Yes, inflation is a thing there. An Apollo-style mission couldn't be done with nowadays budget anyways (if they still want to do other projects, which they do). I also don't think NASA wastes most of their budget. They are working with unproven, new technology.
Now, the same can be said about SpaceX, however, they are working in an environment that has been familiar for decades (Low Earth Orbit). One of SpaceX's major goals is to reduce the costs of bringing cargo into orbit, that's where private contractors can shine - increasing efficiency. But if we're talking about a manned Mars mission then SpaceX won't be able to do shit for half as much. Even a billion dollar company can't deal with the costs and risks for something like that. Moon missions, that have been done before, will probably go private too but exploring the actual undiscovered frontier? You need a country behind a mission like that.
[–] Dfens ago
You're making excuses for NASA that NASA does not make for itself:
[–] Apeabel ago
No excuses and I never claimed NASAs budget was lower or they're worse off than during their glory days. What I'm saying is still true. They can't pull of a moon mission with their current budget.
From 59-68 they had a few satellites, small space stations and the moon missions. That's it. Today? There are:
and more, just so many thing we didn't know back then. There are too many constant expenses and expectations for there to be more moon landings. I think you might give NASA less credit than they deserve, they've done more than every other space agency in the world, as they should.