4 ms·
The US has plenty of money to have a space program, we choose not to have a more active space program.
by acadien 13y ago
The US has plenty of money to have a space program, we choose not to have a more active space program.
- DerpDerpDerp 13y agoJust to further this point: NASA receives for its yearly budget 12 days of the military's budget, not counting expenses in the wars.
- grannyg00se 13y ago12 days of the budget for the entire us military sounds like a pretty damn good amount of money. Quick lookup indicates that's something like 21 billion dollars.
- bad_user 13y agoThe real question is, what makes the military 30 times more important than space exploration, given that we are leaving days of (relative) peace?
- mynameishere 13y agoAt this point, the military is (in-part) a jobs program, both blue collar and white.
- DerpDerpDerp 13y agoMuch of the jobs money is coming out of the war money, which is not included in that figure.
- salient 13y agoSurely we can create a better jobs program with that money?
- whatusername 13y agoIt's a much larger jobs program
- pavelrub 13y agoRight. Because a single rover on the moon is more "active" than the 5 active space programs, including 2 active rovers, that NASA has on Mars.
- mturmon 13y agoThanks. And Cassini at Saturn, New Horizons on its way to Pluto, Hubble, Chandra, Spitzer, and Planck; STEREO and SDO looking at the Sun, and a host of Earth-observing missions (http://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/missions/ http://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/missions/), etc., etc. Some of the comments above are not very well-informed.
- robomartin 13y agoNo we don't. We operate at a trillion dollar deficit per year. How does that translate into having plenty of money? Should we borrow from the Chinese to compete with them?