Would this be constitutional? NASA supercar.

[Libertydad88]

Hello all,

I had an interesting conversation with a friend the other day. We were discussing oil dependency and the fact that when an actual good alternative arises, big oil lobbies against it or outright buys it. I came up with an interesting idea and wanted to see if you guys thought it would be constitutional.

My idea is that President Paul would instruct NASA to design the most efficient and economic car that this world has seen. It would need to be purely electric or hydrogen powered, able to drive long miles, and be cheap enough to produce that the average American could afford one while still making a decent profit. Then, NASA would sell the design to the highest bidding car manufacturer as long as they signed a contract to make them in America, keep up with demand, and keep the price low. As motivation for putting out a good product, perhaps NASA could keep some of funds made from selling the design to transition into a private entity.

1) Is it constitutional for the president to make such a request of NASA in the first place? I know that NASA in and of itself is unconstitutional and technically shouldn't even be funded from the start.

2) Is it constitutional for government to sell a product?

3) Is it legal for such a binding contract to be attached to the sale of a product?

4) How stupid is my idea? Give it to me straight.

Again, this idea was just for fun and not very well thought through. I would be interested to hear what any of you have to say.

 

[Pericles]

You correctly ID a potential problem with an anarchy based market system. A participant with sufficient economic resources can effective bar a competitor's access to a substantial part of the market, or drive the compitor from the market.

The solution is the proper role of a government - to ensure that barriers to entry to the markets are removed, so that true competition can take place.

 

[bolil]

I think an agency like NASA is constitutional, and I don't see why that would be a problem. I think it is a brilliant idea, except Big Oil and the establishment would in a way Pericles explains above, inhibit the project at every turn from conception to execution.

 

[acptulsa]

The greatest thing that could happen to the cause of hyperefficient cars in this country would be the elimination of NHTSA and the other agencies that design cars for us before the manufacturer even gets the chance to begin the design process. What's more, they would, in the hands of the right driver, be nimble enough to be incredibly safe. Not because they'd survive an accident so well (they probably wouldn't) but because they'd be so nimble that a good driver could avoid almost any accident.

 

[Acala]

Where?

I think an agency like NASA is constitutional, and I don't see why that would be a problem.

Where in the Constitution is the Federal government authorized to explore space or design cars? If it isn't in there SPECIFICALLY it isn't a power granted to the government.

Also, when has the Federal government EVER produced ANYTHING more efficiently than the private sector? Government always ruins everything it touches.

 

[Gary4Liberty]

My idea is that President Paul would instruct NASA to design the most efficient and economic car that this world has seen.

FAIL

Thats not what the Federal Government is supposed to be doing.

 

[Revolution9]

I think they should take all the patents that DARPA has and sell or license those to help pay down the debt. To American companies and manufacturers only.

Rev9

 

[dannno]

You correctly ID a potential problem with an anarchy based market system. A participant with sufficient economic resources can effective bar a competitor's access to a substantial part of the market, or drive the compitor from the market.

The solution is the proper role of a government - to ensure that barriers to entry to the markets are removed, so that true competition can take place.

That's a problem with our current system, because the corporations have access to "sufficient economic resources" through paying off politicians and accessing taxpayer funds.

In an anarchistic society, it would be difficult for a single entity to obtain these resources without using violence which would then undermine their ability to have a good relationship with the population as a whole, which they would be dependent on for support in the future.

Government creates a buffer for these corporations to access the funds without looking evil, at least currently to the majority of the population. Many people are waking up now, of course.

This is why a longterm model for growth should be based on providing good products and services and treating people well, not through using coercion, be in through a private agency or the state. I doubt GE will be around in the future.

 

[Mark37snj]

It would have to be under the other NASA, National Automative Speed Agency.

 

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Ok, why do we think that the Free Market is the reason we all drive gas powered automobiles? The American automotive industry has been HEAVILY subsidized as well as the building of roads for these devices to more efficiently operate on. Get rid of all of the government subsidies and you will see new technology, cleaner technology, and much cheaper technology developed rather quickly.

Evolving to cleaner energy sources and better modes of transportation can only happen if you TAKE AWAY government influence, not add more.

*oh, and NASA is 100% unconstitutional. Space defense should be the job of the Air Force until we create another branch of the military.

 

[PierzStyx]

In an anarchistic society, it would be difficult for a single entity to obtain these resources without using violence which would then undermine their ability to have a good relationship with the population as a whole, which they would be dependent on for support in the future.

Unless the person using violence has enough power to force their views. Then the support of the whole is irrelevant.

 

[Simple]

4) How stupid is my idea? Give it to me straight.

This is one of those areas where truth is stranger than fiction. We already have that mode of transportation and its called a forking train.

 

[Pericles]

Unless the person using violence has enough power to force their views. Then the support of the whole is irrelevant.

Yep - anarchists forget that the dominant market players have no incentive to peacefully let their market dominance lapse.

 

[ConCap]

I think an agency like NASA is constitutional, and I don't see why that would be a problem. I think it is a brilliant idea, except Big Oil and the establishment would in a way Pericles explains above, inhibit the project at every turn from conception to execution.

May I ask?
Which of the Founding Fathers was in favor of space exploration?

 

[pcgame]

it is in fact constitutional for any person to request anything from a company; this does not mean the company has to comply

so yes future president paul could ask NASA to do this, NASA may or may not comply. Also I dont think RP has plans to immediately get rid of NASA, even though the free market can do everything better

 

[Acala]

Ok, why do we think that the Free Market is the reason we all drive gas powered automobiles? .

Yup. Henry Ford designed his first cars to run on ethanol with the turn of a dial from inside the cab. He spoke of wanting farmers to be able to produce their own ethanol fuel from their crops. Enter prohibition.

 

[centure7]

Your idea is agitating to no end because several engines that are at least twice as efficient as traditional engine styles have been developed. Here is an example:
http://www.angellabsllc.com/

If you are going to use the violence of the state to achieve your target, then here is a suggestion that is 1,000 to 10,000 times more effective. Instead of having NASA, a completely retarded organization design the car, simply loan out the money though the Federal Reserve to companies like Angel Labs LLC at 0% interest. There is a vastly superior idea for you.

But the fact is a broad number of technologies are on the horizon that vastly increase the fuel efficiency of engines that have nothing to do with government solutions.

 

[Salutary7]

Batteries and even liquid hydrogen both have poor energy density (energy per volume) compared to gasoline. Even ethanol is only about 60% that of gasoline. Hydrogen shouldn't even be considered, since the most efficient way to produce it is decomposing natural gas, which has a higher energy density. You could say, "well, just make batteries better", but physicists have basically worked out how densely you can pack electrons and we're getting pretty close with current experiments.

This isn't to say electric vehicles will never work, but as long as the advantages of gasoline justify the cost, any government intervention would lead to quite a bit of waste.