$200 Billion for another man on the Moon, and one on Mars? - Page 3

the next generation space race is, i think, more than what it looks like on the surface...there are three other countries that upped their spending big time on space exploration and R&D ( i believe that they were china, britain, and india. but don't quote me on this ) even before America announced the plans for the moon/mars. Even so, America can ill afford to be behind in the techology of rocket science. rockets arent just used to shoot men to the moon. And also with these new goals it will make the much awaited missile defense system more attainable.

that is microeconomics...we're looking at a much bigger picture than a street of 18 houses...the economy is much more than just jobs and people paying their bills, the economy is based on confidence. because if people arent confident about where they are, they arent going to spend their money, they're going to sit on it, for when they do lost their job, its sort of a catch-22 if people sit on their money because their neighbor lost his job and all over the country 10 million other families decide to do the same thing because they heard the economy is in the crapper, then the jobs will dry up and then there won't be as much money to go around because no one is spending what they have...its so simple that it is complicated, so in reality the more doomsayers we have out there warning people to save their money because they may lose their jobs, the quicker it is going to happen. But on the macroeconomic scale, that is not happining right now, America is seeing major growth in almost all areas of bussiness right now...but remember, the more paranoid that you get, the more likely the economy is going to get bad.


The media played the whole cost thing up big time. If you look at it, they budgeted 200 billion dollars plus...to be spend by the year 2030 and if you look at the national budget, which is in the trillions per year, 200 billion is a drop in the bucket in 26 years, and also as wamp stated, this will probably be shredded in congress, although i do believe that a trimmed version of it will be passed. Sorry for the lecture, but then again thats just my .02

Here is how i see things, while i think it is great spending money to send robots and things to mars and the moon, i think it is a complete waste of time and money sending a human. There is NOTHING a human could do that a remote controlled robot couldnt, and the risks are far less for the robot. I think space exploration is very important, but I also think sending a man to the moon was NASAs biggest mistake. It set them back considerably, and the only thing it accomplished was the ability to say wow we did it. Humans are simply not made for space travel, and I deffinetly think it is a long time before we find a way to do that. I think we are many orders of magnitude away from making space a friendly and profitable place to go. So i say send the robots and the rovers. Let the machines have the red planet. I dont think there is any research or discoveries that we would miss by placing them on the planet instead of a human.

Agreed, but that is what people today are concerned about. I need to know that My friends and family are secure in their jobs and houses before I can say Let's do it!

Miro or not, the US really needs to start taking better care of our own or else... All great civilizations in the past have fallen. When is it our turn?

Hi everyone. It’s been a long time since I’ve been active on the board. I’ve just been to busy. But this thread has lead me to take some time and give some experience. I’ve been a department head in a metropolitan city bordering Atlanta, Ga and have been a partisipant in the budgeting process. Therefore I do have first hand knowledge of how it works. I’ve also spent 3 years of my life after that experience developing and implementing fund accounting systems throughout the US. So I’ve been all around the country seeing how governmental financial systems work.

Ross Perot was current when he said our government financial systems are not held accountable and his idea of how to fix them is closer than any other idea I have seen. Don’t take me wrong, I don’t think Ross is the right man to do it, but it may take a man like him to get it done.

My point being, know matter what program you advocate it will go over budget, it is the nature of the beast. Cost controls will not be implemented in a budget based system because the bottom line is to increase the budget.

I believe that the majority of people are looking at the symptoms of the problem and not the actual problem. As long as we are focused on a symptom the problem continues to grow. In this case our governmental financial difficulty which in my belief comes down to the fundamental issue of government responsibility. It is the federal governments’ duty to provide for the Infrastructure of this country. The infrastructure involves roadways, waterways, airways, spaceways, national defense, etc. Nowhere in the original infrastructure established by our forefathers is there a place that states social programs.

This is a Democratic Republic, not a Socialist State. With that being said, I am of belief that social programs lead to a Socialist State and replaces our personal responsibility, something I appose tremendously. Now before all you people get to upset by my statements, understand that they are over simplified due to room and therefore do not completely state everything I believe.

The space program does fit into the infrastructure of this nation on two fronts, space ways (transportation) and self-defense. Our space program has also accomplished something I haven’t heard stated much which is quite unfortunate. The Apollo program increased our GNP by 15% annually while the Shuttle has only done so by 10% annually. These figures are after the program has paid for itself. What this says is the space program does indeed help the economy.

I will end by asking one question. Can anyone name One governmental program that has achieved even half of this success?

I can't. I was also unaware of that fact.

I can however say, that even with that increase, We still do not have a stable budget.

What are your views on space travel becoming a Public Company? I have seen and read many debates about it. What would you think about it?

I have to agree, that it is not nor was it our founding father's intentions to establish a government that took care of individuals in the form of retirement pensions [SS], health care [Medicare/Medicaid] or even welfare for that matter. Yes, did you know that the highest % of our taxes go to human resoureces? Compared to zero % 150 yrs ago. In view of that, its hard to complain that we aren't putting enough into helping people or that monies targeted for other programs, such as NASA, should be diverted into resolving the social issues of this country. The truth to the matter is our taxes mostly pay for human resources. So what's the problem? Look closer at that piece of the pie. If so many millions, in fact the greater percentage of our tax dollar is going to human services, then why do we have so many problems??

As voting taxpayers, we need to seriously take a look at the money going towards the social service portion of gov assistance. Rather than thinking about diverting monies from the military, or NASA into more social services, lets think about what we are actually doing with the monies that is now going into that pot, and is that really how we want to use it???

Please ask yourself these questions?

Do I want to live in a socialist country? Where no matter how hard I work or how much money I make, I am only going to get a set amt of the money I worked for and the rest is going to support the "whole of society".

or

Do I want to live in a capitalist society where its UP TO ME how successful I am and how much money I earn, whether I am rich or poor?

Wamp – Good question, just wish the answer was so simple. I really don’t think we are ready to take such a venture public. There are to many issues to be worked out first. Just one of the many is how do you take such a program public when there are technologies which they work on that has National Security issues involved. I’m not apposed to it, just haven’t figured out how to accomplish it successfully from this point in time.

Beth – Well spoken !!!!! You go girl!!!!!
:cheer: :cheer:

In 1958 the space program was taken away from the air force and given to a newly established civilian agency, NASA...now even tho it is almost completely government funded it is still technically not a government organization as far as i know, since i have not had the time to properly look this up and study it i may be wrong, but i do know that NASA was established as a civilian organization.

Well put Beth, we are both in complete agreement.

Jarre: an experienced voice is always welcomed

Iceburger - Duh, what was I thinking. You're right. NASA was started as a Civilian Organization. I just think of it being a government one because of the funding. Good point - Thank you!

Being a lowly college student I work pretty menial jobs, and right now I am a clerk at a foodmart in a pretty bad area, now everyday I see the government "taking care of its own" every single day that i go into work, people come in and buy candy or icecream or something along those lines with their foodstamp card, and then turn around and pay cash for a 24 case of beer, and then buy $20 worth of lottery the government can't help the people if they can't help themselves, that being said, it is not the governments job to make sure that the public has a job, like beth stated, it is there for protection of freedom, now it is in the governments best intrest that everyone has job security, but when it comes down to it, that is not what the government was established for in 1776