Trump Wants $1 Billion For Private-Sector-Led Mars Exploration
- Reference: 0177905579
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/06/03/0335217/trump-wants-1-billion-for-private-sector-led-mars-exploration
- Source link:
> Under the proposal, NASA would award contracts to companies developing spacesuits, communications systems and a human-rated landing vehicle to foster exploration of the Red Planet. Trump's proposed $18.8 billion NASA budget would cut the agency's funding by about 25% from the year before, with big hits to its science portfolio. The fleshed-out request on Friday builds upon a condensed budget proposal released earlier this month.
>
> "We must continue to be responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars," NASA Acting Administrator Janet Petro wrote in a letter included in the request. "That means making strategic decisions -- including scaling back or discontinuing ineffective efforts." The new Mars scheme is modeled after NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program that has benefited Intuitive Machines LLC, Firefly Aerospace Inc. and Astrobotic Technology Inc., though it has achieved mixed results. According to the budget, the contract to land on Mars would build upon existing lander contracts.
[2]America's Next NASA Administrator Will Not Be Former SpaceX Astronaut Jared Isaacman
[1] https://phys.org/news/2025-06-trump-billion-private-sector-mars.html
[2] https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/06/01/0722227/americas-next-nasa-administrator-will-not-be-former-spacex-astronaut-jared-isaacman
Sure (Score:2)
If someone can really get to Mars for $1 billion, then give it to them. Even give them $10 billion, in case there are budget overruns.
We should increase NASA funding though. Cutting that is stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
> If someone can really get to Mars for $1 billion, then give it to them. Even give them $10 billion, in case there are budget overruns. We should increase NASA funding though. Cutting that is stupid.
Yes. Spacex is not NASA, and they are doing separate missions. If we're cutting out science, what are we going there for? And no - it isn't happening for a billion. 10 billion is sketchy.
But the big question is - Is there ketamine on Mars?
Re: (Score:3)
I doubt it can be done for even ten billion. I mean, sure, you can get a spaceship into orbit and point it out Mars. We've done that enough times now. But putting people in that ship and having them arrive at Mars without them being irradiated corpses, that's where the money will go. And then you've got to get them down and back up out of a non-unsubstantial gravity well, and again, get them back to Earth without them being irradiated corpses.
No way any of that can be done for ten billion. Ten billion is th
You could, you know... (Score:2, Interesting)
fund NASA to the tune of $1bn.
Of course, your South African Nazi friend wouldn't profit from that, which is your main concern really.
Re: (Score:2)
The first rover mission was $1BN, the latest rover mission was roughly $3BN. $1BN wont cover anything today. It has to be commerically led for an ROI vs tax payer funded science. Just because its led by private dollars doesnt mean science wont be moved forwarded. [1]https://www.forbes.com/sites/n... [forbes.com]
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2021/02/19/how-the-cost-of-perseverance-compares-to-other-mars-missions-infographic/
Truly, small small people (Score:5, Insightful)
It's hilarious to think that these tiny fascists can't even live up to the old joke about Mussolini getting the trains to run on time. There's practically nothing they ever set out to do and successfully accomplish, whether it's the overt or covert goals, except for shutting things down. Anything that requires an organisation to do something, as opposed to stopping doing something, ends in failure.
They are so wildly inadequate, in every sense.
Re: (Score:3)
There goal is more-or-less to destroy government. They don't want the trains to run on time, they don't want the trains to run at all.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that's mainly true, but not wholly. And they're not even massively effective at breaking things! They've broken lots, of course, because breaking is easier than fixing, but there's plenty of stuff they tried to break and failed. Taking 2tn of services out of the government is the most obvious example.
Re: (Score:2)
> There goal is more-or-less to destroy government. They don't want the trains to run on time, they don't want the trains to run at all.
They want to continually ask for funding to make the trains run on time, provided via taxpayer dollars, while never quite making the trains run on time, so that they can be justified in constantly asking for more funding to make the trains run on time. Fraud and waste are being screamed from the rooftops, while the biggest fraudsters in existence create the biggest amount of waste possible. It's all quite asinine, and I'm quite frankly flabbergasted that there's no way to stop it from continuing.
Re: (Score:1)
> They want to continually ask for funding to make the trains run on time, provided via taxpayer dollars, while never quite making the trains run on time, so that they can be justified in constantly asking for more funding to make the trains run on time.
Do you understand that making the trains run takes money constantly? So does making them continue to run on time take money constantly. Sort of how just buying you a meal doesn't feed you for life (unless you immediately die of course) but you constantly need to buy food or things to use to grow food.
Re: (Score:2)
That is because they think they do not need cooperation. Do what they say or starve.
Jokes on them, you can't force a caged bird to sing.
Jokes on us, we will be forced to go through World War 3 because they do not believe other people really exist like they do.
Translation... (Score:5, Informative)
Elon gets a billion dollar bonus from daddy. Got it ;-)
Re: (Score:3)
> Elon gets a billion dollar bonus from daddy. Got it ;-)
Oh, a certain amount will be funnelled direct to Trump... He's not doing this out of scientific curiosity.
Re:Translation... (Score:5, Informative)
> Hell of a political stretch to see one billion as some kind of payoff from "daddy" when speaking about a man with hundreds of billions in wealth.
What are you smoking? Leon couldn't even come up with $44B for Twitter, he had to get Saudi money. Paper value of stocks doesn't equal money in meatspace. If he tries to spend hundreds of billions of dollars he will rapidly find the value of his stocks plummeting. Further, his valuation to date has been founded on money from government. Tesla would have been barely if at all profitable without subsidies. SpaceX would be much smaller (if it still existed at all) without government contracts.
Re: (Score:2)
The first rule of being rich is getting other people to spend their money.
Re: (Score:2)
> The first rule of being rich is getting other people to spend their money.
There's no question that makes more sense than the alternative, and the house of Saud has the money to spend on maintaining their empire. It doesn't change the fact that Elno can't spend and therefore isn't functionally worth hundreds of billions.
Re: (Score:1)
> SpaceX would be much smaller (if it still existed at all) without government contracts.
Government contracts are not themselves subsidies. Just like Canada not buying as much from the U.S. as the U.S. buys from Canada is not a subsidy no matter how loudly Trump and MAGA claim otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone has never heard of a bonus... What do you think the richest men in the world give one another? Cufflinks? LoL
Re: (Score:1)
"If they have hearings with young men who have been alienated by Democrat policies and actions"
There were no goddamn policies that alienated young men. It's a lie and you're a liar.
Re:Trump just killed an airliner in dc (Score:4, Interesting)
Blaming Democrats for supporting the latest Republican scapegoat minorities again huh? Are you sure you arent projecting your own bigotry onto your analysis of the situation?
> Young men have been dehumanized almost since birth and been told they are unneeded and the cause of all problems. Older men, especially of a particular skin tone, are told they are sexist and racist - Ironically a textbook example of sexism and racism
Ah, the conservative mantra of victimhood. Funny how I don't feel put upon isn't it? But sure, you're a victim.
Re: (Score:2)
> Young men have been dehumanized almost since birth and been told they are unneeded and the cause of all problems. Older men, especially of a particular skin tone, are told they are sexist and racist - Ironically a textbook example of sexism and racism.
> Finally, they reject science and biology in a move that make anti-vaxxers look mild.
If you could cite some sources here that would be fantastic. Or perhaps you're having ChatGPT like hallucinations?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh I'm certain he has a handful of anecdotes to back up his claim of male victimhood.
It's like when conservatives made feminism a bad word. They pointed to a small handful of extremists and said what they were saying is what feminism is and now most women are afraid to call themselves feminists even though all it actually means is belief in the common equity of women.
A billion dollars? (Score:2)
To kill some astronauts?
Couldn't we just shoot 'em instead and be done with it?
Srsly, this is an untenable version of space travel. It's not the frigging Mayflower. If the radiation on the way doesn't kill them, the landing process in the skimpy atmosphere likely will. And there's the not small matter of getting them back.
This is a Musk wet dream right out of the movies, and all the positive thinking in the solar system isn't going to make it sensible.
PLUS, we've spent $93 Billion on Artemis and still no ci
Re: (Score:1)
> PLUS, we've spent $93 Billion on Artemis and still no cigar. Is Mars gonna be that much cheaper?
It takes talent to repackage 1970s shuttle technology and take so long and blow through so much money making the Senate Launch System. Too bad it was wasted turning the SLS into a pork barrel boondoggle.
One Billion Dollars!!! (Score:2)
If you aren't saying that in a Dr. Evil voice, you are seriously missing out.
The orbiters on the STS program cost 10 billion to make in 1981 dollars. That would be about $50 billion today. Now, I know that Elon is doing what he can do to drive that cost down, but there is only so much you can do. We are comparing a reusable rocket vehicle that made it to LEO vs one that is going to Mars.
Granted, Elon gets billions from government contracts. I don't think this extra billion is going to do much if he can'
Re: (Score:2)
"I don't think this extra billion is going to do much if he can't deliver HLS"
Elon not deliver on a technology he promised?! That would be crazy.
Waste of a huge amount of money (Score:2)
The waste of money is shameful why explore another planet when we should be using the money and resources making this planet better, earth is our only home so it deserves the investment
Was this what it was like under Ulysses S. Grant? (Score:2)
I mean, the level of corruption here is kind of blatant to the point of perversity.
Elon wants the government to seize spectrum from companies that paid to use it first to give to his company.
Elon got to destroy USAID, and hamstring several other agencies, that were investigating various companies he leads. Those investigations ranged from basic overcharging, possible aid of an adversarial foreign power, to blocking safety inspectors.
He's gotten a sweetheart bonus to his HLS contract, despite missin
Taxpayer dollars (Score:4, Insightful)
Says the man who is spending tens of millions on a vanity parade.
But, But, the DEFECIT! (Score:2)
OH! THE DEFECIT! we have a deficit we can't afford this stuff, if we don't slash spending were all doomed!
Haven't you heard? we have a deficit! We have to slash medicare and heating assistance! There a deficit you know!
It will destroy us all!
We can't afford to feed hungry children, there's a deficit don't you know!
We can't give tax breaks to billionaires, oh wait that one doesn't count, never mind.
But we have a Deficit! we need to cancel Supplementary food assistance for the poor.
Sorry poors, there's a Defi
Do you think that we could crowdfund ... (Score:2)
a few tickets for one way seats for Trump and some of his cronies; make the world a better place.
Call me skeptical, (Score:2)
But starship after nine missions has yet to complete a single orbit of the Earth. They then have to perfect unmanned on orbit fuel, transfers, etc., etc. Musk seems to be good at taking existing established technologies, branding them and scaling them up, not so much on the new things. Which really points to sending robots instead of humans. If he wants a vanity project, let him fund it himself.
Industry-standard performance (Score:2)
If the US Government gives Elon a billion dollars to go to Mars, his company will get to Mars with the same cost-efficiency and effectiveness that other aerospace companies have achieved on other NASA contracts, such as the gaggle of companies delivering the Space Launch System.
One way trip, Don & Elon (Score:2)
Put Trump and Elon on it, make it one way, and I'll donate now!
Private/public (Score:2)
He wants it to be private sector led but with public funding? That's a good way to funnel money and get nothing back.
Could you be any less obvious (Score:2)
About bribing Elon musk? The 250 million he spent getting Trump elected though was money extremely well spent I'll give him that.
Re: (Score:1)
Agreed!
Thats it ??? (Score:1)
He should x by 18times and increase NASAs budget. NASA is extremely inefficient with their money but that can be addressed in flight. The ROI on what NASA does is crazy good.Memory foam, scratch-resistant lenses, infrared ear thermometers, water filtration systems, freeze-dried food, portable X-ray and CAT scan imaging, advanced prosthetics, anti-icing systems, fuel-efficient jet engines, digital image sensors, fire-resistant materials, solar panels, GPS and weather satellites.
I already know the ending (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me guess. SpaceX will provide all of this.
Re:I already know the ending (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep, the perfect way for Musk to siphon public money into his pockets for decades to come. Even better - because it's "hard" and "nobody has done it before", the deadlines will be non-existent and the deliverables completely negotiable after the fact.
Enjoy your kleptocracy.
Re:I already know the ending (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep. Much like his endless Full Self-Driving promises to Tesla shareholders, Musk's promises of "Mars Real Soon" are vaporware, even moreso than the lunar lander services he's been paid for. This will be more wealth transfer, done at the expense of far more productive research and science.
Re:I already know the ending (Score:5, Interesting)
It was a space race when NASA was going to Mars, now it's looking almost certain that China will be the first to do a sample return mission, and at least 50/50 for them being the first to land humans there. Their sample return mission is scheduled to launch in 2028.
Their human Moon landing is targeting around 2030 as well. I'd say at the moment it is 50/50 if China or the US will be the first to land people there this century.
Does it matter? From a scientific perspective it's nice to have money spent on that kind of exploration and development, but a lot of it is just corporate welfare too. As someone in Europe I don't really care which of the two gets there first.
Re: (Score:2)
> It was a space race when NASA was going to Mars, now it's looking almost certain that China will be the first to do a sample return mission, and at least 50/50 for them being the first to land humans there. Their sample return mission is scheduled to launch in 2028.
> Their human Moon landing is targeting around 2030 as well. I'd say at the moment it is 50/50 if China or the US will be the first to land people there this century.
> Does it matter? From a scientific perspective it's nice to have money spent on that kind of exploration and development, but a lot of it is just corporate welfare too. As someone in Europe I don't really care which of the two gets there first.
I'd rather have a space race than warmongering. On or off planet.
And for those looking at the 60s thinking we can afford both, fuck you. We can't. Vietnam was pointless. As near every war is.
Re: (Score:2)
> And for those looking at the 60s thinking we can afford both, fuck you. We can't. Vietnam was pointless. As near every war is.
The private sector gets rich on both space races and wars, so they're quite happy to promote and participate in both sets of activities. But wars, like fires, seem much easier to start - and sometimes they break out spontaneously. Starting a space race requires effort and planning.
As for being able to afford a space race, I would argue that as a species we can't afford it. We're well on the way to rendering our planet marginally inhabitable by our kind, thereby potentially ending our civilization.
We can't a
Re:I already know the ending (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a lot more potential graft in war than in space, because you can claim a need for secrecy when you hide your spending. The US military never passes audits, even in peacetime . (Or what passes for it anyway, we're always bombing someone.)
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing about this that prevents warmongering.
Please explain how this administration's actions in the middle east are not warmongering. I'm pretty sure that some people have a few things to say about his wanting to turn Gaza into some modern-day Gomorrah.
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that the entire point of the original space race was to establish the ability to nuke the other side, right?
Re: (Score:2)
> You do know that the entire point of the original space race was to establish the ability to nuke the other side, right?
Yes. And we've checked that box. To death, and then some. Hell, we're targeting the cockroaches with current stockpiles.
Needless to say I was hopeful a 21st Century space race would have loftier goals. Perhaps starting with cleaning up the starting line (orbit) so the guy named Kessler doesn't confirm the only place us advanced rednecks are racing to, is orbit. To turn left and crash.
Re: (Score:2)
That's simply not true.
The initial point of rockets in space was to nuke the other side- for sure- but that was hardly a race.
The US had the capacity, and the Soviet Union did not- full stop.
By the time there was any kind of race, the soviets had caught up on capacity, and we were worried about prestige and throwing humans around the planet, and onto other planets.
Re: (Score:2)
Landing on Mars is the easy part, getting back off is the hard one, even with the lower-than-Earth gravity. China has a bit of an advantage in that the Chinese government is willing to risk astronaut lives a lot more than the US.
Re: (Score:3)
I think the hard part is surviving on Mars for any extended length of time without suffering severe radiation-induced illnesses. Heck, surviving even getting their and back has the same issue. We've basically never gone further than a week or so's round trip to the Moon, with only part of that outside of Earth's magnetic field. Now you're talking years (at least 2.5 years round trip), and while for no other reason than the sheer awesomeness of humans walking on Mars, there are vast technical and biological
Re: (Score:2)
> Heck, surviving even getting their and back has the same issue.
Bingo. It may be that the most humane thing to do is to send them with a gun and a single round.
Current plans for getting people there are pretty fucking batshit crazy, with the plan for getting them back being some serious clown shit, with a timeline that is entirely divorced from the reality of the ongoing equipment tests.
Re: (Score:2)
On what do you base that claim? So far no Chinese astronauts have been killed or badly injured, and the same cannot be said for the US.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you would get out more than bragging rights for putting a person on Mars. Mars will not become Second Earth anytime soon[tm], except we invent planetary size artificial gravity. Otherwise, people born and grown up on Mars will not be able to visit Earth except with some really heavy machinery and life support systems, while at the same time be to large to fit in any terrestric vehicles/chairs/beds/rooms.
To me, putting a human on Mars is just a waste of money.
Re: (Score:2)
The FSD promises may have hit a hard barrier.
Musk claimed that cars with FSD 2.5 hardware would support FSD, then it became 3.0 hardware. This wasn't too bad because the 2.5 cars could be upgraded to 3.0.
Now it looks like real FSD will require HW 4.0 and there is no upgrade path from 3.0 to 4.0. I don't understand why there isn't already a class action, asking for thousands of dollars back. for owners of HW 3.0 cars who bought FSD.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, the perfect way for Musk to siphon public money into his pockets for decades to come.
Correction. To siphon MORE public money into his pockets.
Re: (Score:2)
Fortunately he's incompetent and has already run Tesla into the ground. The company is basically living off schizoid incels buying the stock. SpaceX's success is largely based on the fact that they keep Musk away from actual management, but with Tesla a smoking ruin he's going to push his way into that and mess it up too.
Re: (Score:3)
> Yep, the perfect way for Musk to siphon public money into his pockets for decades to come. Even better - because it's "hard" and "nobody has done it before", the deadlines will be non-existent and the deliverables completely negotiable after the fact.
> Enjoy your kleptocracy.
Wow - an assertion that's supported by recent history, and which comes close to being an inevitable outcome, is downmodded as 'Troll'.
Moderation here is getting really, really bad.
Re:SpaceX vs. NASA (Score:5, Interesting)
>> Since the amount is (according to you) not significant to Musk, he should turn down any contracts here to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.
>> Something tells me he won't.
> President Biden sent well over one-hundred billion of taxpayer money to the very country that hires dishonorably discharged cokeheads to serve on executive energy boards.
> Coincidentally enough, that cokeheads name was also Biden.
> Spare me the fucking 'conflict of interest' bullshit.
"Because I perceive this one example of a conflict of interest, this other conflict of interest is not important."
Is that really your position?
Maybe a better position would be "I think the everyone should be bound by conflict of interest legislation that is effective." or "I will not support anyone's conflict of interest actions."
BTW, didn't the Republican-led congressional inquiries into Biden wrongdoings in this area lead to nothing? When the political opponents can't find much to pin on somene, maybe there isn't much to find.
Re: SpaceX vs. NASA (Score:2)
Corrupt people feel one person's corruption justifies their own.
Re: SpaceX vs. NASA (Score:5, Informative)
It's called projection,
or the "everyone thinks more or less like i do" syndrome,
or the "I need someone else to seem corrupt so my obvious corruption can be explained away as they all do it".
Re:SpaceX vs. NASA (Score:4, Informative)
The money spent defending Ukraine has been a fucking bargain - a weakened Russia will be incredibly easy to defend against over the next decades.
Worrying less about them will be especially important as China steps up to be more of a threat.
The analysis is oblivious, but you're too busy pretending this is only a team sport, and facts don't matter.
Pathetic.
Re: (Score:2)
> The money spent defending Ukraine has been a fucking bargain - a weakened Russia will be incredibly easy to defend against over the next decades.
Quite an arrogant position to play from your fucking armchair as Grandfathers die on the front lines. You act as if Ukranian civilian-turned-shooter attrition is cheap and plentiful. Those are human lives, dick.
> Pathetic.
Yes. It is. Thinking someone else's son lying dead on the front lines is worthless because "bargain" future discounts off a fight from a boogeyman who hasn't even dared to start anything other than a Cold-ass War with the US. Fuck your excuses to dismiss obvious corruption. Not a damn thing you
Re:SpaceX vs. NASA (Score:5, Interesting)
Errrr....not quite. There was no connection between Biden's son and the Ukraine government except in your Maggot mind. And stopping Russia from rolling over Ukraine and then casting eyes on the Baltics and the rest of the lost USSR empire is a good thing.
So spare me the faux "outrage" bullshit. How come you Maggots still get your dainty little panties in a twist over Biden? Show us on the doll where Biden touched you.
Re: (Score:2)
Hunter Biden got a job in Ukraine so it's a conflict of interest for us to support those folks in a war for the survival of their country? Are you suggesting that the United States backing of Ukraine is entirely based on one job? Are you sure you're not the coke head here?
Both of our political parties were perfectly fine supporting Ukraine until Trump came in and started telling Republicans that Russia was the victim in all this.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you really just post "but but but Hunter Biden! Burisma! Reeeeee!"
You do know that Biden would have sent those munitions regardless, yeah? Because Ukraine is an ally, and the Biden administration actually worked with and defended allies, unlike the current one that just pisses them all off?
Besides, if you want to talk about offspring of presidents grifting based on their father's station, maybe you should look into the literal BILLIONS of dollars given to Jared Kushner against all advice. Or Don Jr.
Re: (Score:2)
Ukraine is not, and has not ever been, an ally.
Recently, their enemy is Russia, which put them in a convenient position for us to see them as the friend of our enemy.
You are otherwise correct that the implication that we're doing this because of the ex-President's son is pretty fucking laughable.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry- the enemy of our enemy.
Re: (Score:1)
Nor should he— this would be money well-spent. SpaceX is developing our space capability, enabling poorer areas around the world to get connected to the internet, and developing new materials and doing fundamental physics research in order to get there. This is a huge boon to humanity.
This is similar to what NASA did for the moon landing, before becoming a bureaucratic nightmare and an outlet for pork spending.
Re: (Score:2)
> At least SpaceX could make Katy Perry an "astronaut" in her own mind for that money. NASA would have blown it on the new logo design.
Damn, looks like great minds think alike, In my post above, I said she should be the captain of the first ship. Maybe even the science officer.
Re: (Score:2)
> Let me guess. SpaceX will provide all of this.
Well, considering that NASA is being cut out, it ain't about any science.
Maybe we can get Captain Katy Perry to lead the Mars missions?