o, Sorry...We are talking about money grubbing NASA contractors who lobbied to take obsolete space-shuttle hardware to make this new SLS Franken-Rocket with no mission. That hurts the country. It will cost at least $1 billion for each launch, then what?...It has no mission. We already have private companies competing for launch services and designing all new low cost launchers...Including one that successfully builds re-usable boosters, and plans to put people on Mars next decade -- unrealistic in my view...But eliminates the need for a SLS giant rocket that nobody has any idea what to use for. NASA should get out of the space launch business and stick to science.
Your nonsense about homeless people and college money is besides the point. I will happily join conservatives who also have criticized the SLS budget and liberals who agree that this is a total waste and the money should be used for something else.
I don't understand your point, and I think you don't either.
Fundamentally, space exploration has no return on investment, other than scientific and to satisfy human curiosity.
Nasa could well outsource all of the exploration stuff to Musk and Bezos, but at the end of the day, designing clean sheet heavy launch systems that are man-rated is going to be astronomically expensive no matter who designs it. And since no money will be made, Nasa would bear the cost anyway... the only question is whether SpaceX or Blue Origin could make it cheaper than the SLS.
In fact, Nasa has funded most of SpaceX's rocket development. They're the reason Musk has been able to go from 'barely able to successfully launch a small payload' to 'successfully launching a semi-reusable heavy launcher on a regular basis' in about a decade...
SLS came about when the US had lost its ability to launch humans into space and had to depend on old rivals to do it for them, all the while being challenged by China's rapidly advancing and very ambitious space program... As far as I know, that is still the case.
Basically, you have to ask yourself whether you want some of your tax dollars to go towards space exploration at all.
If you don't, then I suppose that's your prerogative. The US might stick to commercial LEO and GTO and let China go back to the Moon, Mars and beyond, probably with help from Russia.
But if you do, then you're entitled to want the most bang for your taxed buck. In that case, whether the SLS is a good and dollar-effective way of doing it is certainly up for debate, but I know it's still way cheaper than designing a new system from the ground up, and for all the confidence and outlandish dreams and volition of Musk and Bezos, I'm not sure they could do it for less in a reasonable time frame. Not to mention that despite their achievements, they're still not in the man-rated game yet.
The SLS is not perfect nor cheap, but it's doable, and within a few years. That's more than anybody or anything else can claim right now.
Now, as much as I like the appeal of massive rockets and single launch missions, I can see a future where Nasa would subcontract more efficient private launchers to fling the hardware up and then use a smaller rocket to launch the astronauts and their re-entry capsule once everything is ready up there.
Cue Falcon Heavy...
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.