The CNET Lounge forum

General discussion

Should NASA be a "For Profit" Enterprise? I am torn

by quasar-atl / February 21, 2011 8:51 PM PST

Dear Buzz Gang and Crew,
NASA the "National Aeronautics and Space Administration", is in another budget battle with the U.S. Congress. Now NASA is considering working together with commercial organizations and companies to continue space craft launches. Should NASA be a "For Profit" Enterprise? I am really torn by this because there is value in "pure research".

Your Thoughts?

Later People.

Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Should NASA be a "For Profit" Enterprise? I am torn
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Should NASA be a "For Profit" Enterprise? I am torn
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
by MarkFlax Forum moderator / February 21, 2011 8:56 PM PST

Sadly, I feel they should. Pure research is not enough justification for the billions that they need every year nowadays, and frankly, the US can no longer afford it.

If the science behind the development of space travel is to progress it has to become affordable, and that can only happen if the private sector becomes involved.

In my view...


Collapse -
Agree & Disagree MarkFlax :-)
by quasar-atl / February 21, 2011 9:42 PM PST
In reply to: Yes.

Dear MarkFlax,
I have to both agree and disagree with you. Yes, the U.S. Government spends billions of dollars on NASA and yes space exploration is very expensive. To continue spending money for this type of research will be a burden on U.S. taxpayers.

But the U.S. Government waste as much or more billions on wasteful spending and silly pork projects than that do on the budget they give NASA.

There has to be a compromise somewhere.


Collapse -
by Nicholas Buenk / February 22, 2011 4:43 AM PST

There is no profit in pure research. If they were a private company they wouldn't do so much pure science. Note NASA only costs $18b a year a small part of the US governments budget.
However there is no reason they can't help fund themselves by doing for profit satellite launches for private companies.

Collapse -
"Pure Research" has value, Nicholas
by quasar-atl / February 22, 2011 7:34 AM PST
In reply to: No

Dear Nicholas,
I think that you misunderstood my statement. "Pure Research" has value. I did not say anything about profit. If NASA were to become a "For Profit" organization, they would have to pass on "Pure Research" over to other agencies or institutions which is very sad.

There are people a lot smarter than me who have argued the points, merits and value of having "Pure Research".


Popular Forums
Computer Help 51,224 discussions
Computer Newbies 10,453 discussions
Laptops 20,090 discussions
Security 30,722 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 20,937 discussions
Windows 10 1,295 discussions
Phones 16,252 discussions
Windows 7 7,684 discussions
Networking & Wireless 15,215 discussions


Roku Streaming Stick 2016

Roku has the most apps, the simplest interface and the best search, making it CNET's favorite way to stream Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, HBO and all the rest.