An offshoot of the South Florida Tea Party called "Tea Party In Space" (T-PIS) is looking to break apart the government's socialist grip on the final frontier. Andrew L. Gasser launched Tea Party In Space in June as a way to "bring fiscal responsibility" into the space program.
"It is socialism when you have the government coming down and saying, 'this is what we want to build, and this is how we want you to build it." Gasser said.
According to a T-PIS press release: "The TEA Party's core values are just what America's space endeavors need right now in this volatile economy. NASA is being forced to fund programs that are behind schedule and ridiculously over budget. It's time to ask: 'how much is enough?' Both NASA, and the American taxpayer deserve a better plan and that's what our platform provides."
Photo TPM
15 comments:
Umm, no? That's not socialism. That's called responsible government. Because there's noting more retarded than giving a bunch of idiots who can't even name the founding fathers explosive rocket fuel and rocket parts and saying "hey, do whatever you want." When it comes to flying extremely dangerous missiles over the other, we kind of need rules...
Actually, It's time to get private funding into the Business and save the taxpayers billions. Let's disband NASA and let private industry take it over. Why do we need inefficient Government doing what lean mean industry can do better?
I agree 100% This dingaling found an agency to harass and has battened onto it.
Hey wait one second...Anon, Disband NASA?!!! Save Billions!!!! I am sorry but have you been paying attention to what we have been talking about for the past few months? Look I know, NASA is an easy target and I have taken my pot shots over the lack of foresight but you honestly believe that an open capitalistic economy is going to save us Billions?!!! NO I am not some neo communist. I have run my own business for years and since my grandfather's grandfather we have made a living and raised our families on the strength of capitalism, but this systems dirty little secret is that it is not about saving ANYONE money but making as much money as you can with the lowest outlay.
Private industry and a private economy NEEDS to wade in now to provide support for the efforts in LEO and that is where the money is.
But no nasa?!! private industry would have put us on the moon in 10? without a clear profit at the back end? Nope that ain't happening. Go back to last week's entries and listen to Tyson talk on what we need to do and how much NASA really costs the public and then with a straight face tell me that we are not benefiting private industry and citizens alike from NASA and the companies that work for it (remember nasa is just the leader who hired private industry to build what it needs) Boeing, Northrup, Martin, Marietta would beg to differ that the money was wasted or for that matter the private contractors and their hundred of thousands of employees. Now I know I am on a rant here but NASA is needed, but it is needed to do its job which is opening and exploring new frontiers. Yes it does need to get the hell out of what it does badly and thats being a delivery service. The shuttle may have been an amazing machine, but it put us on a spiraling staircase to no where and for that alone makes it a failure, but it DID prove that a reusable craft can be used and ongoing economy can be built servicing the need in low orbit. Oh and SMD don't you think that your brush is just a tad to broad my friend? Maybe the complete ethos of "here is bushel baskets of money geterdone!" may be a little obsolete but it is just that type of mentality that got us to the moon. It's the "more government control" thinking that forced NASA into missions like a craft that barely flies better than a potato that ultimately priced itself right out of the very economy it started.... But yeah, we need oversight and control, I know that, but lets call it honestly.....
ok, I am done.
See, Ron, I guess I just don't get it. That is EXACTLY what the government needs to do. This is what we want to do, this is how we are going to do it" Thats called a mandate. That is what NASA needs a clear mandate and that is how things will get done. Does that mean they have to be in control of everything above 60 miles? Of course it doesn't, matter of fact I believe that other than rule making the government really needs to get out of everything below 300 miles and use that mandate to set new goals and open up new frontiers. The united states govenment doesnt need to be the traffic cop of everything in LEO....laws are needed or skylabs will continue to drop on people's head, otherwise I think its a place the government needs to get out of.
Hope people realize that a great deal of the private space programs out there are, in part, funded by the government. Space X gets funding from NASA, for example, and Virgin Galactic has been in talks to collaborate with NASA since 2007 (since Spaceship Two isn't operational yet, it's not clear whether that will happen in the next few years or not; Space X is likely to get the "private" contract from NASA with their pods and what not).
The teapartyiers don't seem to get that everything NASA does is contracted out to big, medium and small capitalist enterprises.
Maybe they think if they shut down the weather satellites, there will be no more talk of climate change!
But why stop with NASA. What about the National Zoo?!? Lazy animals living in a socialist paradise. Boot them out, make those lions and tigers and bears go catch their own meals!
I know SMD! But it's where and how it has always been...You dont thing the Saturn lifter or the Apollo CM/SM and LEM were built by NASA in house? Of course not. The money went to big and small business like Boeing and Lothrum and hundreds of cottage industries ( like the group of for all intents someones grannies who for all intents "wove" the memory and central processors of the LEM and CM computers) Litterally hundreds of small business shuttered when the shuttle program ended because the received ALL their funding from NASA to build specialty hoses and pipes, switches and covers, gaskets of all types and the list goes on. But a lot of us benifit that were not "funded" Low moisture food storage, advancements in medical telemetry, fuel cell tech would have never made it out of the lab and into test beds that could and most likely will help alleviate inner city pollution. And on and on and on. I applaud them for funding off site business. It is the best bang for your buck. NASA didn't want to reinvent the wheel, Just keeping the moving.
"Actually, It's time to get private funding into the Business and save the taxpayers billions. Let's disband NASA and let private industry take it over. Why do we need inefficient Government doing what lean mean industry can do better?"
Could lean, mean industry have put human beings on the moon in the late 60s? No.
Can industry, even today, build, launch and control robots exploring distant worlds? Not if they're driven by market forces.
Eventually industry must take over the "easy" tasks that NASA has shouldered for decades; launching supplies and humans into LEO, but industry is not quite ready to do so. In a year or two...
NASA has always been brilliant at pushing the frontier far, far beyond anything that private industry, driven by market forces, could possibly have done.
NASA should continue to explore the universe and continue to make human space travel practical. Private industry should try to catch up to NASA.
Blizno
What you accomplished in a few short statements took me a half hour of rambling rant.
Exactly
Bravo
Obviously disbanding NASA, or reducing funding, at this time, is an idiotic idea. Private industry is not ready for for much beyond low Earth orbit space tourism. Now, as has been the case for many years, is the time to exponentially increase NASA funding. Spinoff technologies have helped fuel many industries and the long-term potential for space industries (mining, energy, etc) could possibly create enough economic growth to reverse what seems to a long-term, global economic downturn.
However, as neither side is ever 100% right nor 100% wrong, the issue of cost-overruns is a serious one. They don't cost taxpayers extra money: they cost NASA missions. That is an issue that does need addressing.
Talking points memo? Now there's objective, unbiased news - lol.
Ron you and I know that bears and lions are opportunistic hunters. If you kicked them out of socialistic zoos their first few meals are redundant zoo keepers.
The Horror....
Dave, you know I missed the very fundamental loss that NASA's cavalier budgeting has cost us. Missed may be a bit strong, but talk about cutting to the core of an argument. NASA quite literally spent itself right out of missions. The biggest problem, whether people want to admit it or not is our spacecraft designed by a committee, the shuttle has been the biggest siphon of ready cash. The machine never did what it was supposed to do cheap enough to make it attractive, but there have been others as well. We are just beginning to see the micro/multi mission efforts come on line. These things are almost a license to print money. As a rule they are costing us a fraction of what earlier probes did. Even Phoenix is cheap by comparison. Hopefully NASA is beginning to learn it's lesson that the pie is much smaller now and if you want to make sure everyone gets a taste, you're going to have to 'cut" it more equitably.
Well stated Mr Tackett
... From a libertarian...
NASA = National Defense / DOD...
It's existence would be constitutional if it were to be viewed as a defensive measure as it so blatantly is. However, the Fed is not suppose to be in the business of Fed funded research... This has jack & shiz'all to do with the enumerated powers. I say... Place NASA under the control of the AF, Army, Navy and Marines respectively... Dissect it yet integrate and combine it within the various branches.
Like it isn't already... I would prefer to see NASA modeled say like NIMH, yeah the funding is still government based but with a bit more autonomy. Spin off whatever the agencies that be want. that has proof of concept since the 80s with launches from Vandenburg AFB
Post a Comment