It's an interesting debate, and one that has not been carried out openly and freely in the USA after the shuttle became the Offically Approved launch method.

On one side we have arguments about reuse, shared capital costs, lower opex.

On the other side are issues of short-term vs long-term reliability, refurbishment costs, and nasty wrinkles like hydrogen emrotllement and combustion chamber/nozzle erosion.

This is worth a few pages of debate (NOT shouting, but genuine discussion).

Tom, you have ben deeply involved in low-duty reusables. Is there an effective limit on the mission profile of a re-useable craft? Is it capex vs opex? (i.e. in another reality, would the development costs of a different Shuttle have been more, but the per-flight costs less?)