You should be happy since NASA has paid for about 1/2 of SpaceX expenses so far. In fact NASA doesn't build much. The last A is for administration which is what it mostly does. Private contractors do the vast majority of the work. NASA just sets the goals and monitors the contracts. Some work is kept in house but most of that is so that there are people smart enough to manage the contracts.
I'll try one more time. They have shown they can land from a stable position in Texas. If they can show they can get from second stage separation to a similar configuration over a barge in the ocean then it's a success. If they can it will show they have good enough control that range safety will allow them to fly back to try to land on land.
Funny how you just throw the word profit out there without explaination. If your first statement is true that humans are brave and motivated by liberty and honor then the easiest way for corporations to make a profit is to sell people what they want. If humans were truely motivated by these ideals then corporations would be selling into that market.
The goal isn't to land on a barge, but back at the launch site (or at least near it). If they can show over a couple attempts that they get close to the target then they can move to doing this over land. They have already proven they can do this in Texas many times. It doesn't really matter if they tip over over land too hard at sea. What you don't want is that it missed by a mile or cartwheels out of control.
I think it was Milton Friedman who explained there are 4 ways to spend money.
1) Spend your own money on yourself.
You look for a compromise between cost and quality 2) Spend your own money on somebody else.
You look mostly for cost 3) Spend somebody else’s money on yourself.
You look mostly for quality 4) Spend somebody else’s money on somebody else.
You really don't care.
We all want to have a monopoly on what we do for a living. We want limited competitor and supply s and be able to charge high prices. As consumers we want unlimited choices, lots of supply, and low prices. A free market will provide the latter and a command economy is required for the former. What we have now is the worst of both. Those with political power use it to restrict start up and small competitors while trying to have unlimited supply of cheap labor.
It only takes one predator carrying a pregnant fish from one pond to another to eat it and having the eggs wash into the pond to start. I'm sure they take off pretty quick with no large fish predators in the water.
I think the original reason is that employee benefits are typically calculated over 40 hours. So after 40 hours the cost of the employee actually goes down to the employer.
Not quite. I am talking about in place of the existing tax code.
So take this mine. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?... Right now they pay $87M in taxes on $2789M in revenue or about 3%. So prices wouldn't go up that much. If anything their costs of tax complience would also go down quite a bit.
Not quite. The price of your labor is $50. That hour is worth less to you than $50 otherwise you wouldn't trade. That hour is worth more to your employer otherwise they wouldn't trade.
I limit my liability for driving by buying insurance. The more risky a driver the higher the rates. The same should apply to businesses. Except since the risk is externalized so companies are better off taking larger risks because they keep the benefits but socialize the risk.
Not if you are an employee. I can't deduct my car that I need to get to work, house to live, utilities, food, medicine, etc. Only if you are self employed.
Individuals aren't taxes based on their profit but income. Corporations should minimally be held to the same standard. After all there is a huge benefit to incorporating which is limiting liability of the owners. Tax the income at a much lower rate of 5% or so. Think of all of the productivity lost moving money around to optimize tax payments. If your profit margin isn't high enough to cover this tax then you shouldn't incorporate.
Wrong. Electric cars have plenty of gears. You need to change the relatively high RPM of an electric motor to the lower RPM of the wheels. Also if a motor is driving more than one wheel you need a differential which is full of gears.
What you might not need is a transmission where you can actively change the gear ratio but there are plenty of gears in an electric car.
Slashdot Mirror
One ton of AC is equivalent to what one ton of ice melting would provide over a day.
You should be happy since NASA has paid for about 1/2 of SpaceX expenses so far. In fact NASA doesn't build much. The last A is for administration which is what it mostly does. Private contractors do the vast majority of the work. NASA just sets the goals and monitors the contracts. Some work is kept in house but most of that is so that there are people smart enough to manage the contracts.
I'll try one more time. They have shown they can land from a stable position in Texas. If they can show they can get from second stage separation to a similar configuration over a barge in the ocean then it's a success. If they can it will show they have good enough control that range safety will allow them to fly back to try to land on land.
Funny how you just throw the word profit out there without explaination. If your first statement is true that humans are brave and motivated by liberty and honor then the easiest way for corporations to make a profit is to sell people what they want. If humans were truely motivated by these ideals then corporations would be selling into that market.
You missed quoting the important part.
The goal isn't to land on a barge, but back at the launch site (or at least near it). If they can show over a couple attempts that they get close to the target then they can move to doing this over land. They have already proven they can do this in Texas many times. It doesn't really matter if they tip over over land too hard at sea. What you don't want is that it missed by a mile or cartwheels out of control.
I think it was Milton Friedman who explained there are 4 ways to spend money.
1) Spend your own money on yourself.
You look for a compromise between cost and quality
2) Spend your own money on somebody else.
You look mostly for cost
3) Spend somebody else’s money on yourself.
You look mostly for quality
4) Spend somebody else’s money on somebody else.
You really don't care.
We all want to have a monopoly on what we do for a living. We want limited competitor and supply s and be able to charge high prices. As consumers we want unlimited choices, lots of supply, and low prices. A free market will provide the latter and a command economy is required for the former. What we have now is the worst of both. Those with political power use it to restrict start up and small competitors while trying to have unlimited supply of cheap labor.
It only takes one predator carrying a pregnant fish from one pond to another to eat it and having the eggs wash into the pond to start. I'm sure they take off pretty quick with no large fish predators in the water.
The difference is that this is the first compile and test of Orion and it costs a couple billion so don't mess up.
I think the original reason is that employee benefits are typically calculated over 40 hours. So after 40 hours the cost of the employee actually goes down to the employer.
In case anyone is interested.
http://www.ustream.tv/nasahdtv
Especially since those evil men were most likely raised by single women and educated in schools made up almost entirely of women.
If men's lives weren't disposable think how hard it would be to get things done or have wars.
This was a problem with the Air Force rocket not the NASA payload.
NASA doesn't launch these rockets. They are operated by ULA (Boeing and Lockheed).
Not quite. I am talking about in place of the existing tax code.
So take this mine.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?...
Right now they pay $87M in taxes on $2789M in revenue or about 3%. So prices wouldn't go up that much. If anything their costs of tax complience would also go down quite a bit.
Not quite. The price of your labor is $50. That hour is worth less to you than $50 otherwise you wouldn't trade. That hour is worth more to your employer otherwise they wouldn't trade.
Of course they would for a price. But it's hard to compete with free which is what businesses pay today.
We already pay sales tax on cars and houses. It's factored into the price.
I limit my liability for driving by buying insurance. The more risky a driver the higher the rates. The same should apply to businesses. Except since the risk is externalized so companies are better off taking larger risks because they keep the benefits but socialize the risk.
Not if you are an employee. I can't deduct my car that I need to get to work, house to live, utilities, food, medicine, etc. Only if you are self employed.
Did you read what I wrote?
"After all there is a huge benefit to incorporating which is limiting liability of the owners"
This is what I mean. This HUGE benefit should come at a price.
Individuals aren't taxes based on their profit but income. Corporations should minimally be held to the same standard. After all there is a huge benefit to incorporating which is limiting liability of the owners. Tax the income at a much lower rate of 5% or so. Think of all of the productivity lost moving money around to optimize tax payments. If your profit margin isn't high enough to cover this tax then you shouldn't incorporate.
Wrong. Electric cars have plenty of gears. You need to change the relatively high RPM of an electric motor to the lower RPM of the wheels. Also if a motor is driving more than one wheel you need a differential which is full of gears.
What you might not need is a transmission where you can actively change the gear ratio but there are plenty of gears in an electric car.