Billionaire blasts off for space station

(Henry Spencer) wrote in
:

In article ,
Jeff Findley wrote:
...The Russian space program has been suffering badly from
lack of money ever since the demise of the Soviet Union. It's pretty
much a given that the Russian space program will sell you anything, if
the price is right.

Yes, they've been acting amazingly like capitalists. Certain Western
space organizations in nominally-capitalist countries could learn
something from it, if they bothered to pay attention.

Certain Western space organizations might actually learn something *useful*
from it, if they were allowed to keep their revenue rather than send it all
back to the Treasury at the end of the fiscal year.

One of the signs of honest capitalism is that when you ask for
something that's going to be difficult and inconvenient to provide,
the answer is not "forget it" but "that's really going to cost you".

When the Treasury takes all your revenue, you have absolutely no incentive
to give the latter answer, and every incentive in the world to give the
former.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 02:54:27 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Greg D.
Moore \(Strider\)" made the phosphor
on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 00:37:39 GMT, in a place far, far away,
(Henry Spencer) made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

One of the signs of honest capitalism is that when you ask for something
that's going to be difficult and inconvenient to provide, the answer is
not "forget it" but "that's really going to cost you".

Yes, though, in the case of the Russians, it would be more useful if
they themselves actually knew what things cost...

Useful to whom?

They seem to be happy enough with what they're charging.... and customers
seem to be happy enough to pay it.

Ignorance is bliss. For a while. Until someone figures out that it's
actually a value-subtracted activity, and cuts off the funding to put
it into one that's value added instead.

In uk.sci.astronomy Jeff Findley wrote:

It's $25 million above and beyond the low level of funding paid for by
the Russian government. The Russian space program has been suffering
badly from lack of money ever since the demise of the Soviet Union.
It's pretty much a given that the Russian space program will sell you
anything, if the price is right.

Excellent! Any country going from communism to capitalism just has to be
a Good Thing.

The more folks offer trips into space, the cheaper it will get...

FoFP

In uk.sci.astronomy Sylvia Else wrote:

Mariginal cost pricing is a short term solution to a cash flow problem,
nothing more. It would probably make financial sense for NASA to pay the
$25 million themselves to put one of their own astronauts up there instead.

Well, they could replace you on your next holiday more cheaply. Perhaps
they should do that instead?

FoFP

"Jorge R. Frank" wrote in message
...
When the Treasury takes all your revenue, you have absolutely no incentive
to give the latter answer, and every incentive in the world to give the
former.

Still wouldn't matter. Congress would cut your funding for the next year by
the amount you "saved" the year before.

But there are signs that capitalism might start working in the US space
launch industry. There has been some interest recently in private companies
buying commercial (manned) launches on EELV's that NASA has abandoned in
favor of Ares I and Ares V.

Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)

M Holmes wrote:

In uk.sci.astronomy Sylvia Else wrote:


Mariginal cost pricing is a short term solution to a cash flow problem,
nothing more. It would probably make financial sense for NASA to pay the
$25 million themselves to put one of their own astronauts up there instead.


Well, they could replace you on your next holiday more cheaply. Perhaps
they should do that instead?

If they can get whatever technological or scientific benefit they're
after that way, then why not?

Sylvia.