|
Space research has had many civilian spin-offs.
Knowledge is also important to people. We often pay for academic research which has no obvious
practical ramifications in the vague belief that increasing knowledge is an inherent good and may
have beneficial effect further down the line.
We also have to take account of the problem of "planet-killer" asteroids or comets which, assuming
our civilisation survives long enough, we will eventually have to deal with. Clearly our
capabilities in space technology will be important then.
NASA from the first was closely tied to the military and its research has had, and continues to
have, many military applications. Don't fool yourself into thinking that this was just something for
innocent civilian purposes. If NASA didn't exist, the military would take over many of its
functions, and, in case you haven't noticed, their budget is vastly greater than NASA's. Would-be
cost-cutters should look there first before turning their attention to NASA. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Not quite sure why all these pro-NASA votes are in the wrong column. Space exploration excites and
inspires people. It helps to answer fundamental questions about the universe and our place in it.
And your cost for this, as an individual taxpayer in 2007, was $57.10. Your cost of the year in Iraq
was over $4500. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
This is a tough debate. NASA is and has been extremely important to the US and the world. All in
all, NASA has been a very good use of US tax dollars.
The problem is that over the last 20+ years, NASA has appeared to reach the end of its maximum
capabilities. Should we get rid of NASA? No. I would submit that NASA as a gov't agency needs to
be kept to maintain what it has created.
I do think funding needs to be cut and that space exploration should become private industry. We
will go farther faster when the world's best minds aren't dulled by red tape and bureaucracy. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Actually the technology and research that NASA has created over the years has resulted in well over
a thousand patents. The revenue that NASA generates with these licensing fees is 4.5 billion dollars
annually or about half of there own budget. Additionally I guarantee that if companies are willing
to pay 4.5 billion a year to develop these patents they are raking in a lot more dough than that
which is in turn taxed as revenue. So when you add up the economic shot in the arm that comes from
the R&D department of NASA with the valuable research with the fact that they are nearly
self-sustaining they seem more than worth it to me. But if none of that was true and the cost twice
as much it would still be worth it to me just to have non-commercial research going on at that
level. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
"What publicly useful technological advancements have come out of NASA?"
Are you kidding me??
And yes, tax money should fund a country's space program - better that than war.
Http://techtran.msfc.nasa.gov/Patents/keywords.html
Tell me none of those things ( patented by NASA ) are useful? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
NASA gives us fascinating images of Mars, other planets, the cosmos, even of our own planet.
Countless software, aerodynamics, optics, and propulsion discoveries have been made. Wonder foams
which are light as air and insulated better than anything else were NASA discoveries. I'm sure
there's a whole lot more.
I don't think refusing to fund NASA is the issue. It's more a question of what types of NASA
projects are worth funding and which ones aren't. For example, a manned mission to Mars not only
will be extremely costly but likely won't tell us much new information. But in comparison, unmanned
robotic missions like the current Mars rovers, or the Hubble telescope, provide tremendous amount of
information for far less cost than if humans were there in person. And finally, I definitely agree
there needs to be some balance between NASA budget and domestic spending. I mean I don't want NASA
in ruins, but I also don't want the whole country in ruins while NASA writes blank checks. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
What else is going to pay for NASA? We have learned so much from the results they get, which helps
us understand things that occur on earth. Such as weather, that can be very deadly if we knew
nothing about it, or how to predict it. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Funding and brilliant personnel would be better used on this planet. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
15 Jul 2008 19:30
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
