- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
Sept. 30 (UPI) – Elon Musk is under fire after publicly backing a far-right political party in Germany, suggesting the current government should not be re-elected over its position on the current migrant crisis in Europe.
Twitter is so easy for people to get off of. But they won’t.
Now, if any companies could give any serious competition in the US to SpaceX (launch or Starlink) and Tesla, that would be phenomenal.
Space travel isn’t profitable. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done, of course, but the way it works is that pieces of shit like musk wedge themselves in the space and then like a leech start siphoning public funding from NASA just because idiot or senile senators would rather allocate more money to private industry then fund a public good. So SpaceX get’s subsidized, and NASA gets privatized.
Regarding the profitability - spaceflight isn’t profitable yet. Some companies are trying to do manufacturing and mining that could be profitable in the future, especially if launch costs keep dropping. Moving heavy industry off planet seems like a good goal to me. That’s also ignoring different imaging and communications companies that are doing alright.
Regarding privatization - NASA has contacted out services from their literal beginning in the Mercury program. Contracting out basic/boring launch makes sense to me and lets them focus on bigger ideas. I don’t really think SpaceX is “subsidized” vs winning contracts to deliver hardware and provide services, especially when you compare to their competition for programs like ISS commercial crew/cargo and Artemis human landing system, where their direct competitors (Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Blue Origin, etc) are more expensive.
My big gripe is that no one else has launch capacity right now, so SpaceX has no pressure to get cheaper and companies don’t have a choice. Ariane 5 retired, Atlas V is booked out, and Vulcan, Ariane 6, New Glenn, Neutron, Terran R, etc. are not flying yet.