My conclusion is that public funding for NASA should be zero, unless we have good evidence that some kind of market failure will cause us to miss out on an opportunity to achieve widespread benefit, and the resources we use to get that benefit cannot presently be used to achieve any greater benefit. NASA should raise funds through voluntary contributions, from people who enjoy the benefit of NASA's work. If the funds are insufficient to support a space station, the happy result is that people may choose to direct their resources — their money — on outcomes that they prefer to space stations. Are you on board with that? Is private spaceflight so unrealistic? (I expect a lot of those companies are cozy with NASA, but still. If the justification for NASA is that people who pay for it benefit from it, let's cut out these annoying middlemen!) Thanks for your kind words. I enjoy the conversation, and would like to contribute more than I do.All that I can say to you is "yes".