The whole discussion reminds me of the angst experienced when Naval Shipyards were shutdown during BRACs in the 70's and 80's. Costs in the Navy Yards were 30 to 40 percent higher for similar work at private yards, took more time, experienced more delays and relied on private firms to do the more specialized work. The press keep parroting that this impacted our military readiness, while ignoring the fact that very few ships were actually built at Navy Shipyards and the majority of new construction, maintenance and repairs were performed by private corporations. Closing the Navy Shipyards just streamlined the workflow between the Navy Area Commands and the people who actually did the work. NASA is one of the few organizations where public-private ventures have actually been successful, however, NASA, as it exists today, primarily coordinates efforts by multiple private entities to further space exploration. Certainly the scientists at NASA add value to the discussion, but at the end of the day the private sector is leading in the push to expand our understanding of outer space.
And people keep saying that Branson's flight didn't break any new barriers, which is true. But any time you push engineering boundaries, you open the door to new knowledge.
But, you wouldn't expect an alcoholic 2nd-rate writer raging from his mother's basement to appreciate how technological advances are actually achieved.