Musk is creating a constellation of satellites that can provide global internet. His technology seems like the only viable way to and back from Mars. Bezos/Branson made a rollercoaster for the super wealthy.

>Musk is creating a constellation of satellites that can provide global internet

And is a good example of creating negative externalities, lots of ground based astronomy (a field that has contributed immensely to our collective scientific knowledge and pushed technology advancements forward globally) extremely difficult due to those same satellites that create interference. Yes, global internet is good, but funnily enough this satellite network creates the need for more astronomical observations be done from space/orbit.. Handy that he is in the business of selling that service as well..

So while I agree his rocket technology is a great advancement and has spurred others to create similar reusable first stage rocket tech, these efforts were already underway. Musk might have accelerated this through risking his personal wealth when creating SpaceX but this was not a one man effort and people should spend less time attributing these advancements to one person.

Hoping "competition" in this space returns to helping orgs like NASA achieve scientific goals (rather than private joy rides), but that would require convincing govs to spend more tax money on these organizations..

I pretty much agree with everything you've said, maybe with different emphasis on certain points.

In particular, I do hope the reusable technology benefits people first and then science. I sometimes wonder about how many Einsteins are born and die without ever learning to read. First and foremost, I hope we use this technology to benefit people and science second.

> Musk might have accelerated this through risking his personal wealth when creating SpaceX but this was not a one man effort and people should spend less time attributing these advancements to one person.

You could have erased any person in SpaceX and SpaceX would have happened anyway. Erase Musk, and no SpaceX. Musk was the lynchpin to making it happen. He provided the vision, the impetus, the funding, and the leadership.

That's why he gets (and deserves) the credit.

It's just like Apple. Apple floundered with CEO after CEO, winding up 90 days from bankruptcy. Then Jobs became CEO, and Apple became the richest company in the world.

With the same staff.

The Apollo program was about $120B in today's money all said and done. And that's with 1960's manufacturing processes. The complete Gemini program was about $10B.

Blue Origin is up to ~$10B already and hasn't even gone orbital yet.

I googled "cost of Apollo program" and it comes to $257 billion in today's dollars.

Also, the economy was considerably smaller in those days, and so the Apollo program took up a much larger share of it.

> Also, the economy was considerably smaller in those days, and so the Apollo program took up a much larger share of it.

Isn't that what adjusting to today's dollars essentially does? Those $28 billion were back then what $257 billion are in today's economy.

> Isn't that what adjusting to today's dollars essentially does?

To make it more obvious, a town council spending $1 million on a project is a much bigger undertaking (for them) than a country spending $1 million. It has nothing to do with inflation. I.e. consider it as percentage of GDP.

No. I think parent means that the economy was smaller in real terms. E.g. the population was lower.

I read somewhere that 400,000 people worked on the Apollo program.

Not quite:

The purchasing power of a dollar has grown ~8.5x over the past 60 years.

The US GDP has grown about 38x in that same time.

I've seen a lot of numbers, how about we go with Wiki's $156 and cut the difference?

And it doesn't matter what the rest of the economy was doing if we've converted it to today's numbers. The argument you were making was that government was intrinsically bloated, but from my view these private orgs are barely keeping up with 1960s .gov.

Since you're leaving off half the cost, it does make the government bloat look slimmer :-)

Why did the Apollo program stop?

Too expensive; had achieved goal.