3 ms·

Interesting points from Prof. Brian Cox: * NASA costs less than 0.13% of GDP and provides 9x return on investment * The entire Shuttle Program cost

by sambeau 15y ago

Interesting points from Prof. Brian Cox: * NASA costs less than 0.13% of GDP and provides 9x return on investment * The entire Shuttle Program cost approximately the same as the UK bank bailout * The Iraq conflict so far has cost significantly more than a manned mission to Mars Source: https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/88955884390195202 https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/88955884390195202 https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/88956654539902976 https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/88956654539902976 https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/88957802281840640 https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/88957802281840640

praxeologist 15y ago
I wonder how he comes to the conclusion of 9x return. I think that we ought to invest in dragons instead and that they would bring returns in orders of magnitude greater than any space program, plus they live longer. Source: http://blog.mises.org/6512/socialist-calculation-versus-magical-monsters/ http://blog.mises.org/6512/socialist-calculation-versus-magi...
- rbanffy 15y ago
  Downvoted for referring mises.org.
- michaelchisari 15y ago
  Your link isn't even about NASA, it's just an ideological discussion (and not a particularly coherent one). For reference, here's a list of NASA spin-offs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off It's not hard to see the multiplier effect of our investment in NASA.
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    Like I said in another related post, the Ludwig von Mises Institute is not the place you go for coherent discussions. The sooner we drop it as a source of discussion arguments, the better.
  - hugh3 15y ago
    The 9x return is nonetheless unsourced and likely to be the results of some fuzzy accounting.
nate_meurer 15y ago
I nearly vomitted when I read this story on NPR saying that we've spent more on air conditioning in the Afghan war -- around 20 billion -- than NASA's yearly budget. Fucking politicians. http://www.npr.org/2011/06/25/137414737/among-the-costs-of-war-20b-in-air-conditioning http://www.npr.org/2011/06/25/137414737/among-the-costs-of-w... Edit: I understand that the 20 billion figure includes the cost of infrastructure needed to put that air conditioning in place -- fuel for transport, roads that will be unmaintained or actively destroyed soon after the U.S. leaves, etc. Each piece is more frustrating than the last.

by sambeau 15y ago

praxeologist 15y ago

I wonder how he comes to the conclusion of 9x return. I think that we ought to invest in dragons instead and that they would bring returns in orders of magnitude greater than any space program, plus they live longer. Source: http://blog.mises.org/6512/socialist-calculation-versus-magical-monsters/ http://blog.mises.org/6512/socialist-calculation-versus-magi...

rbanffy 15y ago
Downvoted for referring mises.org.
michaelchisari 15y ago
Your link isn't even about NASA, it's just an ideological discussion (and not a particularly coherent one). For reference, here's a list of NASA spin-offs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off It's not hard to see the multiplier effect of our investment in NASA.
- rbanffy 15y ago
  Like I said in another related post, the Ludwig von Mises Institute is not the place you go for coherent discussions. The sooner we drop it as a source of discussion arguments, the better.
- hugh3 15y ago
  The 9x return is nonetheless unsourced and likely to be the results of some fuzzy accounting.

nate_meurer 15y ago

I nearly vomitted when I read this story on NPR saying that we've spent more on air conditioning in the Afghan war -- around 20 billion -- than NASA's yearly budget. Fucking politicians. http://www.npr.org/2011/06/25/137414737/among-the-costs-of-war-20b-in-air-conditioning http://www.npr.org/2011/06/25/137414737/among-the-costs-of-w... Edit: I understand that the 20 billion figure includes the cost of infrastructure needed to put that air conditioning in place -- fuel for transport, roads that will be unmaintained or actively destroyed soon after the U.S. leaves, etc. Each piece is more frustrating than the last.