8 ms·
> "Why would you not do this? It has cost just £2.5m a year..." This is is a real feel-good success story and all for 2.5 GBP a year. The frustrating side of t
by SeanDav 10y ago
> "Why would you not do this? It has cost just £2.5m a year..."
This is is a real feel-good success story and all for 2.5 GBP a year. The frustrating side of this is that the UK Government gives hundreds of millions of GBP in aid per year to nations like India, who have their own space program. Just imagine how this money could be used to transform the landscape and environment in the UK itself.
- geon 10y agoIn hn of all places, I'd expect people to appreciate the benefits of a space program. Are you saying that should not be a priority because they recieve aid? I mean, there is valid criticism of any aid program, and you pick that?
- omonra 10y agoHis point is that if India can afford their space program, UK should not be sending them aid. Ie just like if your cousin decides to buy a Ferrari, you probably should not have to to support him financially.
- kristianc 10y agoThat example misconstrues what foreign aid is actually about. It's not about propping up poor economies: it's a diplomatic tool. You may have perfectly legitimate reasons to support your Ferrari buying cousin, if you thought he was going to buy a house (or on the scale of an economy, build a factory in return).
- JoeAltmaier 10y agoIts about a lot of things. Including disaster relief, and humanitarian ideals. Along with the diplomacy.
- geon 10y agoAnd I disagree with that point. India is a large country. I believe having a space program is a sensible long term investment. A space program is not a luxury.
- douche 10y agoInvestments in space are an investment in the future of mankind. In a sense, a big chunk of the funds in either space exploration or international aid are effectively lit on fire - except in one case, it's in literal burning rocket fuel, and in the other wanton corruption... It's not like the USA or USSR didn't have their share of problems or pockets of crushing poverty when they were engaging in the space race, either.
- omonra 10y agoI guess the point is that some benchmark should be used to determine whether a country is rich enough to take care of it s citizens. You and the commenter above disagree whether space program can be considered such metric.
- yongjik 10y agoIMHO, It's more like your cousin decides to buy a $200 textbook on Organic Chemistry. Space Program is more of an investment than luxury.
- sgift 10y agoI've read it as a criticism of giving money to a country which is rich enough to fund a space program, when there isn't enough money to fund initiatives at home. Sure, space programs are great, but unlike food and health care they are not a necessity.
- Bulkington 10y agoBritain had sent 'foreign aid' to India for hundreds of years--but the returns just aren't so great anymore. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_India
- jogjayr 10y agoI'm only surprised because this story has basically nothing to do with India's space program. HN has its share of "India is too poor to do space" commenters that come out of the woodwork on every ISRO related story.
- Symbiote 10y agoAid to India will come with many strings attached, which are intended to benefit Britain in the long term. It's likely money well spent.