This reminds me of why we needed to build yet another nuclear submarine. It was because we needed to keep the welders busy (yes I heard this excuse used at the time). NASA is so used to be a giant bureacracy, that can't make any radical changes, they have forgotten how. So, they may both be right. NASA is incapable of making decisions to realize the savings. On the other hand if you put a real corporate CEO in charge that had the ruthless will to make NASA achieve, then you could reform it and realize savings.

1) If there is not a radical reduction in the personnel required to support the new space launch capability, then we have failed in designing the system

2) The idea that you have to keep a complete work force in waiting while it takes you a decade to field a new space launch capability is ludicrous. As new launch capability becomes real, you can rehire/new hire the required personnel. Its not like there will be no notice of when the personnel will be required. RIF's and rehires happen all the time in cyclical industries and somehow they manage. Of course, the longer you delay RIF's, it is a self fulfilling prophecy (not realizing the savings and having less and less time to realized the savings).

3) The space station was wrongly started, wrongly continued, and is continuing to be wrongly supported. It is not effective to continue to throw good money after bad, just for the sake of saving face for those that won't accept the space station is a boondoggle of huge proportions. If we must keep the space station, we could do the absolute minimum to keep it aloft with russian progress launches and no on board presence, until we have new launch capability.

4) I would be interested in seeing new modern designs of a space station with new technology (such as inflatables), that would be built with a new HLV launch system. I wonder if we couldn't have more for less while completely scrapping the current one. For one thing we could probably build a station with virtually no space walks if we would provide good robotic support, good designs that are conducive of robotic support, and good blanketed high bandwidth communication for the station both in orbit and to ground orbit interface. With good enough communication, telerobotic operation could largely be performed from the ground.