3 ms·

No cost? The funds came from somewhere. Very cool if outside sources were backing this for the benefit of everyone. I guessing it's from taxes though.

jethronethro 3y ago
I'm happy for a few (and I'm sure it's a few) of my tax dollars to be spent this way. Actually, I'd like to see more of my tax dollars spent on educational efforts, at least ones that have the potential to be effective.
- mikecoles 3y ago
  No indication was presented if it were a positive or negative use of taxes rather the point is calling tax-funded programs "free" is deceitful, at best.
sixstringtheory 3y ago
I assumed it meant no cost at the point of consumption. Because it’s a government agency I assumed it’s funded by tax money. I’m ok with my tax money being used for public-access educational programming, à la PBS.
nonameiguess 3y ago
Could you be more pedantic? Yes, all human activity has some cost. When this is in marketing copy, it clearly means consumers are not charged for consumption. If it helps, the US federal budget for 2023 appears to have been projected at $6.35 trillion. Thankfully, all of this stuff is public, so taking a quick look at NASA's slides (https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/fiscal_year_2024_nasa_budget_summary.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/fiscal_...), I'm going to guess this falls under "STEM Engagement," which probably encompasses more than just this, but totals $157 million. So somewhere around 0.0025 cents out of every tax dollar. It appears I paid about $50k in federal income taxes last year, so I paid about $1.25 toward NASA's entire STEM engagement activity, some portion of which is represented by this streaming service. And there isn't any question about where the funds came from. "Outside sources" can't donate to specific government activities, only to the Treasury's general fund. Donating directly to a specific activity violates Congress' Constitutional power of the purse. If you're wondering "what about PBS?" They're not a government agency. They're a private nonprofit funded partially by grants from the government.
- mikecoles 3y ago
  Consumers are still charged, if they are taxpayers, so therefore it is not free and should be stopped from being marketed as such.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

jethronethro 3y ago

I'm happy for a few (and I'm sure it's a few) of my tax dollars to be spent this way. Actually, I'd like to see more of my tax dollars spent on educational efforts, at least ones that have the potential to be effective.

mikecoles 3y ago
No indication was presented if it were a positive or negative use of taxes rather the point is calling tax-funded programs "free" is deceitful, at best.

sixstringtheory 3y ago

I assumed it meant no cost at the point of consumption. Because it’s a government agency I assumed it’s funded by tax money. I’m ok with my tax money being used for public-access educational programming, à la PBS.

nonameiguess 3y ago

Could you be more pedantic? Yes, all human activity has some cost. When this is in marketing copy, it clearly means consumers are not charged for consumption. If it helps, the US federal budget for 2023 appears to have been projected at $6.35 trillion. Thankfully, all of this stuff is public, so taking a quick look at NASA's slides (https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/fiscal_year_2024_nasa_budget_summary.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/fiscal_...), I'm going to guess this falls under "STEM Engagement," which probably encompasses more than just this, but totals $157 million. So somewhere around 0.0025 cents out of every tax dollar. It appears I paid about $50k in federal income taxes last year, so I paid about $1.25 toward NASA's entire STEM engagement activity, some portion of which is represented by this streaming service. And there isn't any question about where the funds came from. "Outside sources" can't donate to specific government activities, only to the Treasury's general fund. Donating directly to a specific activity violates Congress' Constitutional power of the purse. If you're wondering "what about PBS?" They're not a government agency. They're a private nonprofit funded partially by grants from the government.

mikecoles 3y ago
Consumers are still charged, if they are taxpayers, so therefore it is not free and should be stopped from being marketed as such.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]