I didn't down vote you but your reasoning is faulty. It isn't causal that 'free markets and capitalism' result in superior space capabilities. The US had its ass whipped getting into space by the Soviets who had a regime that was very definitely not free markets and capitalism.

The US (and pretty much all countries) are 'propaganda' machines to one extent or another.

The US has a very active role in sabotaging the North Korean nuclear and missile programs. It just hasn't been publicized to the same degree as Stuxnet was with the Iranians.

Fresh Air did an episode on it a few weeks ago, following a New York Times article.

http://www.npr.org/2017/03/29/521909787/the-u-s-has-an-activ...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/04/world/asia/north-korea-mi...

>This should be enough evidence alone that free markets and capitalism is vastly superior.

North Korea is isolated from the entire world. I don't think any meaningful evaluation of economic systems can be made here beyond isolation from the worlds physical and intellectual resources makes for poor innovation.

And to add ...

Free markets and capitalism is vastly superior when the bicycle is rolling and society can hit a balance. Until then, you need a single concentrated effort at just one thing. And if you look at the evolution of free markets, you had that in nearly every industry, every emerging technology to some degree.

When the pinata breaks, new technologies and competing industries emerge. SpaceX, Boeing, Blue Labs are an emergence of a sustained governmental push with some reliance on private partnerships. Otherwise, we would still be trying to get to the moon.

I don't think comparing an internet entrepreneur's rocket technology to an isolated nation state's ballistic missle failure is evidence for any macroeconomic theory.

And trying to discredit an opinion based on where its holder comes from is bordering on naughty.

Capitalism vs Dictatorship

1-0

Here is a similar statement: Since USA suck at [something USA sucks at] capitalism is clearly inferiour to [something that isn't capitalism].

See healthcare. :D

SpaceX's launches weren't under constant US cyberattack and sabotage through the "free markets".[1]

[1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/04/world/asia/north-korea-mi...

If the eventual goal is nuclear tipped missiles, high tech isn't so important, at least for the missiles.

Almost accurate isn't just for horseshoes and hand grenades.

Kim is using nukes as means of propaganda and showing off NK is capable of bullying his neighbours while NK population is starving. It's just a psyctoric dictator strategy to to stay in power.

According to the BBC[1], while North Korea has successfully detonated five times, it is exponentially more difficult to get the package small enough to fit on a missile.

[1] - http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-11813699

Why do you say that? Missing with a nuke seems like a major failure and unlikely to have the intended effect.

Blast radius + fallout radius. Either you want it as a terror weapon, and pinpoint accuracy isn't needed. Or you want it as a mutually assured destruction deterrent, and you only need so much accuracy to be credible.

Fallout radius for a 15 megaton blast, superimposed on the north eastern US. Anything with numbers (roentgens) above ~500 is fatal, though less than that isn't harmless either: http://nikealaska.org/nuke/CasBravM.gif Much, much bigger than what the DPRK has tested, but the principal is the same. Low tech SCUD level accuracy is fine.

The Nagasaki bomb missed by 3km. It was similar in size to what the DPRK has tested.

And quantity makes up for quality.

Rockets carry the fuel needed to travel straight up and almost nothing else. Attaching a ton of explosives to it and trying to aim it is a bit trickier.

Besides, claiming the free market works because the country almost every capitalist state refuses to do business with has some problems is a bit of a joke.

SpaceX rockets like CRS-10 are carrying upper stages and the Dragon capsule full of cargo

The upper stages are also mostly fuel, and the cargo is almost nothing as a percentage of the total weight.

Are nuclear warheads that heavy?

Doesn't look like it, Wikipedia says a W87 is 440-600 lbs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W87