4 ms·

Stop trying to use logic to make sense of these budget cuts. The budget cuts aren't about saving money. They're about destroying whole parts of the Government.

sennalen 2y ago
Not just the government. Destroying whole parts of the future and the potential of humanity, just to stoke the egos of two men.
knightfall21 2y ago
[flagged]
dandanua 2y ago
You see, those are necessary steps since billionaires are tired of rules and regulations that don't let them grow and thus hold America back, so it can't be great again.
jisnsm 2y ago
[flagged]
y33t 2y ago
They don't want to destroy it, just make it so useless they have pretext to privatize it.
- nickff 2y ago
  I don’t think anyone wants to privatize any of the space telescopes or NASA as a whole. Do you have any evidence that there is someone who does?
  - ericmay 2y ago
    Generally speaking the current administration is looking to cut some functions and programs from federal agencies and then pay private entities to perform those same functions because they believe that private industry can perform those same functions better more cheaply [1]. There is certainly some merit to that, however I think being dogmatic one way or the other is for simpletons. Specifically for privatizing space telescopes or privatizing NASA as a whole I don't think that has been on the table, but you can imagine a scenario in which eventually something like 20%, 40%, 90% or some other significant portion of NASA's "funding" is just a pass-through vehicle for private contracts. Honestly if you want to learn and understand more about some of these activities you can just read the news because a lot of analysis is being done, well-informed opinions are being written, and indisputable factual evidence including quotes, interviews, and detailed data are publicly available. Admittedly some reporting is behind paywalls, but that's easy to get around. I understand it's not very fair to tell someone to "go read the news", but if you can't keep up with current events or you aren't willing to that's kind of just your problem. There are plenty of websites across the political spectrum ranging from the Financial Times to the Economist, to the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, international journals, and more including locally focused websites that keep tabs with events going on at the federal, state, and local level. It's certainly a lot but it's your responsibility as a citizen (assuming you are American, apologies if not) to keep yourself informed and well read. [1] I'm being charitable here because I personally believe that the goal is to just funnel money from government agencies to specific private enterprises that have the favor of the current administration. Crony Capitalism is what that is called. The current administration has not yet earned my trust to believe otherwise.
    - nickff 2y ago
      I was replying to a comment that said: >”They don't want to destroy [NASA], just make it so useless they have pretext to privatize it.” I just think they were wrong. I agree that the current administration does want to prevent the administrative agencies from doing many things, but I don’t think anyone is actually looking to privatize NASA or the telescopes.
      - LargeWu 2y ago
        Yes, certainly Elon Musk, who owns SpaceX, has no conflicting interest in privatizing America's space operations...
      - ericmay 2y ago
        I think you're assuming a maximalist interpretation where the federal government sells NASA or spins it off as a private company or something like that. What the OP was likely referring to (and they'll have to answer definitively) was the privatization of significant portions of NASA potentially so that it just acts as a pass-through entity for private contracts. Take something like the James Webb Space Telescope. NASA could potentially build its own rockets to launch its own telescopes [1]. Instead what we might see is NASA wants to launch a rocket with their telescope, but their capacity to launch a rocket has been privatized via contracts that go to private enterprise instead of through NASA. Since many in the Trump administration have espoused the belief that existing functions of government and/or administrative agencies would be better off privatized or completely cut, many are worried that the same fate awaits NASA with crony capitalism as the end result. When you say that you don't think anyone is looking to privatize NASA or the telescopes, instead what you should be considering isn't NASA being completely privatized in the sense that it's now a private entity separate from the government, but you should be considering NASA as being privatized in the sense that Congress and the Trump administration allocate taxpayer dollars through NASA to private enterprise for existing or potentially new NASA functions in the future. It's less so about literal 100% privatization, and more so about someone who happens to have a rocket company gets taxpayer allocated funding "from NASA" to provide services. I also don't think NASA as it exists today will be 100% privatized, maybe 40% is privatized, etc. , and the space telescopes won't be because they don't generate revenue, but what I do think will happen and it's up to the Trump administration to convince me that this isn't the case and earn my trust, is that they will allocate funding for NASA works specifically to private enterprise that is in favor with the current administration in a form of crony capitalism. One way to maybe think about this would be imagine that we "privatized" the IRS and in order to file your taxes you would have to file through one of many existing vendors who have contracts from the IRS and charge you to file your taxes. Does that feel right? Why can't we just file directly with the IRS? [1] I'm not sure if this is a good or bad thing, it's just an example.
  - omegaworks 2y ago
    Musk just yesterday asserted that it was time to deorbit the ISS.[1] Decommissioning telescopes would not be out of the question. 1. https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1892621691060093254 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1892621691060093254
    - bradyd 2y ago
      That is something NASA has already been planning for a while now. https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/iss-deorbit-analysis-summary.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/iss-deorbit-...
      - jtgeibel 2y ago
        Yes this has been planned for a while. But accelerating the existing schedule by 4 or 5 years would almost certainly result in a large increase to the existing $843 million dollar contract that Space X has. Elon definitely has a conflict of interest here.
    - bmelton 2y ago
      The Biden administration released an RFP a year ago to exactly that end. IIRC, there was an $800+ million contract awarded.
      - kelnos 2y ago
        Sure, and speeding up the ISS deorbit timeline would almost certainly mean a lot more money for SpaceX, at a time when SpaceX's competitors are still very far behind in terms of capability. Musk wants an earlier ISS deorbit because it lines his pockets sooner, and more reliably. Not only does Musk have a lot of power to get favors granted to him now, but I'm sure he also realizes that there could be significant backlash against him and his companies during a future administration, if his and Trump's actions turn out to be as broadly, bipartisan-ly unpopular as I'm hoping. So not only will he want to extract as much as he can from the government now, he'll want to consolidate and increase his lead over his competitors so a future administration may have no choice but to continue using SpaceX for the bulk of its needs.
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    Nothing could make less sense than a plot to privatize space telescopes. Space telescopes have no commercial value whatsoever. All satellites which have commercial or military value are pointed at earth. The only plausible counterexample is a few of those pointed at the sun, and they only have value insofar as they can make forecasts about solar weather that may disrupt affairs on Earth.
    - krapp 2y ago
      I think it's less a plot to privatize space telescopes and more a plot to shutter NASA and get the US government out of the space industry altogether and privatize everything. Which means that either companies find commercial value in space telescopes or else we just don't have space telescopes. But don't worry, we'll always have luxury trips into LEO for billionaires.
      - lupusreal 2y ago
        After decades of searching, the only good uses for space telescopes thus far found is keeping university researchers entertained and making cool posters for geeky kids to hang in their bedrooms. That second one is actually very important to be fair. (Human space flight is also a waste of money, for reasons I explained in other posts. Other than entertaining children, it serves almost no constructive purpose whatsoever. And the space tourism niche is basically a joke.)
        krapp 2y ago
        It's fine. Europe and Asia can handle the actual science.
    - layer8 2y ago
      They don’t necessarily care about space telescopes. They care about someone else receiving the tax money than NASA.
- chneu 2y ago
  Nah, a lot of this is about removing regulation to let private businesses do whatever they want. It isn't about privatizing the government, it's about removing regulations and "woke" policies
b59831 2y ago
[dead]
mandeepj 2y ago
You packed quite a punch in that short comment! Those fed employees who voted for this govt. and got laid off must be feeling a voters remorse.
- radicaldreamer 2y ago
  Facebook is packed with posts of people saying they support this administration but could they please make an exception for their own role or for their loved one whose nursing care got cut (at the VA) etc. They still don't understand that they voted for this specific thing, nobody was shy during the campaign about what was to come.
  - throw16180339 2y ago
    They're anthropomorphizing the lawnmower and it's not going to work out.

sennalen 2y ago

Not just the government. Destroying whole parts of the future and the potential of humanity, just to stoke the egos of two men.

knightfall21 2y ago

[flagged]

dandanua 2y ago

You see, those are necessary steps since billionaires are tired of rules and regulations that don't let them grow and thus hold America back, so it can't be great again.

jisnsm 2y ago

[flagged]

y33t 2y ago

They don't want to destroy it, just make it so useless they have pretext to privatize it.

nickff 2y ago
I don’t think anyone wants to privatize any of the space telescopes or NASA as a whole. Do you have any evidence that there is someone who does?
- ericmay 2y ago
  Generally speaking the current administration is looking to cut some functions and programs from federal agencies and then pay private entities to perform those same functions because they believe that private industry can perform those same functions better more cheaply [1]. There is certainly some merit to that, however I think being dogmatic one way or the other is for simpletons. Specifically for privatizing space telescopes or privatizing NASA as a whole I don't think that has been on the table, but you can imagine a scenario in which eventually something like 20%, 40%, 90% or some other significant portion of NASA's "funding" is just a pass-through vehicle for private contracts. Honestly if you want to learn and understand more about some of these activities you can just read the news because a lot of analysis is being done, well-informed opinions are being written, and indisputable factual evidence including quotes, interviews, and detailed data are publicly available. Admittedly some reporting is behind paywalls, but that's easy to get around. I understand it's not very fair to tell someone to "go read the news", but if you can't keep up with current events or you aren't willing to that's kind of just your problem. There are plenty of websites across the political spectrum ranging from the Financial Times to the Economist, to the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, international journals, and more including locally focused websites that keep tabs with events going on at the federal, state, and local level. It's certainly a lot but it's your responsibility as a citizen (assuming you are American, apologies if not) to keep yourself informed and well read. [1] I'm being charitable here because I personally believe that the goal is to just funnel money from government agencies to specific private enterprises that have the favor of the current administration. Crony Capitalism is what that is called. The current administration has not yet earned my trust to believe otherwise.
  - nickff 2y ago
    I was replying to a comment that said: >”They don't want to destroy [NASA], just make it so useless they have pretext to privatize it.” I just think they were wrong. I agree that the current administration does want to prevent the administrative agencies from doing many things, but I don’t think anyone is actually looking to privatize NASA or the telescopes.
    - LargeWu 2y ago
      Yes, certainly Elon Musk, who owns SpaceX, has no conflicting interest in privatizing America's space operations...
    - ericmay 2y ago
      I think you're assuming a maximalist interpretation where the federal government sells NASA or spins it off as a private company or something like that. What the OP was likely referring to (and they'll have to answer definitively) was the privatization of significant portions of NASA potentially so that it just acts as a pass-through entity for private contracts. Take something like the James Webb Space Telescope. NASA could potentially build its own rockets to launch its own telescopes [1]. Instead what we might see is NASA wants to launch a rocket with their telescope, but their capacity to launch a rocket has been privatized via contracts that go to private enterprise instead of through NASA. Since many in the Trump administration have espoused the belief that existing functions of government and/or administrative agencies would be better off privatized or completely cut, many are worried that the same fate awaits NASA with crony capitalism as the end result. When you say that you don't think anyone is looking to privatize NASA or the telescopes, instead what you should be considering isn't NASA being completely privatized in the sense that it's now a private entity separate from the government, but you should be considering NASA as being privatized in the sense that Congress and the Trump administration allocate taxpayer dollars through NASA to private enterprise for existing or potentially new NASA functions in the future. It's less so about literal 100% privatization, and more so about someone who happens to have a rocket company gets taxpayer allocated funding "from NASA" to provide services. I also don't think NASA as it exists today will be 100% privatized, maybe 40% is privatized, etc. , and the space telescopes won't be because they don't generate revenue, but what I do think will happen and it's up to the Trump administration to convince me that this isn't the case and earn my trust, is that they will allocate funding for NASA works specifically to private enterprise that is in favor with the current administration in a form of crony capitalism. One way to maybe think about this would be imagine that we "privatized" the IRS and in order to file your taxes you would have to file through one of many existing vendors who have contracts from the IRS and charge you to file your taxes. Does that feel right? Why can't we just file directly with the IRS? [1] I'm not sure if this is a good or bad thing, it's just an example.
- omegaworks 2y ago
  Musk just yesterday asserted that it was time to deorbit the ISS.[1] Decommissioning telescopes would not be out of the question. 1. https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1892621691060093254 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1892621691060093254
  - bradyd 2y ago
    That is something NASA has already been planning for a while now. https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/iss-deorbit-analysis-summary.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/iss-deorbit-...
    - jtgeibel 2y ago
      Yes this has been planned for a while. But accelerating the existing schedule by 4 or 5 years would almost certainly result in a large increase to the existing $843 million dollar contract that Space X has. Elon definitely has a conflict of interest here.
  - bmelton 2y ago
    The Biden administration released an RFP a year ago to exactly that end. IIRC, there was an $800+ million contract awarded.
    - kelnos 2y ago
      Sure, and speeding up the ISS deorbit timeline would almost certainly mean a lot more money for SpaceX, at a time when SpaceX's competitors are still very far behind in terms of capability. Musk wants an earlier ISS deorbit because it lines his pockets sooner, and more reliably. Not only does Musk have a lot of power to get favors granted to him now, but I'm sure he also realizes that there could be significant backlash against him and his companies during a future administration, if his and Trump's actions turn out to be as broadly, bipartisan-ly unpopular as I'm hoping. So not only will he want to extract as much as he can from the government now, he'll want to consolidate and increase his lead over his competitors so a future administration may have no choice but to continue using SpaceX for the bulk of its needs.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  Nothing could make less sense than a plot to privatize space telescopes. Space telescopes have no commercial value whatsoever. All satellites which have commercial or military value are pointed at earth. The only plausible counterexample is a few of those pointed at the sun, and they only have value insofar as they can make forecasts about solar weather that may disrupt affairs on Earth.
  - krapp 2y ago
    I think it's less a plot to privatize space telescopes and more a plot to shutter NASA and get the US government out of the space industry altogether and privatize everything. Which means that either companies find commercial value in space telescopes or else we just don't have space telescopes. But don't worry, we'll always have luxury trips into LEO for billionaires.
    - lupusreal 2y ago
      After decades of searching, the only good uses for space telescopes thus far found is keeping university researchers entertained and making cool posters for geeky kids to hang in their bedrooms. That second one is actually very important to be fair. (Human space flight is also a waste of money, for reasons I explained in other posts. Other than entertaining children, it serves almost no constructive purpose whatsoever. And the space tourism niche is basically a joke.)
      - krapp 2y ago
        It's fine. Europe and Asia can handle the actual science.
  - layer8 2y ago
    They don’t necessarily care about space telescopes. They care about someone else receiving the tax money than NASA.
chneu 2y ago
Nah, a lot of this is about removing regulation to let private businesses do whatever they want. It isn't about privatizing the government, it's about removing regulations and "woke" policies

b59831 2y ago

[dead]

mandeepj 2y ago

You packed quite a punch in that short comment! Those fed employees who voted for this govt. and got laid off must be feeling a voters remorse.

radicaldreamer 2y ago
Facebook is packed with posts of people saying they support this administration but could they please make an exception for their own role or for their loved one whose nursing care got cut (at the VA) etc. They still don't understand that they voted for this specific thing, nobody was shy during the campaign about what was to come.
- throw16180339 2y ago
  They're anthropomorphizing the lawnmower and it's not going to work out.