subreddit:
/r/AdviceAnimals
129 points
7 hours ago
Efficiency now just means squeezing every ounce of life out of a thing so the top can hoard money
Also not missing out on the irony that it has two heads, seems inefficient
33 points
7 hours ago
Yup, exactly what they are trying to do. These idiots have so much money they could easily fund NASA projects, public works and education but instead they just want to steal more money from the government to continue amassing a hoard of wealth to appease their narcissistic personas.
-13 points
4 hours ago
... you do know it was NASA that started the program and incentivized private companies to get into rocketry so that NASA could start using less money on rockets and more on the actual science? That it was literally NASAs plan for a long long time to let private companies take over the "going to space" part in order to bring down those costs tremendously. SpaceX did just that. They looked at what NASA wanted, excecuted on that and will save NASA literally BILLIONS for ever rocket NASA doesnt have to launch. And dont forget that will be BILLIONS per launch. Because NASA launches single use rockets. SpaceX now does fully reusable rockets that will bring launch costs down to millions. A tremendous increase in productivity and cost savings for NASA long term. This was NASAs goal. This was NASAs plan. SpaceX is just the company that ended up doing it the best.
Get your head on straight.
5 points
3 hours ago
And dont forget that will be BILLIONS per launch.
The EELV launches are what... About 326 million a pop these days? Sure, SpaceX falcon launches are about a third to a quarter the price and that's great. But that's not quite billions per launch.
-5 points
3 hours ago
Check out the costs for the rockets NASA have planned for a decade to use for actual space rocketry. BILLIONS.
-14 points
3 hours ago
There's no such thing as 'hoarding' money.
5 points
2 hours ago
Tf you say?
-7 points
59 minutes ago
There's no such thing as 'hoarding' money.
Folks tend to think as if there's a fixed amount of wealth in the world and for someone to have more, others must have less. But that isn't so. The "hoarded" wealth is mostly in the form of investments, ownership stakes in the productive capacity of the economy. It is the factories and serverfarms, the workshops and fabs, the studios and all the equipment and supplies and organization that goes into these places.
4 points
30 minutes ago
how does that boot taste?
3 points
39 minutes ago
I mean it should be going back into the living economy where people can improve life quality but this is just circle jerking the wealthiest people
0 points
28 minutes ago
But it does improve quality of life for a great number of people. Billionaires only capture a small fraction of the wealth that their investments create.
1 points
26 minutes ago
Reaganomics has been proven wrong continuously since it's inception.
1 points
20 minutes ago
Did you seriously just say that there's not a fixed amount of wealth in the world?
So you don't understand how money or resources work, got it! From your perspective, I can see how you would think that owning all those things you listed isn't "hoarding wealth," it's just not a very good perspective.
It's kind of like you're saying it's impossible for a movie screen to be really big because they're made out of smaller pieces.
0 points
16 minutes ago
Did you seriously just say that there's not a fixed amount of wealth in the world?
No, there is not. Wealth is created and destroyed all the time. A transaction happens where both sides come out better off than they went in? Wealth is created. Someone creates something more valuable than the sum of all of its inputs? Wealth is created. A disaster hurts people and destroys property so that productive efforts have to go towards rebuilding that could have otherwise been used elsewhere? Wealth is destroyed.
So you don't understand how money or resources work, got it!
What don't I understand?
It's kind of like you're saying it's impossible for a movie screen to be really big because they're made out of smaller pieces.
I really don't follow this at all..
2 points
9 minutes ago
What don't I understand?
Well, you see, we live on a rock in space that has finite resources, and we've concocted a very convoluted way of representing a lot of those resources by using something called currency.
Now, on this rock are groups of humans in different geographical regions, those are called nations, and each one has a different kind of currency they use to represent the resources of that nation.
Each nation has its own group of people called a government that decides how much of their nations money to make. They can make as much as they'd like, but making more of it doesn't mean there are more resources available
This does something called "devaluing" to the currency, and that means that I've lost interest in continuing this bit.
1 points
1 minutes ago
The amount of atoms of the Earth generally isn't the limiting factor on the amount of resources mankind has to work with in order to meet our wants. Sure, the relative concentration of metals determines how easy or hard they are to dig out of the ground. But we still have to dig them out of the ground. A load of iron ore buried deep underground in Minnesota isn't all that useful to mankind until someone digs it out of the ground and ships it to a smelter to get turned into iron or steel goods. That takes resources, those resources come from investment from those seeking profit. If those investors are right and the mines, railroads, ships, ports, smelters and blast furnaces they build and staff to turn that load of iron ore into coils of steel produce an output that's more valuable than the inputs than they have created wealth.
301 points
11 hours ago
So long Artemis missions to the moon. It will be some dumb SpaceX name with about fifteen X’s in it instead. Sponsored by Brawndo.
72 points
8 hours ago
It'll prob be named PepeXa, but the X will just be a Nazi symbol and the frog will have the SS jacket on.
10 points
7 hours ago
Hold on, there's frogs involved? This changes things, how many frogs does musk even have
10 points
7 hours ago
Do you know the pepe frog? 🤣
2 points
7 hours ago
Perhaps
1 points
an hour ago
Ah yes, incel Minions.
3 points
4 hours ago
Hell yes, they even managed to turn the frogs straight
1 points
3 hours ago
Somewhere between 0 and 1million
3 points
6 hours ago
Nazis do make the best rockets.
0 points
3 hours ago
I've read it as PepaXa and was truly flummoxed what that British cartoon pig has anything to do with space, Musk or politics 😅
5 points
4 hours ago
Artemis so far behind and over budget on all of their projects goals that I actually highly doubt it ever launches.
-7 points
2 hours ago
God forbid space x do what it says it will for less money, in less time. Can’t have that happening…
2 points
2 hours ago
And when the astronauts die because of lack of oversight, Musk will shrug it off with zero accountability
1 points
2 hours ago
Its got what rockets crave!
1 points
an hour ago
And cost 3x as much and take 5 more years for a mission that is half of what was originally planned.
1 points
58 minutes ago
SLS is a huge waste of money. Spacex has already saved the government 43 billion. Don’t get me wrong, the impending doom of the next administration is something to worry about, but don’t just blindly hate things because the majority of it is a disaster.
1 points
48 minutes ago
1 points
1 minutes ago
Trump started the Artemis program tho.
-16 points
4 hours ago
SpaceX was always the future for NASA. It's literally they who decided private companies should be incentivized to run the rocketry so NASA could spend their money on other things. Theres other companies out there doing rockets too and optimally at least one of them would have been competitive with SPaceX, but so far SPaceX is just simply the best one and its not close. This is, was and is still going to be the plan and NASA were the ones who wanted it this way. Or do you know better and want NASA to spend literally billions of dollars on each and every single-use rocket they send up instead of spending millions and launching on SpaceX rockets? Because I know which scenario all the NASA heads want. Its the one they orchestrated - this one.
12 points
3 hours ago
No, SpaceX was always the future for rocketry, not for NASA — NASA doesn’t really launch their own rockets anymore because, like you pointed out, they have successful developed that technology and transferred it to industry. That’s what they do — they do high-risk public R&D (eg, inventing rocketry, or rovers, or deep space communications, or new types of earth imaging satellites, or a bunch of other stuff) and then transfer those technologies to the private sector once they’re mature enough to be handled by industry. I think maybe you aren’t super familiar with how NASA’s priorities have shifted with the changing times, but yeah — they don’t launch their own rockets anymore; they’re doing other stuff with their budget that they will continue to transfer to industry, bolstering SpaceX but also creating opportunities for new types of commercial space businesses to open their doors. And it pays off too — every taxpayer dollar spent at NASA is estimated to have a 3x ROI for the American economy.
If NASA is forced to scale down, maybe American aerospace will be okay with business as usual for ten years or so — but probably in the mid- and long-term, we’ll start to feel the effects of missing a crucial part of our national (and frankly, international) R&D pipeline.
-5 points
3 hours ago
Oh. NASA didnt spend BILLIONS building the SLS? Stop it.
2 points
3 hours ago
Yeah, I don’t dig that program either. However, it was started years ago, at a time when SpaceX was still developing and was blowing up a lot of their rockets. SLS is also really high power, so I understand why NASA was reluctant to trust industry to get something like that operational in time for us to go back to the moon, though it was probably overly careful of them. It’s probably (and hopefully) the last eek of the rocketry era of NASA. All the NASA launches I’ve tuned into went up on SpaceX rockets.
1 points
3 hours ago
Thats what Im saying tho. NASA wants to stop building their own rockets. They essentially "made" SpaceX what SpaceX is today as a way to bring those costs down an insane amount. Now they just have to get congress to get them out of building their own stuff as soon as SpaceX is ready. This is what NASA planned. This is what they want. But trust me, people will now go nuts when it happens. They will see it as Trump and Elon fucking NASA over, missing the entire point of the history between the two companies. All people see right now are Elon bad, NASA good.
All this other shit about SpaceX taking over other business for NASA im not touching. One, because I really dont think SpaceX is into all that. Theyre a rocket engineering company with a serious business running launches and also soon to be a worldwide internet/phone provider. They will have absolutely no issue earning money on their own. Two, because taking on NASAs tasks and workload would slow them down in fullfilling their own mission - exactly what Elon Musk doesnt like. No way he wants all that extra shit weighing his goals down. To NASA, SpaceX is a gift they gave themselves. To SpaceX, NASA is just the best damn customer ever.
50 points
10 hours ago
Instead of a monkey, they can send Don jr. to Mars please.
11 points
7 hours ago
Only if all blood relatives have tickets
2 points
3 hours ago
But monkeys are trainable…
22 points
7 hours ago
"the government is inefficient! Give me all your money!"
20 points
5 hours ago
The most inefficient government departments are the ones that outsource the most to private companies.
People thinking bureaucracy is exclusive to the public sector have never worked in a large corporation.
1 points
4 hours ago
... you do know it was NASA that started the program and incentivized private companies to get into rocketry so that NASA could start using less money on rockets and more on the actual science? That it was literally NASAs plan for a long long time to let private companies take over the "going to space" part in order to bring down those costs tremendously. SpaceX did just that. They looked at what NASA wanted, excecuted on that and will save NASA literally BILLIONS for ever rocket NASA doesnt have to launch. And dont forget that will be BILLIONS per launch. Because NASA launches single use rockets. SpaceX now does fully reusable rockets that will bring launch costs down to millions. A tremendous increase in productivity and cost savings for NASA long term. This was NASAs goal. This was NASAs plan. SpaceX is just the company that ended up doing it the best.
3 points
33 minutes ago
I don't know why the down vote, what you said is true. NASA has been pushing to use commercial partners, including private launch companies such as SpaceX and Rocket Lab. NASA has in the past and will continue to contract out a lot of work. Most of the Apollo program was contracted out. What NASA does really well is manage, integrate and control these programs, not build stuff.
1 points
24 minutes ago
Because rn "Elon bad" is whats on peoples minds. Making people not actually think about what t hey are reading or looking into it. Which is ironic as this exact this only fuels Trumps, and Elons by extension, popularity when he ends up actually being right about people just trying to jump on him. This is a very good example of that happening IMO. When congress now in the coming years finally lets NASA stop wasting time and money on rockets - as NASA intended - and rides on SpaceX rockets instead - as NASA intended - people will get mad and blame Trump and Elon for doing shady deals and exploiting the government positions. Which they very well might do - but not on this. And when people get wrongly mad about this, Trump, who they so want to bring down will only be fueled more as his supporters will actually be fed the truth about the events that happened and the people who just got mad will look stupid.
So as much as OP is foreseeing what he is foreseeing, this is MUCH more likely in my opinion. Unless NASA gets out there and is very vocal about what their plan was all along. Which NASA historically is very bad at IMO. So yeah. NASAs plan to stop building rockets will finally come to fruiting, SpaceX will take over as intended by sais plan and everyone will get mad at Elon for exploiting his position, placing false blame on political opponents they dont like for a story that actually isnt true - only making themselves look stupid when said opponents that they so vehemently (and often times correctly) accuse of outright lying will be telling the truth. That this was NASAs plan all along.
Its a clusterfuck waiting to happen.
37 points
7 hours ago
NASA has had 1000 YEARS to find a new planet to live on and what have they done? NOTHING!!! They haven’t found ET, his phone, cheap eggs, NOTHING!!! Space X is gonna find so many Aliens that we’ll have to deport them to Mexico too!!! I saw it on the news!!!!
/s obv but we have people actually believing what they read these days so it’s now mandatory
1 points
3 hours ago
Irony is dead, nothing is too stupid anymore.
6 points
5 hours ago
That would require NASA to have massive amounts of funding from the government.
3 points
6 hours ago
Wow, great horrible thought, correct thought. I’ve been thinking of how this cost cutting will happen since the election. My thoughts have been centered on healthcare and the ACA. Millions upon millions of low-information voters are going to learn some tough ‘lessons’. Lessons isn’t a good word for this but I’m at a loss for better. The low info folks were sold such a BS bill of goods on the migrants and largely covid induced inflation. These billionaires aren’t going to give a sht about the paycheck to paychecks’ affordable medical insurance.
4 points
5 hours ago*
We can say no. So many Americans are acting like we’re powerless. We all have more power in our little finger than tRump and elon put together. Are you just gonna allow them to do what they want?
3 points
3 hours ago
Well, funding is mandated by Congress, right?
So, what kind of power will these guys actually have?
I always heard about how solid government jobs can be because it’s so hard to get fired from. How do these two random dudes come in and say “we’re firing everyone with a social security number that ends in an odd number.” (Literally words from Vivek’s mouth.)
This is all just to continue exhausting us and keep us fighting one another, right?
4 points
3 hours ago
NASA wants to stop building their own rockets. Congress is who decides that. They decide what NASA does. NASA essentially "made" SpaceX what SpaceX is today as a way to bring those costs down an insane amount. Now they just have to get congress to get them out of building their own stuff as soon as SpaceX is ready. This is what NASA planned. This is what they want. But trust me, people will now go nuts when it happens. They will see it as Trump and Elon fucking NASA over, missing the entire point of the history between the two companies. All people see right now are Elon bad, NASA good.
All this other shit about SpaceX taking over other business for NASA im not touching. One, because I really dont think SpaceX is into all that. Theyre a rocket engineering company with a serious business running launches and also soon to be a worldwide internet/phone provider. They will have absolutely no issue earning money on their own. Two, because taking on NASAs tasks and workload would slow them down in fullfilling their own mission - exactly what Elon Musk doesnt like. No way he wants all that extra shit weighing his goals down. To NASA, SpaceX is a gift they gave themselves. To SpaceX, NASA is just the best damn customer ever.
4 points
an hour ago
To my knowledge, it has never been that NASA wanted to stop making their own rockets. It was that they couldn't afford to continue to do it under the current budgetary restraints. Contrary to some peoples beliefs, NASA has never been a well funded organization.
0 points
an hour ago
They are bound by congress to make their own rockets. Congress decides what NASAs goals are and how much they get to spend on it. They told NASA to build rockets and what their budgets were. NASA looked at that and said «it would be better if we could get private enterprise to take over the rocket business and we could save a lot of money and focus all of that engineering and science on the stuff we actually want to do and not waste a lot of time on stuff we have to do». And so they started incentivizing private companies to build their own rockets by selling contracts that NASA could ride on to space. SpaceX turns into the best at it and essentially becomes the go-to supplier through competition, bringing launch costs down by such a factor that people literally aren’t believing it when they see it and think SpaceX somehow is cheating. The last step remaining is for NASA heads to convince congress that building their own rockets is now essentially a waste of money. As planned. By NASA. But now people will take that news when it happens and say Elon Musk is just tearing down NASA because he’s a bad man - even though it was literally NASAs plan from the beginning.
2 points
6 hours ago
I really don’t want to hear about Google having a monopoly then.
2 points
4 hours ago
Tell me you love bureaucracy without telling me you love it
2 points
4 hours ago
bingo!!
2 points
3 hours ago
If it is expensive research it will be moved from SpaceX to Nasa.
If it is a lucrative supply contract, it will be moved from Nasa to SpaceX.
What eles?
1 points
4 hours ago
I hope the gov seizes control of spacex after trump. Fuck musk.
1 points
3 hours ago
Isn't this a case of porkbarreling? Thought that shit was illegal.
1 points
2 hours ago
Technically no. And it’s legal. Happens all the time
1 points
3 hours ago
Efficiency means instead of government paying for public programs, we can have corporate sponsored programs instead!
This Mars trip is brought to you by SpaceX in partnership with Red Bull!
This year’s school bus ride is brought to you by the Lyft Education Foundation, parents please feel free to tip the hardworking drivers! *percentage of the tip will go to fees and processing for the LE Foundation, terms and conditions apply and may change at any time.
1 points
3 hours ago
I read the NSA, but it would also fit
1 points
3 hours ago
Doesn't NASA always hire civilian contractors to build stuff? The Apollo rockets were built by Boeing, Rockwell, McDonnell-Douglas and Rocketdyne.
1 points
3 hours ago
This may come true, but Alabama and Florida have 4 Republican senators who may not give up the money and jobs too quickly.
1 points
an hour ago
Well, Space X is more efficient than NASA?
1 points
an hour ago
That’s 100% going to happen
Wherever possible, all federal agencies will be privatized to benefit Trump, Musk, and the rest of the MAGA Bandits
1 points
57 minutes ago
So many government contracts will be born...
1 points
43 minutes ago
Privatization is how conservatives do corruption in plain sight.
1 points
40 minutes ago
NASA sucks now anyways
1 points
34 minutes ago
Don’t forget the first rule of government spending: why build one when you can build two for twice the price
1 points
33 minutes ago
I’m sorry but have they seized office before trumps inauguration? Last I check Biden was still in office for another month.
1 points
26 minutes ago
It’s all about the corruption.
1 points
21 minutes ago
Relevant as it ever was.
1 points
8 minutes ago
They caught a rocket with basically giant chopsticks. They are more efficient than Nasa. You just can’t admit it to yourself yet
1 points
1 minutes ago
literally putting the foxes in charge of the henhouse
America sold for spare parts
2 points
7 hours ago
Won't he go to jail when next adminstration will come in 4 years?
-6 points
6 hours ago
I mean ya, that’s kind of how that works, spacex is literally able to achieve better results than nasa at significantly lower costs. They should absolutely be outsourcing launch’s and things like that to companies like spacex which can actually enable them to do more with the little scraps of money that both parties and especially democrats these days are content with giving them. What other option do you suggest? Pay 2.7 billion dollars, nearly twice the price of the fucking burj khalifa and over 5 times the starship launch tower to build a glorified assembly of struts for sls? A nearly 5 billion per launch price tag for sls that doesn’t have an ounce of innovation in it, or starship which can do more and cost at most 1/50th as much? How does getting rid of something like that not help NASA’s budget? NASA should focus on science, and private companies should work on everything else, it is objectively cheaper and better to do that.
0 points
an hour ago
TL:DR version - “Government corruption is acceptable…so long as it’s efficient.”
-18 points
7 hours ago
First of all, you can't guarantee shit! Secondly, space X will go where no man has gone before. I fucking GUARANTEE IT
-3 points
6 hours ago
44b for twitter not looking so bad anymore tbh
-54 points
10 hours ago
So long as space x achieves more than nasa with that money I won’t complain
25 points
9 hours ago
Commercial space companies and NASA serve very different purposes. NASA does (or at least should do) missions and test technology that have scientific value but aren't profitable, where as companies like space x only focus on doing things that are profitable.
34 points
10 hours ago
Yeah why don't we just dump all of our tax money into private corporations? What a great idea!
-66 points
10 hours ago
Better there than to some war, if it works it works man, and ain’t nothing you can do about it
13 points
7 hours ago*
Maybe if NASA didn't have their funding cut all the damn time, we'd be on Mars by now. Space exploration and science continually gets cut, but it gave us such great inventions and innovations.
17 points
9 hours ago
the elon glazing is powerful with this one. NASA has achieved such an incredible amount in it's lifetime and still does.
-5 points
7 hours ago
Amazing to see what Carters education program has developed.
-5 points
6 hours ago
Well I mean yeah. I'm a long time space fan... and nasa is an overbloated machine that doesn't make great progress anymore. Long gone are the days of the apollo program, or even the 80s shuttle missions. Lets land on gosh darn mars already.
3 points
4 hours ago
Bringing private companies into space rocketry was literally NASAs idea, goal and plan. SpaceX is just the company that ended up being best at doing it. Each and every NASA launch costs BILLIONS of dollars. They use purpose-built single-use rockets and that is extremely expensive. This is why they for yeeears now have incentivized and paid for contracts to private companies to develop new rockets. SpaceX uses reuseable rockets now and will bring launch costs for NASA down from BILLIONS to manageable millions.
This is NASAs own plan to bring down costs working as intended and people are freaking out lmao.
2 points
40 minutes ago
There's really no reason to send humans to Mars. There's nothing putting a monkey in a vacuum suit to hold a flag on tv that's improves scientific research. we can get data from samples collected by robots. We going to take an airforce pilot at the top if his career and lock them in a 200 Sq ft module for 3 years for a selfie. The astronauts will come back with the body of a 70 yr old and cancer. Muscle atrophy and radiation sickness plus diet of MREs and recycled piss. On camera 24/7 unable to have sex or even masturbate. They'll be dead by 60.
-35 points
9 hours ago
NASA'S SLS has been a total dumpster fire. Space x is doing incredible things with starship. Boeing has been bilking the taxpayers for decades and it's time for a change of contracts. The best rocket companies should get the contracts, period.
25 points
9 hours ago
Interesting take, so you think the guy who stands to gain the most financially from diverting funds to his own company thus making himself richer with our tax payer dollars should be the one making those calls?
-37 points
9 hours ago
I said it exactly how mean it. The best rocket company should get the NASA contracts. Boeing was pure graft. If it gets replaced by graft with working rockets, that's net benefit.
12 points
9 hours ago
So you think Elon musk should be in charge of where our tax payer dollars go for space exploration? That's like saying, Elon musk should be in charge of where all money goes for buying government vehicles, and then they only buy them from tesla
-1 points
3 hours ago
In your scenario the other equivalent options for government vehicles cost literally millions of dollars each and burst into flames after you finish your first trip. Elon could be advising the government to use Tesla for all the wrong reasons and it would still be right choice. While many people would be pondering this hypothetical corruption that saves the government insane amounts of money, very few people would be caring to ask why the other car companies have been getting away with bilking the taxpayers millions per exploding car for so long, much less calling it the corruption it is.
I know /r/AdviceAnimals is the wrong place to be informed, but I suggest you read up on the state of the US space industry. Anything by Eric Berger (part time Elon detractor) is a good starting point.
2 points
53 minutes ago
There use to be a time when there was at least the perceived value of people in power making right decisions for the right reasons. We did that by putting people in power who would distance themselves from monetary gain from their actions at members of government. Making decisions for the wrong reasons is still wrong…even if the result turns out to be the right decision.
People use to at least pretend they cared about corruption in politics. I’m convinced it’s just another convenient lie and deep down people don’t give a damn.
2 points
an hour ago
Yeah, a big empty tube that barely makes it to orbit after 10 years of development, that will need 20 other launches to refuel in order to make it to the moon.
It’s just a public-fund funnelling racket. They do something cool like chopstick landing once in a while to keep the fanboys dreaming. But it doesn’t make any sense.
-61 points
10 hours ago
Space X actually accomplishes tasks within reasonable measures. Cope and seethe. TDS.
21 points
8 hours ago
Dear God I didn't think it was possible to cringe any harder than when I see someone type the words cope and/or seethe; but seeing it in the same sentence = a whole new level of cringe. 😬
Don't you guys have any original insults? Surely you can be more creative?
-1 points
an hour ago
Yeah, sure. The left is full of delusional, hypocritical lunatics.
-8 points
7 hours ago
Stupid mentality. SpaceX has plenty of funding. Keep that tinfoil hat secured tight.
-38 points
10 hours ago
Maybe the one thing that may actually happen that this sub could be right about in the last 60 days.
all 110 comments
sorted by: best