Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
NASA Space Politics

Romney-Ryan Release Space Policy Paper 378

RocketAcademy writes "The Romney-Ryan campaign has released a white paper on space policy, which observers find to be long on criticisms of the Obama Administration but short on specific recommendations. The policy promises 'a robust role for commercial space,' but it's clearly a supporting role: 'NASA will set the goals and lead the way in human space exploration.' When it comes to space, both parties put government ahead of private enterprise. Some see a parallel with the policies which are driving space companies out of California. Newt Gingrich, one of the few politicians who thinks seriously about space, says the policy is a step in the right direction but not enough."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Romney-Ryan Release Space Policy Paper

Comments Filter:
  • What NASA needs. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by camperdave ( 969942 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @06:05PM (#41443377) Journal
    What NASA needs is a specific goal (moon in this decade), and the money to achieve it, free of political constraints. None of this "No ATK, no $$$" garbage.
  • by medv4380 ( 1604309 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @06:16PM (#41443477)
    We can blame ether side all we want, but the truth is that without a perceived threat there isn't any political power to throw to NASA. If their was a known killer asteroid that was going to hit in 10 years we'd put every penny of the defense budget towards stopping it. If North Korea were building a lunar station we'd do everything to get one up first. But without the credible threat of something like what USSR presented we have no motivation other than just "to do it". I'm sorry but as much as we like to think we do things just because we can we do things a lot faster when you're in fear for your life.
  • Re:What NASA needs. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by HornWumpus ( 783565 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @06:46PM (#41443803)

    No. South pole of the moon is a potential fuel base. Build the ships on earth, assemble in orbit, fuel from the moon. Skip mars mission and fetch the nearest earth crossing small to medium nickle-iron asteroid to L5. People only in LEO and maybe at the lunar fuel base. Everything else robotic.

    Then build/invent orbital metal refinery with intention of blowing or sputtering onto foil a nickle iron barrel shape. Move that to LEO as new habitat. Also refuel and refurb asteroid tug and send it for the next asteroid.

    Be fucking careful, an asteroid tug is a serious potentially planet destroying weapon. Use very strong crypto. Build hard restrictions into navigation computer.

  • Re:What NASA needs. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Kell Bengal ( 711123 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @10:18PM (#41445493)
    *ring ring*
    "Hello, Baikonur Cosmodrome? Yes? Oh good - yes, hello. Ah, well, you see, we have a couple of astronauts we'd like to send up. Yes. As soon as possible. No, next month will be fine. 50 Million? Sure, no problem. Ok, great, we'll send them over. Yep. Yep, ok. Thanks. Yes, dasvidanya to you too. Great, thanks, bye!"
  • by foniksonik ( 573572 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @10:32PM (#41445581) Homepage Journal

    What's that old saying? "I didn't protest when they left the liberal state. I didn't protest when they left the moderate state. Now they are leaving the country and leaving all the burdens on citizens. "

    Maybe not a faithful quote but you might get the gist of it.

    Corporations don't care about your values. They only care about the bottom line. That's how it is set up and probably how it should be. OTOH it's our job to hold them accountable. Part of that social contract is to make them contribute back to the community they have benefited from. The infrastructure, the subsidies, etc.

    Laws and regulations enforce that contract. Without them corporations are bound to screw us over by their own rules.

    The flip side is feast and famine. When the predator over hunts a territory he either moves on and fights his way into a new one or dies of starvation.

    Civilization is supposed to moderate that cycle for us smart humans. Part of civilization is rules and regulation. Really that's all it is. Agreed upon self regulation to avoid feast and famine.

    You are an ignorant person.

  • Re:What NASA needs. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mjwx ( 966435 ) on Monday September 24, 2012 @10:52PM (#41445719)

    yeah... because since the 60s, all NASA has done is launch probes to all of the planets, orbiters to a bunch of them, rovers on Mars, interstellar probes at the boundary of the solar system, ion drives, missions to asteroids... gee I sure wish we were still trying to put a couple of guys into low earth orbit.

    Because NASA GISS and JPL have done nothing in the last 40 years.

    If it weren't for JPL, flying would still be as expensive as it was in the 60's.

    You cant continually perform great feats with an ever shrinking budget.

    How does this crap get modded up.

  • Re:What NASA needs. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Teancum ( 67324 ) <robert_horning AT netzero DOT net> on Monday September 24, 2012 @11:09PM (#41445823) Homepage Journal

    No, I said I would like a 20th Century management that was able to manage an empire of about 200 million people at a time when communications was really not that different than it is today in terms of getting messages around.

    State governments could certainly take care of nearly everything you are suggesting here as well, and what it needed to coordinate efforts between state governments can be facilitated with a very small bureaucracy that acts more as diplomats than overseers. Satellites can be provided by private businesses... and in fact mostly are anyway. Drug companies who put out a drug that kills people can be sued in court and held liable for their damages. It was a failure of courts to act which brought about the FDA.

    Oh, and weather forecasts were done with that federal bureaucracy back so many years ago, as were universities. Of course the universities were also operated by state governments and still are. And they were a whole lot cheaper to attend before the federal government screwed them up with too much money.

    So far you haven't given me a convincing argument, other than the fact that we have a standing army that seems to make a whole bunch of other countries pissed at us for having when we go off in misadventures all over the globe. The big government causes the problems we are facing that seems to be the justification for having the big government.

Mathemeticians stand on each other's shoulders while computer scientists stand on each other's toes. -- Richard Hamming