I find it hard to believe NASA really wastes that much money. But, if you look at the success of programs like NGLLC, you can see that it is pretty clear the private sector is the way to go. Literally, you could put a lander developed by Armadillo or even Masten, on top of Falcon 9, and send it to the moon. I think a return to the moon is an important goal, but NASA plans it's budget like money grows on trees. Why don't they just say enough is enough and outsource the whole program?

Here's an idea. Take NASA's budget and cut it in half. Half the money goes to NASA, and the other half is used for a lunar XPRIZE. HALF the prize money is awarded to the 1st privately team that puts a man on the moon (and brings them back ALIVE), half of that amount is second prize, and the remaining cash goes back to the taxpayer. If you are following the fractions, that's STILL a 1/8th savings for the taxpayers. And you can bet any privately funded moon program is not going to build disposable rockets, or not take advantage of resources available on the moon.

And, if, like space X, private industry can produce the same quality NASA does (or better) at 1/70th the cost, even 1/8th of the current NASA budget for the moon program for 2nd place would be plenty of reward to fund a private venture. First prize would eqwuate to huge windfall profits, enough to fund speculators and veunture capaitalists and even wide eyed dreamers.

The future of human space exploration looks bleak. After making great leaps 50 years ago, stagnation has taken over. No human has left Earth orbit in 37 years, and NASA's current unambitious goals look to be further delayed or scaled back.

http://www.watchinghistory.com/2009/11/future-of-space-exploration.html