If it done by voluntary means and not by government coercion then no, there is no position except admiration.

It is sort of like asking if there is an objectivist position on calculus.

i like the private space efforts of Musk and others...NASA could not perfect the reusable rocket launcher in 50 years...Musk and others have done it in 5 years...lowering re-launching tremendously...Musk will put 1 million people on Mars to live permanently...

Thanks for your thanks.
I was a four-eyed Marine.
Now I'm a four-eyed-old dino.

90%.

I like Rand's answer. When we were racing the Soviets to the moon, it was entirely plausible that they wanted to put a missile base there, which would dominate the Earth. China still might do that, but our European friends have rockets that could stop it.

On the other hand, present space efforts seem concentrated on (1) tourism, (2) more unmanned science probes which we already know how to do, and (3) Obama's proposed manned Mars mission -- none of which rises to the level of necessity that could justify tax funding for them.

Thank you for your service. Been said a million times,but can never be said enough. I was one of those 4 eyed geeks who was declared 4F early on, which is why I was in school studying the very uncool engineering. .

Just let me specify what the taxes that government steals from me is to be used for. Some of the funds stolen from me will definitely go to space exploration, where no man has gone before. (Preferably as investment in private efforts to build space habitats.)

Yes. As long as it is not funded by the government and private business is allowed to do it.

True -- unfortunately.

Government likes to take credit for the projects as though they are similar to business men, that the project would not be done without their thinking. There were NASA engineers to make sure that the private contractors were doing their work correctly. Didn't work very well with Hubble.
There is not very much difference now with boosters because government pays much of the development cost and its engineers still over see development and probably get in the way. The innovation seems better with re-landing boosters.
Government and taxpayers will be involved for the foreseeable future, especially since most launch facilities are under government control.

Which is why I refer to NASA as the State Science Institute.
Now it's an affirmative action institute for Mulsim inclusion, as ordered by Obama.
No wonder we haven't got a moon base or put a foot on Mars.

Me dino can tell you know what you are talking about.
Makes me remember how dino got drafted to become "a mean green killing machine" Marine at a time when "Flower Power" and getting in touch with you feelings was all the rage.

I'd prefer for it to be done privately, which seems just now to be developing. But it is pretty obvious that space is our destiny. It would be good if a really excellent accountant (I could recommend one) would take over the budget and allocate funds properly, and there would be plenty to hire private firms to create the hardware which would eliminate the need for $1,000 toilet seats, and $200 wrenches.

The development work had been done by then. It got worse after the landing. In late 69 at the university I where I was a student there were almost 500 PhD applications for a single assistant professorship. The political class decided they had enough people who thought logically and shifted to producing "feeling" social services degrees.

Me dino is not disputing your facts.
It just makes me wonder how we made it to the moon in 1969.
Guess someone was smart with pooling available resources among the best and the brightest.

Me dino forgot about that!
Thanks for the memory boost.
Old dino needs those from time to time.
By cracky!

If your viewing non-conscious humanoid behavior then yes...you are correct but that does not represent Conscious Humanity and in a sense, Most could be if allowed to or if everyone understood they can be in spite of the anti-civilized paradigm.

My view, my conclusion after much study is that: "Evil does Not reside in the hearts of men" it is taught, it is put there and coerced into existence by those that are nothing like us, the genetically retarded creatures that have ruled over mankind for the past 8000 years or more.

The most important part of the Apollo program was what followed it, defunding further development. and a shift from science based government programs to social services programs. In 1966 the US had an engineering and scientist shortage. In 1968 thousands of those scientists and engineers were out of work.

"... cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin ..." Six months before Gagarin's mission, unknown to the world, a Soviet rocket exploded at Baikonur, killing at least 150 including top science and military people.
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/r16_di...

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Without that profit motive, there is no achievable goal, and any venture that is done for "Humanity's Sake" will fail. Always.

It's all about profit motive. I can't trust any business venture that doesn't have a profit motive.

Occasionally, the Government can have one. But it's very rare. For example, if there's a deadly plague sweeping the land, the Government profits by developing a vaccine.

Space Travel and exploration is one of those times where the Government does profit. In my opinion, free men go nuts without a new frontier to explore / colonize. They need that last "hope" that says no matter how bad it gets, you can always "Go west young man." And currently we only have 2 left. Under the Ocean and Space. And neither is colonized yet.

And while Government funded Space Exploration should continue (with accountability to someone), private space exploration should continue, too. With full profits for property claims. While I don't believe that there are ventures that only a Government could fund, you have to admit that we are here in our current state because of Nazi rocket funding, and Nazi Scientists doing work for American and Soviet Governments. It's hard to guess how far behind we'd be if it was only ever a private investment.

Rand gave us that position. I could best express it in Constitutional terms this way:

"The Congress shall have the power to provide for and maintain a space force, over which the President shall be Commander-in-chief, to make rules for the government of the same, to provide for the calling-forth of any State space militia into the service of the United States, to repel invasions by any hostile powers, on earth or off it, as may discover themselves to humankind and pose a military threat, to provide for organizing, training, and disciplining said militia, to exercise exclusive legislation, in all cases whatsoever, over such places as may be purchased with the consent of the legislatures of the States in which the same shall be, or on any suitable celestial bodies, for the erection of launch pads, mission control centers, space dockyards, and other needful buildings, and to make all laws that shall be necessary and proper for the execution of the foregoing." In other words, military application only. Resource development should be the province of private investors only.

The only possible reason for insisting the government explore a body first, would be (a) to protect the lives, property and legitimate interests of any extraterrestrial civilization any explorer might discover, (b) to negotiate treaties with the same, or, if necessary, to demonstrate the ability of human beings to defend themselves from external attack, and (c) to demonstrate whether any particular celestial body or bodies have exploitable resources--or not. That last becomes important when one realizes that raising money for deep-space mining presents opportunities as much for fraud as for genuine resource acquisition.

One could say I grew up when the space program was all about proving which form of government is best with the Cold War rivalry between the democratic republic of the USA and the communism of the Soviet Union.
(Most folks did back then did and still do simply call our government "a democracy," but it appears as shown by a recent post in the Gulch that most U.S. citizens can be led to believe that the Trump kids hunt triceratops in Africa).
Ten-year-old dino recalls the anguish I felt when Sputnik became the first satellite during 1957. Unlike today, kids in school was taught that communism was really, really bad, but now it appeared that the Soviets could do something out of space spectacular better than our free nation.
Because of that, kids my age were walking around looking glum.
Fourteen-year-old dino was horrified during 1961 when the USSR scored another political propaganda coup by making cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin the first man in outer space. I recall feeling robbed. The USA was supposed to do that first.
I actually felt anxiety over communists first landing on the moon proclaiming proof for why all the world should follow the teachings of Karl Marx.
Months later during 1969, I was to be drafted into two years of military slavery when we beat the Soviet Union to the moon.
I was all like ":Yay! Take that, you enslaving Russians!"

I would feel much better about our space program if it had, (not saying that it doesn't in some respect) an overall inclusive goal for humanity, meaning our survival and our knowledge of our galactic environment for future expansion and resource consumption.

Profit or Non Profit (funded voluntarily by humanity as a whole) makes no difference to me so long as the only especially interested group to be involved are Conscious Human beings with the very best of intentions.

Also...complete disclosure is very important so that we are aware and not prone to hysteria should shocking revelations be discovered.

Sure. Get off this rock and find a place to set up Atlantis!

private enterprise only