🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov18.133412.15599@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>
>Your saying that since the subcontractors are turning a profit it therefore
>follows that NASA is making a profit. If you think about that for a moment
>you will see that it makes no sense.

I would hope this country could do more with its space program than just keep
its contractors profitable.  But NASA isn't a contractor -- it's a government
agency.  Government agencies don't earn profits, nor should they.  They should
be doing things in the public interest that can't earn a profit.  If it earns
a profit, then it should be done by private industry, not government.

>Profit is when you collect more in fees/sales than you spend. If you add
>up all the money collected in fees and subtract out the amount spent you
>will see that Shuttle has lost billions.

So?  The Shuttle was never supposed to earn a profit -- it's run by a govern-
ment agency called NASA.  The interstate highway system didn't earn a profit
either, but most people consider it money well spent.

Mike

-- 
Michael Kent                                   kentm@rpi.edu
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Tute Screwed Aero Class of '92                              Apple II Forever !!