Obama is going to add 2 billion to NASA's funds

[0roo0roo]

just obamas latest FLIP FLOP!!
he was calling for a cut before
http://conservativepulse.com/h...tion-and-nasa-funding/

this should be in p&n anyways.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Heh, imagine if the money spent on Iraq was pumped into NASA . . .

I don't see how hiring scientists to stare at the sky generates any benefit to the US. To think spending $2 billion on NASA will generate anything is foolish.

NASA does not only fund observations of the sky. They also fund tons of robotics, nanotech, physics, and chemistry research right on planet Earth.

 

[andy04]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Heh, imagine if the money spent on Iraq was pumped into NASA . . .

I don't see how hiring scientists to stare at the sky generates any benefit to the US. To think spending $2 billion on NASA will generate anything is foolish.

NASA does not only fund observations of the sky. They also fund tons of robotics, nanotech, physics, and chemistry research right on planet Earth.

Dont forget fuel efficient vehicle competitions, robotic race, personal airplanes and race to build planes that can go to outer space

 

[So]

Originally posted by: mcmilljb
It's not idiotic when someone wants cuts across the board.
Fair enough, but NASA gets relatively little funding and uses it a LOT more efficiently than most government agencies. Surely you'd agree that something with so much utility should be cut last
Spending money for the sake of spending money is not worth it. Have the shuttles cut costs to send anything to space? No.
No, and any space advocate will tell you the shuttle was a bad design the day it came off the drawing board. Just because we bought a pinto doesn't mean it's a bad idea to own a car
Has the International Space Station been finished yet? No.
Has the Freedom Tower been finished yet? No. So what? It is under construction.
Is it already obsolete? Yes.
Just because you decided it's old doesn't make it obsolete. Obsolete means there is something newer and better to replace it. There isn't.
I can go on about how much they have wasted, but it's pointless to someone who just loves space exploration. My point is about spending less money when you're running the red. You damn well better believe I don't want those morons at the pentagon wasting more money on their pet projects too. I also bolded 2 program where I think some money should be spent.
My point is, if you're over budget, do you sell the lexus or do you sell that cordless drill?

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: DangerAardvark
Carl Sagan was also critical of NASA missions, noting that much of the experimentation could be done unmanned for a fraction of the cost. But overall he supported manned missions for their exploratory spirit.

I love the idea of space exploration, and I work at a NASA base (for a contractor, not directly for the US government), but NASA seems huge and bloated compared to how it used to be. If all of NASA is run the same way that my installation is run... Well, let's just say that they just put a building in our parking lot and then built another parking lot on the other side of that building. Rumor is that the whole thing was an accident.

The biggest waste is in hiring contractors like you. They could spend a fraction and hire a government employee who gets paid the same.

cept they would need about 3-4 government workers to get the same productivity as a non-government employee

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
The biggest waste is in hiring contractors like you. They could spend a fraction and hire a government employee who gets paid the same.

I don't work for NASA, I work at NASA.