3 ms·
The broken windows parable is an argument against destruction to encourage the exchange of money. There is no analogous destruction in this case. > "Those ear
by jlgreco 13y ago
The broken windows parable is an argument against destruction to encourage the exchange of money. There is no analogous destruction in this case.
> "Those earth engineers could be doing other things."
I might as well point out that you could be working on a cure to cancer right now. You wouldn't buy that argument though, right?
- codeflo 13y agoIn the abstract, paying people to waste time is very similar to destroying windows: you're destroying the services that they could have provided.
- jlgreco 13y agoYou are not paying them to waste time though. You are paying them to develop a very advanced (and valuable) skillset. You are paying to develop and mature your nation's scientific community and education system, to provide them access to facilities and capabilities they previously lacked. The IRSO didn't sit on their asses twiddling their thumbs while consuming money for several years, only to have a rocket pop out of think air. They were working their asses off, developing new skill-sets and advancing their understanding of their field.
- codeflo 13y agoJust to clarify, I was addressing the general form of argument, not the concrete example of whether space research is a waste of time. Personally, I consider advancing science and the arts very worthwhile goals of public spending, but that's a different point.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- graeme 13y agoRight, but now you're arguing that their work is useful. That's a different argument than simply arguing we're spending the money on earth. If people think the space programs are wasteful, then presumably they don't think the work done is useful.