Slashdot Mirror


Romney-Ryan Release Space Policy Paper

RocketAcademy writes "The Romney-Ryan campaign has released a white paper on space policy, which observers find to be long on criticisms of the Obama Administration but short on specific recommendations. The policy promises 'a robust role for commercial space,' but it's clearly a supporting role: 'NASA will set the goals and lead the way in human space exploration.' When it comes to space, both parties put government ahead of private enterprise. Some see a parallel with the policies which are driving space companies out of California. Newt Gingrich, one of the few politicians who thinks seriously about space, says the policy is a step in the right direction but not enough."

34 of 378 comments (clear)

  1. What NASA needs. by camperdave · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What NASA needs is a specific goal (moon in this decade), and the money to achieve it, free of political constraints. None of this "No ATK, no $$$" garbage.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:What NASA needs. by murdocj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      yeah... because since the 60s, all NASA has done is launch probes to all of the planets, orbiters to a bunch of them, rovers on Mars, interstellar probes at the boundary of the solar system, ion drives, missions to asteroids... gee I sure wish we were still trying to put a couple of guys into low earth orbit.

    2. Re:What NASA needs. by Teancum · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What NASA needs is to be scrapped and started over.

      I think you could say the same thing about the whole of the U.S. federal government. It was less than a hundred years ago (in the beginning of the 20th Century) that the Post Office Department was the largest federal agency.... not because the post office was necessarily all that huge but because the rest of the federal government was practically non-existent. That even including the U.S. Army, Navy, and Marine Corps, which combined was still smaller than the Post Office.

      America wasn't exactly a wimpy nation a hundred years ago either and had 48 states plus a dozen territories, including the Philippines and Cuba. That the whole "empire" could be managed with under a couple hundred thousand bureaucrats speaks volumes about what the federal government could be doing today.

      Then again I blame Herbert Hoover for the mess that the federal government became, and FDR only made it worse.

    3. Re:What NASA needs. by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 3, Interesting

      *ring ring*
      "Hello, Baikonur Cosmodrome? Yes? Oh good - yes, hello. Ah, well, you see, we have a couple of astronauts we'd like to send up. Yes. As soon as possible. No, next month will be fine. 50 Million? Sure, no problem. Ok, great, we'll send them over. Yep. Yep, ok. Thanks. Yes, dasvidanya to you too. Great, thanks, bye!"
      *click*

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    4. Re:What NASA needs. by mjwx · · Score: 3, Interesting

      yeah... because since the 60s, all NASA has done is launch probes to all of the planets, orbiters to a bunch of them, rovers on Mars, interstellar probes at the boundary of the solar system, ion drives, missions to asteroids... gee I sure wish we were still trying to put a couple of guys into low earth orbit.

      Because NASA GISS and JPL have done nothing in the last 40 years.

      If it weren't for JPL, flying would still be as expensive as it was in the 60's.

      You cant continually perform great feats with an ever shrinking budget.

      How does this crap get modded up.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    5. Re:What NASA needs. by Teancum · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, I said I would like a 20th Century management that was able to manage an empire of about 200 million people at a time when communications was really not that different than it is today in terms of getting messages around.

      State governments could certainly take care of nearly everything you are suggesting here as well, and what it needed to coordinate efforts between state governments can be facilitated with a very small bureaucracy that acts more as diplomats than overseers. Satellites can be provided by private businesses... and in fact mostly are anyway. Drug companies who put out a drug that kills people can be sued in court and held liable for their damages. It was a failure of courts to act which brought about the FDA.

      Oh, and weather forecasts were done with that federal bureaucracy back so many years ago, as were universities. Of course the universities were also operated by state governments and still are. And they were a whole lot cheaper to attend before the federal government screwed them up with too much money.

      So far you haven't given me a convincing argument, other than the fact that we have a standing army that seems to make a whole bunch of other countries pissed at us for having when we go off in misadventures all over the globe. The big government causes the problems we are facing that seems to be the justification for having the big government.

    6. Re:What NASA needs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah. $2.2 billion after you cut out the part Germany paid for. That's to send a giant robotic laboratory 350 million miles and land it on another planet.

      We spend that much on one submarine. We have 71 of those. Last figure I saw for the f-22 program alone was $65 billion. That's just one plane we have zero use for and has spent a fair percentage of its operation life grounded. And still we spend between 1 and $1.4 trillion, per year, on defense related stuff.

      That's (conservatively) more than one Curiosity rover launching, and one landing on another planet, every single day, all year long. Oh, and cash left over to launch a new space telescope maybe every other month? Plus the manpower to run it all. Now do that every year. Rough math, I admit.

      So yes, $2.2 billion is roughly "$14 and a pack of chewing gum", with regard to the US Budget.

  2. I hear that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Romney thinks the windows in our space craft need to be able to open.. ya know, in case there is a fire and they need to let the smoke out.

    1. Re:I hear that... by SoCalChris · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is what AC is referencing. 7th paragraph down.

      http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-romney-beverly-hills-fundraiser-20120922,0,2317962.story

      “I appreciate the fact that she is on the ground, safe and sound. And I don’t think she knows just how worried some of us were,” Romney said. “When you have a fire in an aircraft, there’s no place to go, exactly, there’s no — and you can’t find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don’t open. I don’t know why they don’t do that. It’s a real problem. So it’s very dangerous. And she was choking and rubbing her eyes. Fortunately, there was enough oxygen for the pilot and copilot to make a safe landing in Denver. But she’s safe and sound.”

      Sadly, this isn't an Onion article.

    2. Re:I hear that... by SoCalChris · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If I'm running for the most powerful office in the world, and giving a prepared speech the day after an event like that happened then yes, I would fully expect to give a coherent and cogent response. It's not like they interviewed him on the runway, standing next to a still smoking plane while his wife was gasping for fresh air.

    3. Re:I hear that... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well it's not this wasn't the first time Romney committed a gaffe. The London Olympics, the visit to Israel, the Syria embassy, the 47%, and that's stuff from the last several months.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re:I hear that... by Moofie · · Score: 3, Informative

      "But in any case, he's right: there are a huge group of Americans who simply pay no income taxes and instead live off government support. They will support Obama regardless of what Romney says because they want to continue leeching off the rest of society."

      So that's why the preponderance of people who don't pay income tax live in states that vote for Democrats! Obviously, right?

      Well,

      http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-47-percent-no-income-tax-map-red-republican-states-2012-9

      not exactly.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  3. Re:Romney-Ryan no Insurance your doctor is ER and by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bottom line is, if you can't afford insurance, you have no business getting free health care financed by the rest of us. Find a free clinic.

    And who pays for this "free" clinic?

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
  4. The real question... by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Funny
    ... will the Romney spacecraft have windows that open?

    When you have a fire in an aircraft, there's no place to go, exactly, there's no - and you can't find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don't open. I don't know why they don't do that. It's a real problem. So it's very dangerous.

    Clearly, Romney is an expert on these things, so I hope they take his input seriously in the design phase. We wouldn't want future astronauts dying from not being able to open their windows.

    (yes, I know I'll be moderated down for this. but I've got karma to burn - even if I can't get oxygen at 30,000 feet to burn it with)

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:The real question... by damn_registrars · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh wow, that's pretty stupid; but he was speaking from emotions. If your spouse was in peril, would you think about the technicalities first? He's done and said some really stupid things, but I have to give him a pass on this one.

      You might feel the need to give him a pass, but I do not. He had time between the incident and when he gave that remark (at a $50k/plate dinner no less). Furthermore he is college educated and should realize the stupidity in that statement (actually there are layers of stupidity in it if you read it carefully).

      His fratboy antics

      You must be new here. On slashdot you are only allowed to call Obama (or BHO as is preferred) to be a frat boy or party animal. All republicans are serious, Obama is a party animal. Get the mantra straight before you talk politics here...

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    2. Re:The real question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Obama corrected himself and said that he had "visited 47 states" about 20 seconds after the end of that video.

  5. Re:Romney-Ryan no Insurance your doctor is ER and by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bottom line is, if you can't afford insurance, you have no business getting free health care financed by the rest of us. Find a free clinic.

    And who pays for this "free" clinic?

    Magic. Magic pays for everything. It's the new fiscal accounting model.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  6. I blame the USSR for the fall of NASA by medv4380 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We can blame ether side all we want, but the truth is that without a perceived threat there isn't any political power to throw to NASA. If their was a known killer asteroid that was going to hit in 10 years we'd put every penny of the defense budget towards stopping it. If North Korea were building a lunar station we'd do everything to get one up first. But without the credible threat of something like what USSR presented we have no motivation other than just "to do it". I'm sorry but as much as we like to think we do things just because we can we do things a lot faster when you're in fear for your life.

  7. Summary by Dyinobal · · Score: 4, Insightful
    blah blah space good. Insult Obama. I will be better than Obama

    1:Science and innovation important, some how having nasa means our workforce is some how more scientifically educated and skilled. Which makes no sense because I thought education did that, not Nasa.

    2: Space is important some how to a bunch of industries, despite the only real importance being research and satellite launching.

    3:Military in space good, need to secure space against space terrorists. More money to defense contractors. Could be hostile aliens?

    4:Nasa and our space program is like fancy armor in WoW, it is the international penis we can wave in the face of non-space faring countries. People respect space penis. Also private space penis is good too.

    Restate all the above and say that the country needs clear and concise leadership etc.

    pretentious quote by me. Who quotes themselves in their own policies? I do. I'm that awesome

    Huge diatribe on how Obama is bad and stuff. Also commercial space stuff is good

  8. Romney just showed he is still a hypocrite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    January 27, 2012 Republican debate:

    “I spent 25 years in business. If I had a business executive come to me and say they wanted to spend a few hundred billion dollars to put a colony on the moon, I’d say, ‘You’re fired!’” -Mitt Romney

    Calling for anything other than a minimal to nonexistent manned space program is hypocrisy for Mitt Romney.

    1. Re:Romney just showed he is still a hypocrite by tragedy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Quite aside from how it reflects on his opinions about colonizing space, that quote says some pretty bad things about Romney's management style if he's in earnest. Most of us have seen that sort of autocrat manager that can't even tolerate discussion of anything outside the box. They're pretty much universally idiots.

  9. Re:Romney-Ryan no Insurance your doctor is ER and by Dahamma · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Simple, Ryan has this one covered...

    You just have to rob a bank to steal the money to pay for your health care. If you get away, you can now afford it. And if you get caught, no worries, the government will now pay for all of your health care, food, and lodgings anyway.

  10. Re:How About Tax Returns First? by Dahamma · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If he's going to be President of a country who's attitude on individual privacy can now be summed up as "if you didn't do anything wrong, what are you hiding?" then yes, I think it's very relevant.

  11. Re:Romney-Ryan no Insurance your doctor is ER and by gagol · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow, Magic Johnson must pay a LOT of taxes to cover for medicare alone!

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
  12. Re:The Short Version by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do you care to discuss this point using reason and logic, or it this just flamebait?

    Honest question, it is worth discussing.

    Intellectual honesty, or coward? Just asking,

    I'd point out something about anonymous coward and finger pointing, but don't expect you have the grace to say, "Touché"

    Sometimes it's just about having a little light hearted fun, after all this is a political thread. I don't expect anything in here to influence a vote, one way or the other.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  13. Re:Romney-Ryan no Insurance your doctor is ER and by iluvcapra · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do you really think that parents that take their kids to the ER for a fever and/or ear infection are going to suddenly stop taking their kids to the ER and go to their regular doctor?

    Well yeah, they'll have insurance. These people aren't hopeless morons, and they love their children and what whats best for them. Indigent homeless are trickier, but you see a lot of working homeless families lining up around the block to get their non-emergent medical needs addressed. Under a

    In some states that can be Robamacare and in others it can be insurance and tort reform. Tort reform would save the system more money then any of the current proposals.

    You forgot to call the President "hopey changey," or make a reference to the "democrat party." Minus two points.

    Tort reform is a bit of a red herring. Orrin Hatch's Tort Reform proposals in '09 would have saved about $54 billion, which isn't chump change, but it would only reduce total national health spending by 0.5%. So we could claim that money on the table, but the limitations in Hatch's proposal specifically were extremely low, to the extent that they reduced pain and suffering awards to a slap on the wrist and would probably cause incidents of malpractice to increase.

    State-by-state solutions are doomed in the US because of regulatory arbitrage. Employers and tax units in states with expensive programs can simply move their paper addresses to states with lower tax liability. Insurance companies can shop around for states that offer them the most favorable regulation (the ones with the least customer protections), and employers can play states off each other to obtain favorable tax treatment. States simply can't design their own programs when the employers within it can simply evade the costs of the system by filing paperwork, while enjoying all the benefits of the system by dumping their employees into the state public program. A state-by-state healthcare system in the US would end up looking a lot like the consumer credit card system in the US, which is to say, we'd all have whatever rights the North Dakota and Delaware legislature had agreed to, because they were the highest bidder for the health insurance company's business.

    "States' Rights" has been keeping 60's-style state capitalism alive for decades, by giving employers a huge stick with which they can extract free services from a state government, guised under the threat of "killing jobs." An employer simply threatens to move unless they can stay tax-free, dumping the costs of roads, schools, police, and health care on everyone else.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  14. Re:Romney-Ryan no Insurance your doctor is ER and by Dahamma · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At least they are still alive, and not lying face down in a gutter. And of course those inadequate facilities are probably still costing taxpayers about 10x what providing basic insurance would...

    Always amazing the stupid decisions people (politicians and voters) will make with emotion or spite over reason. Reminds me of the CA death penalty. 13 people have been executed since it was reinstated in 1978, at a cost of about $4B. And the process takes so long that over *80* death row inmates have died of other causes. So $200M a year has been wasted just to wait around for 90% of the inmates to die on their own, same as in life without parole.

  15. Re:But he said space was stupid before.... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only ones that haven't flip-flopped are Gary Johnson and Ron Paul.

    That's correct. They skipped the "flip" part and just flopped.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  16. Re:Romney-Ryan no Insurance your doctor is ER and by GrimShady · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bottom line is, if you can't afford insurance, you have no business getting free health care financed by the rest of us. Find a free clinic.

    And who pays for this "free" clinic?

    WTF does this have to do with TFA about Romney and space? This is why I dont like reading /. anymore

  17. Romney? Really?! by SternisheFan · · Score: 3, Funny

    "I don't want a president who looks like a game show host." - David Letterman

  18. Re:Romney-Ryan no Insurance your doctor is ER and by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Thread drift is a hallowed part of /. history. From the time I joined after lurking for a while, thread drift has become a major feature of this atmosphere. To ensure you like it, next time you get mod points, use the Offtopic mod.

    Most geeks have at least a touch of ADD. The original topic, which talked about a Space Program by the opposition candidates, was made after one of them wondered, in all seriousness, why you couldn't open windows on airliners. Any semblance of subsequent sanity is purely accidental.

    --
    ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  19. Article's editorializing isn't fair, but mine is. by goodmanj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article's editorializing isn't really fair. No, Romney doesn't have a plan, but the goal of the article isn't to propose a space policy, but to bash Obama's. And it's true that space exploration has taken a hit during the Obama administration, but all the key events took place before his administration.

    Bush, 2004: "Screw that space shuttle, boys, we're going back to the moon!"
    NASA, 2004: "Cool! Just so you know, that's kind of expensive."
    Bush, 2006: "Is a buck fifty enough?"
    NASA, 2006: "No. And BTW, we're cancelling the shuttles like you asked."
    Obama, 2009: "Umm, guys? Let's be honest here, going to the moon on a buck fifty isn't going to happen. We need a new plan for what to do with your buck fifty."
    Congress, 2009: "What buck fifty?"
    Obama, 2011: "Oh for fuck's sake."

    I've talked to lots of NASA employees over the year. Lots of them are really pissed off at Washington politics. But the names that inspire curses are George Bush and Congress. Obama is rarely mentioned.

    NASA's woes are a classic case of the Republican game plan:
    1) When in power, make grand plans without sweating the details or the cost.
    2) When out of power, block all solutions to the problems that arise from your grand plans.
    3) When seeking power, blame the opposition for failing to solve the problems you caused.

  20. Re:Romney-Ryan no Insurance your doctor is ER and by foniksonik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What's that old saying? "I didn't protest when they left the liberal state. I didn't protest when they left the moderate state. Now they are leaving the country and leaving all the burdens on citizens. "

    Maybe not a faithful quote but you might get the gist of it.

    Corporations don't care about your values. They only care about the bottom line. That's how it is set up and probably how it should be. OTOH it's our job to hold them accountable. Part of that social contract is to make them contribute back to the community they have benefited from. The infrastructure, the subsidies, etc.

    Laws and regulations enforce that contract. Without them corporations are bound to screw us over by their own rules.

    The flip side is feast and famine. When the predator over hunts a territory he either moves on and fights his way into a new one or dies of starvation.

    Civilization is supposed to moderate that cycle for us smart humans. Part of civilization is rules and regulation. Really that's all it is. Agreed upon self regulation to avoid feast and famine.

    You are an ignorant person.

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  21. Re:Romney-Ryan no Insurance your doctor is ER and by RobbieCrash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The banking side of TARP is going to turn a profit.

    Universal health care will decrease the cost of health care to the entire population, while increasing overall health. Arguing against it is short sighted and stupid.

    --
    Keep on knockin'
    https://robbiecrash.me