5 ms·
I think there’s a few hundred programs that cost more and had fewer returns (and many with negative returns) before we get to man on the moon being a problem.
by addicted 3y ago
I think there’s a few hundred programs that cost more and had fewer returns (and many with negative returns) before we get to man on the moon being a problem.
- lumost 3y agoAs a fan of big science projects, I find this line of thinking unconvincing. The manhattan project cost roughly 56 billion in todays dollars vs. 149 billion for the Apollo program. The manhattan project effectively ended global great power conflict, likely saving hundreds of millions of lives from the inevitable catastrophe of a Warsaw pact vs. NATO conflict in Europe and Asia. The F-35 program cost 1.5 trillion dollars, but this program was also effectively an omni-spending program for the military - sustaining fighter development and arguably deferring several major global conflicts. We should judge projects by their individual merits rather than the justification that we're wasting less money than the alternative.
- AlecSchueler 3y agoThey might also agree that those projects weren't worth it.