The Instigator
BeastModest
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
mathteacher
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

RESOLVED: Private sector investment in human space exploration is preferable to public sector invest

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/26/2011 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 8,850 times Debate No: 18490
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (1)

 

BeastModest

Pro

Private sector investment is preferable for a number of reasons. First of all, the public sector simply put hasn't been and won't be in the future, enough money to completely fund human space exploration. NASA has recently shut down the space shuttle program due to the fact that there simply wasn't enough money for it to be continued. To allow private sector investment would be extraordinarily beneficial for the government and and for NASA. Since the private sector makes up only 20% of the US economy according to the Business Dictionary, it really can't be deemed a sufficient source of funding. The private sector, however, would be extremely useful in that it brings the potential of huge amounts of funding for the government for human space exploration. Since money is the only reason we can't say go back to the Moon, we can multiply where we're at regarding NASA by four to get where we would be at if we allowed for private sector investment, seeing as the private sector makes up the other 80% of the United States economy. Essentially, its the money that matters in this debate. Since the public generally knows the important things that are going on with space exploration as of now, unlike the Soviet Union of the 1960s, it doesn't really matter that the United States wants to keep the funding in the government. So for the simple reason that it would be much better funded, i stand in firm affirmation that human space exploration should be invested in by the private sector.
mathteacher

Con

To begin the debate, I wish to clarify some of the terms stated in the resolution. Private sector investment refers to organizations run by private individuals or groups in order to profit. Human space exploration refers to space flight with humans on the spacecraft. The word preferable means "having greater value or desirability" according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Public sector investment refers to investment from the government of a state. The negative finds value in public sector investment, but finds that it holds disadvantages that prevent it from being preferable to public sector investment. Whereas private sector investors are concerned primarily with increasing profit, the public sector has an interest in gaining knowledge for the good of the people. Private companies do not have the ability to negotiate in diplomatic matters concerning international space flight. It is for these reasons that I urge you to negate the resolution "Resolved: Private sector investment in human space exploration is preferable to public sector investment."

Contention 1: Whereas private sector investors are concerned primarily with increasing profit, the public sector has an interest in gaining knowledge for the good of the people. This can be seen very clearly in the current selection of private investors in manned space flight. Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic carried the first humans to space in a privately developed and operated vehicle. The plans for Virgin Galactic are to cater to so-called "space tourists" who will pay grand sums of money to be flown into space. These hardly represent any leaps in space-flight technology, and though there may be marginal scientific advances, there is no motivation for these companies to break new ground. NASA, however, has been instrumental in the development of everything from water filters to cordless tools to safety grooving on roads and runways. Because state-run space exploration does not have a motivation to profit, it can work to make new scientific discoveries in a way that private companies will never be able to justify to their investors.

Contention 2: Private companies do not have the ability to negotiate in diplomatic matters concerning international space flight. Because space flight takes place in a volume that is not claimed by nations, the possibility for international conflict is a great likelihood. While only the United States, USSR/Russia and China have sent humans into space, India, Ecuador, Japan, Iran and Malaysia all have human spaceflight programs. This presents a diplomatic issue that private companies may not have the capacity to negotiate. In addition, private companies might unintentionally involve their host nation in a diplomatic situation by virtue of infringing on another country's space program. Though space flight seems old to Americans and Russians, it is a relatively new venture for many nations. As we have yet to see how nations cooperate in space, private space exploration seems unwise at this venture.

It is clear that private investment is unlikely to lead to great breakthroughs in science, but rather will focus on making profits for its investors. Because public sector investment is not specifically concerned with making a profit, it has more freedom to seek scientific discoveries which can aid the public. It is also evident that private investors could pose a diplomatic problem with more states developing space programs. As more spacecraft leave Earth's mesosphere, more potential for international conflict arise, and private companies are ill-equipped to handle such conflicts. Private sector investment may have a place in human space exploration, but for the moment, it is certainly not preferable to public sector investment. For these reasons I urge a negative ballot.
Debate Round No. 1
BeastModest

Pro

BeastModest forfeited this round.
mathteacher

Con

mathteacher forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
BeastModest

Pro

BeastModest forfeited this round.
mathteacher

Con

mathteacher forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
BeastModest

Pro

BeastModest forfeited this round.
mathteacher

Con

mathteacher forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
BeastModest

Pro

BeastModest forfeited this round.
mathteacher

Con

mathteacher forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Oldfrith 2 years ago
Oldfrith
Could you guys post up your sources for this? Thats one of the things I look at on these debates
Posted by BeastModest 2 years ago
BeastModest
no i just wanna practice the topic. I'm not gonna steal any arguments. And @seraine thanks for the tip
Posted by seraine 2 years ago
seraine
Why is it that whenever I see this resolution I think of Dan Brown's book Deception Point?
Posted by Xboxlive 2 years ago
Xboxlive
It's PF, they copied le policy topic
Posted by nerdykiller 2 years ago
nerdykiller
AHH POLICY FOR DEBATE HUH?
yep i m in debate too so i know whta this is man...
but just saying u shouldn't just debate on DDO and take the information provided by the other oponent just saying...
so dont do this debate if u r just gonna do that.
Posted by RoyLatham 2 years ago
RoyLatham
I don't understand the intent of the resolution. It would be nice is the private sector put up the Hubble Telescope and sent probes to Jupiter, but that seems unlikely. Is the debate about whether private sector funding would be better, assuming it happened, or is the debate about whether the private sector would in fact do all the things worth doing in space? Or maybe the topic is about NASA subcontracting all the space mission work rather than just part of it? Is the resolution equivalent to "The government should not fund space exploration."
Posted by YYW 2 years ago
YYW
ahh... policy.... lovely.
Posted by thett3 2 years ago
thett3
ehh I havent researched this..would you be interested in debating the September PF topic?
Posted by seraine 2 years ago
seraine
brotip: Don't post walls of text, it's hard to read. Instead, space it into paragraphs and organize it.
Posted by BeastModest 2 years ago
BeastModest
you should, it'd be fun
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by cameronl35 2 years ago
cameronl35
BeastModestmathteacherTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: both sides forfeited, but in the round mathteacher had the better arguments