A clear example of how private enterprise does it better:

[dismal]

I don't know why we are even having this discussion when it is an obvious true fact there is literally nothing the government does not do best.

We know this because we can simply observe that places where the government does everything for everyone are such beacons of freedom and prosperity.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/07/elon-musk-knows-whats-ailing-nasa-costly-contracting/

I have repeatedly pointed out the problem with government doing thing is the lack of competition resulting in major inefficiency. Here's a stunning example of it:



It's amazing how much better things work when people have their own skin in the game.

Simple and easy question - Why would private 'supply side' econ go to space? Unless of course the public sector 'demanded' it in the first place?

Private sector absolutely sucks at providing solutions to problems undiscovered by society in general. The military needed location information accurate to < 10m for planning and execution. Why would Garmin ever invest in GPS if the DEMAND for that service never existed?

aa

I don't see the relevance. I was pointing out how much better things work in the competitive world. I'm not saying there aren't things which government will do but private enterprise will not. GPS is an example because there's no reasonable way to charge for it.

Note, though, that these days GPS birds are lofted by private companies.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

NASA didn't consider the bottom line when it considered safety for the astronauts.

No, it let politics overrule safety.

- - - Updated - - -

I believe there have been no government launches since the Shuttle retired.

Last shuttle flight (STS 135, 2011-07-08)

4 Delta and 5 Atlas launches from Canaveral or Vandenberg in 2012.

3 and 8 in 2013. 5 and 9 in 2014. 3 and 9 in 2015. 4 and 8 in 2016. 1 and 3 so far this year.
Who's launching all those Atlas and Delta rockets?

Both Delta and Atlas are built by United Launch Alliance. Private enterprise.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

Simple and easy question - Why would private 'supply side' econ go to space? Unless of course the public sector 'demanded' it in the first place?

Private sector absolutely sucks at providing solutions to problems undiscovered by society in general. The military needed location information accurate to < 10m for planning and execution. Why would Garmin ever invest in GPS if the DEMAND for that service never existed?

aa

I don't see the relevance. I was pointing out how much better things work in the competitive world. I'm not saying there aren't things which government will do but private enterprise will not. GPS is an example because there's no reasonable way to charge for it.

Note, though, that these days GPS birds are lofted by private companies.

I agree competition brings prices down. My point is there would be nothing for these companies to compete for if the government hadn't created the demand. What is the ROI for a space rocket?

aa


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jonatha]

Both Delta and Atlas are built by United Launch Alliance. Private enterprise.

You think NASA built the shuttle in a back room at the Johnson Space Center?

 

[untermensche]

I don't know why we are even having this discussion when it is an obvious true fact there is literally nothing the government does not do best.

We know this because we can simply observe that places where the government does everything for everyone are such beacons of freedom and prosperity.

You mean places like capitalist Haiti? Or capitalist Guatemala? Or capitalist Indonesia?

Oh the luxury all those people enjoy thanks to good old capitalism.

 

[untermensche]

No, it let politics overrule safety.

Yeah that was during Reagan's time.

They hated regulation, hated worker safety.

The country has gone downhill ever since those Reagan Republicans gained power.

The freaks in the Republican party now are extensions of the insanity that infected the nation beginning with Reagan.

The insane America first crowd with it's culmination in the monstrosity called Trump.

 

[dismal]

I don't know why we are even having this discussion when it is an obvious true fact there is literally nothing the government does not do best.

We know this because we can simply observe that places where the government does everything for everyone are such beacons of freedom and prosperity.

You mean places like capitalist Haiti? Or capitalist Guatemala? Or capitalist Indonesia?

Oh the luxury all those people enjoy thanks to good old capitalism.

You nutty anarchists are always arguing the government is the best at doing everything so it doesn't count.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't see the relevance. I was pointing out how much better things work in the competitive world. I'm not saying there aren't things which government will do but private enterprise will not. GPS is an example because there's no reasonable way to charge for it.

Note, though, that these days GPS birds are lofted by private companies.

I agree competition brings prices down. My point is there would be nothing for these companies to compete for if the government hadn't created the demand. What is the ROI for a space rocket?

aa


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So what if the demand was created by the government?

And note that only 30% of this year's launches were government payloads and the percentage of upcoming payloads that are government is even less.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

I agree competition brings prices down. My point is there would be nothing for these companies to compete for if the government hadn't created the demand. What is the ROI for a space rocket?

aa


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So what if the demand was created by the government?

And note that only 30% of this year's launches were government payloads and the percentage of upcoming payloads that are government is even less.

You're putting butter on both sides of the bread. Let me try this another way. The government is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. What if instead, it also decided to compete with private enterprise? What if it was so successful at this that it put all other corporations out of business. Would you be touting how great a competitor the government is, or would we hear endless derogatory refrains about the communist state?

aa

 

[bilby]

No, it let politics overrule safety.

- - - Updated - - -

I believe there have been no government launches since the Shuttle retired.

Last shuttle flight (STS 135, 2011-07-08)

4 Delta and 5 Atlas launches from Canaveral or Vandenberg in 2012.

3 and 8 in 2013. 5 and 9 in 2014. 3 and 9 in 2015. 4 and 8 in 2016. 1 and 3 so far this year.
Who's launching all those Atlas and Delta rockets?

Both Delta and Atlas are built by United Launch Alliance. Private enterprise.

Private enterprise isn't usually spelled 'P.O.R.K', but if you say so.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I've worked for major private enterprises and for major state run enterprises. I've seen incompetence and competence in both areas.

Good management systems determine cost-efficiency.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Quick question. Did spacex cost include infrastructure, ip licensing, design, requirements, and oversight etc? Also, how much of that was offloaded to nasa? Does the nasa cost include any of those pieces?

 

[Jayjay]

To me this looks like a clear example of how a government agency does it better:

By subcontracting some functions to private sector, namely those functions where it's possible to set clear and unambiguous goals what to measure success against.

 

[ronburgundy]

Having a clear performance metric is the important thing, whether you have done it yourself or not doesn't really matter. Contracting out a nebulous target is a bad idea.

Who has control over what the goal is and what the performance metrics are is critical. Private concerns will only make decisions that optimize their personal gain no matter the effect on society. A company being told exactly what the end product needs to do, plus there being clear evidence to verify whether they did it are essential to whether contracting out the service will serve the public. Also important is there being minimal opportunity for the private company to cause harm people in how they produce the designated product, whether through their labor practices or production methods.

Yes, private companies tend to be more efficient, but immorality and lack of concern for harm to others is often a major means by which private companies act more "efficiently". Doing something efficiently is not an inherent good, and is just as harmful as helpful to society, depending on exactly what that something is and the impacts of how its done.

Also, as Jaecp accurately pointed out SpaceX would never had existed without NASA just as countless companies and whole industries in computing and biotech would never had existed without government leading the way in pursuing knowledge and tech long before their are any clear profit opportunities to motivate private companies to get involved.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So what if the demand was created by the government?

And note that only 30% of this year's launches were government payloads and the percentage of upcoming payloads that are government is even less.

You're putting butter on both sides of the bread. Let me try this another way. The government is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. What if instead, it also decided to compete with private enterprise? What if it was so successful at this that it put all other corporations out of business. Would you be touting how great a competitor the government is, or would we hear endless derogatory refrains about the communist state?

aa

The government is almost never a good competitor if it's playing fairly.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I've worked for major private enterprises and for major state run enterprises. I've seen incompetence and competence in both areas.

Good management systems determine cost-efficiency.

No--the problem is in many cases of government work efficiency isn't the best management decision. Often the company fares best by milking the contracts.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Who has control over what the goal is and what the performance metrics are is critical. Private concerns will only make decisions that optimize their personal gain no matter the effect on society. A company being told exactly what the end product needs to do, plus there being clear evidence to verify whether they did it are essential to whether contracting out the service will serve the public. Also important is there being minimal opportunity for the private company to cause harm people in how they produce the designated product, whether through their labor practices or production methods.

I do agree that private enterprise will generally act with little regard for the externailities. However, government tends to be very bad in this regard, also, doing things for political reasons with little regard for their actual costs & benefits.

Yes, private companies tend to be more efficient, but immorality and lack of concern for harm to others is often a major means by which private companies act more "efficiently". Doing something efficiently is not an inherent good, and is just as harmful as helpful to society, depending on exactly what that something is and the impacts of how its done.

Plenty of immorality from government.

Also, as Jaecp accurately pointed out SpaceX would never had existed without NASA just as countless companies and whole industries in computing and biotech would never had existed without government leading the way in pursuing knowledge and tech long before their are any clear profit opportunities to motivate private companies to get involved.

I'm not saying that government shouldn't ever be the trailbreaker. Very often they're the best trailbreaker. I'm simply discussing the efficiency of doing things.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

You're putting butter on both sides of the bread. Let me try this another way. The government is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. What if instead, it also decided to compete with private enterprise? What if it was so successful at this that it put all other corporations out of business. Would you be touting how great a competitor the government is, or would we hear endless derogatory refrains about the communist state?

aa

The government is almost never a good competitor if it's playing fairly.

So then by your own admission, the government isn't an inefficient competitor. It's "playing fairly". What is the point of the OP again?

aa

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

... SpaceX would never had existed without NASA ...

Not only is that true, but SpaceX would have gone out of business (even after existing) without NASA.

From the beginning of Loren's article:

Just two years earlier, Elon Musk’s SpaceX had been left for dead. Like so many other new space ventures that had come before, it had made big promises but delivered few payoffs. Bankruptcy would certainly have swallowed SpaceX had NASA not thrown Musk a $1.6 billion lifeline two days before Christmas in 2008—a contract for a dozen cargo delivery flights to the International Space Station.

If NASA were a private corporation, then they would not have given a startup a contract or free licensing to IP, but instead smothered them with patent lawsuits and put pressure on them through exclusivity agreements with vendors etc.