Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Say no to NASA, yes to private companies: USA Today

  1. Oct 22, 2003 #1

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-09-23-zimmerman-edit_x.htm
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 22, 2003 #2
    I'd still suggest some serious government oversight...corporations are evil, in case you missed the last 20 years!
     
  4. Oct 22, 2003 #3

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    ZERO! As a corporate stock holder I am deepely offended; at least I would be if I weren't so evil.

    No doubt; we don't want the next Enron running the space program. Also, in a free market wouldn't we expect the safety concerns to be balanced against cost to a greater extent than now; you know, acceptable losses?
     
  5. Oct 22, 2003 #4
    Safety concerns? That's a laugh...
     
  6. Oct 22, 2003 #5

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Its a tough battle to decide who would be more incompetent, a corporation or a government. The government has the inside track though, since it isn't burdened by the need to turn a profit or other market forces.
     
  7. Oct 22, 2003 #6

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    True. Counterpoint: Corporations can be much more efficient.
     
  8. Oct 22, 2003 #7

    kat

    User Avatar

    I guess it would depend what type of safety you're speaking of, unsafe work environment can be very costly to private corporations. On the other hand who bears the cost of unsafe work enviroment in goverment equivalent? I'm not so sure that the government has that great of a track record on safety either. I don't have the numbers to support that (I haven't looked for em, yet.)..but I'm firm enough in my belief to bet on it.
     
  9. Oct 23, 2003 #8
    But, at the same time, the drive for profit makes any and all other concerns nearly nonexistant, in this new 'market', where making a buck is more important than human beings, the environment, or anything else you can think of.
     
  10. Oct 23, 2003 #9
    Corporations are less likely to be radical when the financial risks are so high - to push technology to new places. NASA is known for its innovation - not that corporations are not, but in an area like space where, as mentioned, costs run in the hundreds of millions to even create a design, corporations are less likely to take risks. There is a counterpoint of course, NASA propensity to take risks runs hand in hand with its propensity to lose money on failed projects. We just have to decide if we want to fund a more progressive program (NASA) or a more economically sound program (no doubt one of the big aero-space corporations).
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Say no to NASA, yes to private companies: USA Today
  1. Private contractors (Replies: 39)

  2. Privatize everything! (Replies: 71)

  3. Privatizing Animals? (Replies: 10)

Loading...