> All I see is something they said would cost $500m and due to government involvement it is now unbelievably expensive. Again with the ignorance: I just showed

> All I see is something they said would cost $500m and due to government involvement it is now unbelievably expensive. Again with the ignorance: I just showed that it's not the government involvement that drove cost. It was because it turned out to be much harder than anticipated. > Maybe there is more to it than it just being hard. In this particular case, no there really isn't as annoying as that might be to the anarcho-capitalist/neo-liberal anti-government crowd. The thing about NASA is that they're open and that includes their successes and failures alike. Delays are commonplace in private industry as well, but failure in particular more often than not results in bankruptcy and thus you never hear about it. Just ask a venture capitalist how many high-risk tech investments actually turned a profit and within the anticipated timeframe. You only hear about the unicorns that made it or the ones that crashed and burned so brightly it could be seen from orbit. The majority dies like a drowning child - quietly and unnoticed.