they crowd out private enterprise.
More than that I doubt it can happen without the contribution of private companies. Frame the discussion as you wish yet you're responding to an argument I have not made. Consider over-taxation and manifold failed government programs as the launching point for my opinion and then we'll have something to talk about.
Think of yourself as a millionaire investor wanting to make a return on an investment. Now imagine a believable scenario that would make you part with your money.
How is not paying them equivalent to crowding them out? Doing so still doesn't make private spaceflight commercially viable.
Only if you'll imagine the possibility that somehow, there might be some way to turn a meager profit in space travel. Bottom line, there is no reason to consider space exploration as a solely altruistic endeavor.
I said earlier that space mining will become economically viable... but not for several centuries. And it will be very dirty, very dangerous and won't get us very far from earth. We won't even have to go to the asteroid belt.
Do you not understand how crowding out works? If the government is doing something, it is taking away business from those who would otherwise get paid to do the same thing.
So, you're not talking about crowding out, you're talking about refusing to artificially create a market for something that doesn't exist on its own.
No I am talking about crowding out. NASA should stop doing launch and repair services for other government agencies and private business. If NASA has something it wants to do, it should contract a private company to do it.
Private companies and wealthy individuals do not "explore". And that is what is ending. The MANNED EXPLORATION OF SPACE. Sure, Burt Rutan flying tourists briefly into LEO at 1 million dollars a trip. Or the Russians having some plans to fly tourists around the moon (no landing) with modified Soyuz capsules for 120 MILLION dollars each.. Technially, you still have manned spaceflight. But it isn't EXPLORATION. I personally do not give a rats ass about tourism. I support exploration.
So, the entire New World, the Light Bulb, Aeronatucal Engineering and Nuclear Energy were all colossal wastes of time, eh?
I mean the type that NASA and ESA and other agencies are employed to do in space. Tell me of any science or exploration mission that has ever taken place in human spaceflight that wasn't a giant loss.
Some gains are not apparent until years later. I don't know how you can measure it, but it has been said that hundreds of thousands of American students were inspired to go into science and engineering thanks to Apollo 11 and early space program. What are the economic benefits of 100,000 scientists and engineers you would not have otherwise.
If they can find 400-500 billion for the US military without difficulty how come they can't dig up more than a measly 18 for NASA?
Cutting back on space exploration and the related sciences seems to be the one thing both Democrats and Republicans agree on.
We should really be dealing with the larger problems first. That means DoD, HHS, and others should be on the chopping block NOW. Worry about NASA when there's nothing larger left to cut.