3 ms·
I get the general frustration there, but it's weird to focus on NASA's budget when it's such a teeny tiny fraction of the total. Yes, there's a lot of governme
by kelnos 7mo ago
I get the general frustration there, but it's weird to focus on NASA's budget when it's such a teeny tiny fraction of the total.
Yes, there's a lot of government waste, but NASA ain't it.
And I would suggest that the billionaire class and unfettered capitalism are far more responsible for the modern day version of Scott-Heron's woes than the good ol' government scapegoat.
- elteto 7mo agoIf DOGE served for anything at all it was for showing that there isn’t even that much “waste” per se. If there’s any waste it’s in the Pentagon which can’t even audit itself, but of course DOGE didn’t even get close to that. It was all performative for them.
- rationalist 7mo agoI think they proved that the waste is not easily defined. I would call fraud, waste, but a computer program isn't likely to discover it without boots on the ground looking to see if the money is actually going where the records indicate.
- TheOtherHobbes 7mo agoThe richest person in the world, who has had billions from government handouts, decided they were going to audit government spending. Fraud doesn't even begin to describe it.
- WalterBright 7mo agoSpaceX did not receive government subsidies. Government contracts, yes, but those are payments for services delivered, not subsidies or handouts.
- ericjmorey 7mo agoThose contracts are direct subsidies. They would not exist in the private market. Government spending subsidizes whatever it spends on.
- WalterBright 7mo ago> Those contracts are direct subsidies. They are not. You are imputing your own meanings into the word "subsidy". If you buy a Coke from a Coke machine, you are not "subsidizing" the machine's vendor.