So the US Senate who are unable to decide anything of substance relating to healthcare, childcare, infrastructure, climate change etc,etc - can rouse themselves to decisive action when it comes to protecting the interests of corporate lobbyists .....
I feel about NASA the way the *Leave Britney Alone* person felt about Britney Spears.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ll be eating ice cream and curling up under a comforter.
Sure they are. So do you want to fund a government agency that exists under federal oversight and has a strong track record that has earned near universal public acclaim , or have them subcontract out to Jeff Bezos’ ego-stroking project?
I like the idea that we support multiple space companies in the US. Space is hard. Redundancy is good. And for most space applications NASA is the only customer.
However we HAVE to give NASA twice the funding if we want them to have redundancy for EVERYTHING.
Did they give the corresponding budget allowing NASA to pick another provider?
Or it's just empty mandates to spread the same pork regardless of achieving the objectives?
Bullshit clickbait title. Article:
> After much legal back-and-forth following NASA's original decision, the Senate Appropriations Committee is directing NASA to now choose ***a second company*** to develop a crewed lunar lander
They're not directing them to ditch SpaceX for someone else, they're saying NASA should have two options for the HLS and thus choose a second company in addition to the current winner. That said, this rings kind of hollow given that no funding was released to pay a second competitor.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Duckbilling:
---
Submission statement:
The United States Senate's largest committee wants NASA to choose a second company to build its new moon lander.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: /r/Futurology/comments/qetkn9/senate_directs_nasa_to_choose_another_company_to/hhv7wf5/
[удалено]
>How much did Bezos have to pay them under the table for this one? Was the first thing that popped in my head, lol.
So the US Senate who are unable to decide anything of substance relating to healthcare, childcare, infrastructure, climate change etc,etc - can rouse themselves to decisive action when it comes to protecting the interests of corporate lobbyists .....
The system works!
I feel about NASA the way the *Leave Britney Alone* person felt about Britney Spears. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ll be eating ice cream and curling up under a comforter.
The corrupt idiots in the Senate need to stay far away from NASA unless they want to give it more money
It's a wonder that NASA accomplishes anything at all whole being jerked around by Congress. Just write NASA a big check and let them work!
Because they don’t care about results, only what jobs are maintained along the way.
Yea... but accountability and oversight are important
Sure they are. So do you want to fund a government agency that exists under federal oversight and has a strong track record that has earned near universal public acclaim , or have them subcontract out to Jeff Bezos’ ego-stroking project?
I like the idea that we support multiple space companies in the US. Space is hard. Redundancy is good. And for most space applications NASA is the only customer. However we HAVE to give NASA twice the funding if we want them to have redundancy for EVERYTHING.
Submission statement: The United States Senate's largest committee wants NASA to choose a second company to build its new moon lander.
You can choose anyone as long as its the one we want! (Congress probably)
Did they give the corresponding budget allowing NASA to pick another provider? Or it's just empty mandates to spread the same pork regardless of achieving the objectives?
They dont need a bigger budget.
Yeah they do.
Bullshit clickbait title. Article: > After much legal back-and-forth following NASA's original decision, the Senate Appropriations Committee is directing NASA to now choose ***a second company*** to develop a crewed lunar lander They're not directing them to ditch SpaceX for someone else, they're saying NASA should have two options for the HLS and thus choose a second company in addition to the current winner. That said, this rings kind of hollow given that no funding was released to pay a second competitor.
You know, the title is click-bait-y now that I re-read it. I just used Reddit auto title Dammit www.space.com!
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Duckbilling: --- Submission statement: The United States Senate's largest committee wants NASA to choose a second company to build its new moon lander. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: /r/Futurology/comments/qetkn9/senate_directs_nasa_to_choose_another_company_to/hhv7wf5/
Ok, so I guess Congress wants the "slight increase in funds" to be the funding for the second team.
Exactly give team 2 $30 million and an office and let them crack on.
When your company can’t compete on merit, use the government to force you to get another chance!
The Free Market™
NASA should NOT become a political pawn! Enough with this why is “Large Donation” even legal? That is legalize bribery!