The exciting news this week is that a private company, SpaceX, has successfully orbited an unmanned ship that will attempt to dock with the International Space Station. This is all very cool, but I’d like to preemptively make a point here.
This project (if it continues to be successful) will undoubtedly be hailed as a huge victory for the private sector (and rightly so) but also by some as evidence that the private sector is better than the public sector, and thus we should stop funding NASA because the private sector can do it. But this project was not produced in the private sector alone. Rather, this was a partnership between SpaceX and NASA. The rocket that carried Dragon into orbit was launched from an Air Force Base. The whole operation is partially funded by NASA, and if successful the company will rely on a NASA contract for it’s revenue.
I don’t point any of this out to demonize the private sector, or to say that NASA should have done this on their own. To the contrary, I think public-private partnerships like this are great. I’d just like to point out that this was a partnership. It is not proof, as some on the right will undoubtedly have you believe, of the grand magic wonderfulness of the private sector over the bloated, worthless public sector.
520 Chestnut 
Indeed it is exciting. Just as you would warn against the interpretation that the private sector is better than the public sector, I would warn against the possible interpretation that the private sector necessarily needs the public sector.
I like the partnership here, but the fact that SpaceX used an Air Force Base shouldn’t suggest that they NEEDED an Air Force Base. The fact that SpaceX got NASA to chip in doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have been able to come by money another way. And, the fact that the company will rely on a NASA contract does not mean it needed a contract from NASA. All those facts suggest is that those were the best opportunities for SpaceX.
We also need to consider the significant barriers to entry into the “space transport” market imposed by the government (can you imagine the permit process to be allowed to launch a rocket!).
I’m not saying SpaceX could likely be a profitable enterprise without the U.S. government involvement, but let’s not try and argue that they were somehow dependent on the government to help them along either (I am not suggesting you are suggesting that, just issuing a similar warning as your original post).
There is nothing inherently better about the private sector than the public sector. The only real difference is that one ultimately can force its way to “success.”
Oh I agree, I just wanted to point out that the public sector had a significant role to play in this, as people seem to often forget (ignore?) that in similar situations.