Last week I published a post at Econlib about the future of space exploration. My goal in the piece was to lay out some arguments I’ve been mulling over in my mind for some time now, arguments about the importance and even the necessity of advancing space exploration in the near future if humans want to survive in perpetuity. (Which I do think most of us wish for the rest of our species.)
I have been glad to see that the post generated some comments and even some minor controversy. Was I arguing for more government involvement in spaceflight? Am I suggesting that we tax those indifferent to space exploration to fund its development?
Well, for starters, the answer to both of those questions is no. Private space companies should take the lead on advancing human space capabilities, and it seems to me that they already are. Additional taxation does not strike me as necessary or appropriate to finance these endeavors, because private investors are plenty enthusiastic already. And if private investors weren't so enthusiastic, I would take that as a signal that going to space might be a waste of time and money. But this simply isn’t the case.
At the same time, I am not saying that there is no role for the government to play in supporting a worthwhile space future. Even though I’m a fan of more private leadership in space, I do still want to see rule of law and the administration of justice out there among the stars. This is right in line with how Adam Smith understood the role of the state vis a viz the market several centuries ago. What this will look like in space—and the costs it will incur— obviously depend on the scope and scale of human off-world enterprises, which will vary across time. But I’m optimistic that a fair cost-sharing policy could be worked out, such that Earth-bound taxpayers would be made no worse off by taxation designed to support off-world governance activities. Space firms would justifiably be more on the hook there, as they would benefit in many ways from the healthy lawful atmosphere effective governance would bring.
The bigger point here when speaking about the role of the state in space is that the realism of any space vision or analysis breaks down the second it leans too far in any one ideological direction with respect to that form of authority. Translation: love it or hate it, the state isn’t going anywhere. Same with the firm, and with markets.
Put another way, space visions—to remain realistic—must avoid becoming mere libertarian wishlists or big-government fantasy exercises.
Human colonies on other worlds should be expected to operate and function like other, similarly sized settlements and communities on Earth, but with additional special pressures born of their unique and isolated situation. It would be unwise and unrealistic to assume that only private authorities or only government agents will be sufficient to successfully settle and develop other worlds. As on Earth (or, at least within the free countries of Earth), a well-thought-out mix of public and private authority works best for protecting liberty and individual flourishing. Firms make the hiring, firing, and productive decisions with minimal interference from the state, while governments enforce contracts, maintain public order, and provide for certain other public goods such as defense, basic infrastructure, and dispute resolution.
When discussing space, I think that the “privatization can solve everything” position appears much more attractive and within reach than the more Earth-centric “government can solve everything” delusion. But just because the latter is so horribly wrong does not mean that the former is without error.
Working for the XYZ Mining Company on Mars, you can bet your bottom dollar you’d be glad to have guaranteed access to non-company authorities when some work issue arises. What’s good for the firm is not always good for the functionary, and the temptation to cut legal and moral corners is perhaps greater when there is minimal fear of discovery. This is why basic legal checks—essentially, the substance of today’s standard employment law—need to be in place wherever capital may end up meeting labor in the spacefaring era. This is why the state is still needed in space.
So there are a few additional thoughts about space exploration. I am grateful to those who commented on my Econlib piece for spurring some of the additional reflections that led to this post. If I have missed anything perhaps one of them, or another good citizen of the Internet, will let me know below.