> The world had less reliable housing, less clean water, less reliable food, worse healthcare, and more physical conflicts in the 60s, and we still had the Apol

> The world had less reliable housing, less clean water, less reliable food, worse healthcare, and more physical conflicts in the 60s, and we still had the Apollo program put people on the moon. Of course, you do realize that statement could also read: "When we ran the Apollo program, the world had less reliable housing, less clean water, less reliable food, worse healthcare, and more physical conflicts." Neither of these statements are particularly good at answering the question: How much do we gain by investing money in space exploration versus something else?