NASA Funding Bureaucracy
Comments discuss NASA's constraints due to government funding, congressional politics, bureaucracy, and pork-barrel spending, often contrasting it with efficient private companies like SpaceX.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
Surprising NASA isn’t stepping up to pay
That's how NASA funding pays off!
can you elaborate on what was wrong with the NASA thing?
NASA accepted government money. This is the consequence they have to deal with. It is NASA's fault.
Sounds like that person doesn't really understand that NASA is a political entity and the Public Relations of an ongoing successful mission is more valuable long term than more scientifically pragmatic experiments in the immediate.
NASA funding doesn't mean much here. see danielweber's comment.
"No, NASA's problem has everything to do with gravity and economics"Well, politics and bureaucracy, I'd say.
I don't think its so much a lack of work with NASA so much as a lack of funding.
NASA probably could be as nimble as SpaceX if they didn’t have to rely on Congress, whose goal is not to build a successful rocket, but to spread the money funnel across the States. Imagine if SpaceX’s board suddenly said “the company’s goal is now not to get to Mars, but to employ as many people and contractors as possible in all 50 states!” You’d basically get NASA.
NASA didn’t rip you off, Congress killing NASA’s funding did.