3 ms·

I'd argue that space research is a large enough expenditure that it can only be supported (as in systematically support, not a billionaire gifting their life sa

I'd argue that space research is a large enough expenditure that it can only be supported (as in systematically support, not a billionaire gifting their life savings) by the market. There's nothing sad about it, money has to come from somewhere. If you're talking between NGOs, government, or the market, which one has the most well funded and successful ventures , the market wins every time. It scales better than top down funding and provides longevity and sustained results. LEO is a great stepping stone and maturity there is a prerequisite IMO for further space exploration. The goal is not just landing on Mars - the goal is building up a space ecosystem, and this seems to be the right start.

DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago
You can argue that, but of course the only non-LEO missions have all been government projects. It’s not as though Apollo missions were private endeavors after all. All of the US and European missions beyond LEO aren’t the function of the market. It’s also hard to see how the market would support long range probes and so much else that doesn’t offer a short term monetary reward. Still, maybe you’re right, and reality is just waiting to catch up to your bold capitalist vision of market forces solving everything.