[QUOTE=Svinnik;51941702]the US army is one of the biggest employers of minorities though and a lot of minorities see it as a stepping stone to getting out of bad neighborhoods, why reduce the budget of the military if it helps the underprivileged?[/QUOTE]
The vast majority of the military budget goes to research projects and equipment purchases, and relatively little goes towards benefits and pay for personnel. According to the budget agency's website, only ~25% of the $597Bn we spend on military is used for personnel.
The problem with reducing military spending is that they almost always start cutting soldier benefits and pay rather than reduce spending on bullshit that will go nowhere/superfluous overstocks of APCs and tanks that are currently rusting away on a military logistics center because we have too fucking many. Congress needs to step in and tell them to stop fucking cutting benefits because it's really making my brother-in-law consider not renewing his enlistment contract again after all the goddamn pay cuts and he's a relatively important guy with 15 years of time in the Navy.
[QUOTE=Svinnik;51941805]The reason why the US spends so much on its military is because the US military is essentially the army of the Western world. We prop up NATO and cover the costs of the nations that fail to pay their debt to NATO plus we protect countries like Japan from Chinese expansionism. It's not as simple as reduce the money given to the military because then it forces almost everyone else in the West to start spending money on their own militaries.[/QUOTE]
Sure it's not a simple state of affairs, but it makes more sense to complain about that state of affairs than it does to complain about a NASA budget which looks very big on the scale of human dollars but is essentially nothing compared to US spending. Removing NASA's budget entirely would scarcely even register compared to a significant long-term cut to military spending, and NASA does so much sci-tech research that's not just "space exploration" as Robert Baron seems to think.
[QUOTE=Robert Baron;51941584]Misspent in my opinion. There are millions of people in the US starving and suffering. All of the people of color and the other oppressed groups that could benefit from federal spending will be missing out because a mostly white and priveliged demographic thinks space exploration is more important than the wellbeing of underprivileged people.[/QUOTE]
You're aware that the science that comes out of the space program directly benefits those people you're talking about, right? That NASA putting boots on Mars will mean vastly improved food production methods, medical technology, communications, life support systems, and most likely insight into how to fully conquer the CO2 levels of an atmosphere(A vital thing if we're to colonize Mars, given how CO2-rich its atmo is).
We need more money sent to NASA. What we don't need to be paying is the NSA, TSA.
[QUOTE=Robert Baron;51941584]Misspent in my opinion. There are millions of people in the US starving and suffering. All of the people of color and the other oppressed groups that could benefit from federal spending will be missing out because a mostly white and priveliged demographic thinks space exploration is more important than the wellbeing of underprivileged people.[/QUOTE]
It's not like that money is literally being launched into space in the rockets. That money is being used to pay the people who make the rockets, who provide ground support, who fly them, and so many more. This isn't just a bunch of "white and priveliged" [sic] people throwing money about, they are making sure people get paid to do their jobs. NASA is so much more than just space exploration, they do a lot of climate science, so by funding this, the Republicans are ironically fueling research against their agenda, and that benefits us all.
I always knew space travel was important (and I wish Europe invested more) but this thread has reminded me just how important it is with the advances in technology NASA brought. In that way Baron's posts, while wrong, did end up educating me in a roundabout way. :v:
Only highlights how shameful the reductions in budgets in previously decades were for humans in general.
[QUOTE=Svinnik;51941702]the US army is one of the biggest employers of minorities though and a lot of minorities see it as a stepping stone to getting out of bad neighborhoods, why reduce the budget of the military if it helps the underprivileged?[/QUOTE]
Oh no. My liberal guilt has compelled me to push logic out the window and continue to support the overfunding of the military because it helps minorities.
The military is an incredibly inefficient tool to help minorities off their feet. Considering when you see news stories [URL="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-audit-army-idUSKCN10U1IG"]such as this[/URL], a lot of money could've actually gone to minority outreach programs.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51941886]I always knew space travel was important (and I wish Europe invested more)[/QUOTE]
I wish the same for Latin America, researchers are the most affected.
Every year here in Argentina, scientists make strikes because their budget gets cut every year. Roughly 70% of those scientists left the country now. Not sure about neighbour countries.
Cause the money just vaporize when spent. /s
The value of Money increases when in circulation, as it becomes more stable. Also referred to the "velocity of money".
On top of that, its not like NASA developers new tech and create jobs (and about to be beaten by private companies).
Funding in NASA is funding in education, it teaches kids to dream.
[QUOTE=Robert Baron;51941658]Where does it end though? Why not end all welfare and spend it on exploration if it's our "endgame"? All money spent on these extraneous "future" programs is money not spent helping the underpriveged.
[editline]10th March 2017[/editline]
Caring about real issues that affect people like education, disability, food access, and affirmative action is trolling?[/QUOTE]
Think of the technologies required for us to live on Mars. One of them is definitely going to be water preservation/recycling. Others will include hydroponics. These technologies can (and eventually will) be applied to situations on Earth where food and water shortages are a problem.
[QUOTE=Robert Baron;51941584]Misspent in my opinion. There are millions of people in the US starving and suffering. All of the people of color and the other oppressed groups that could benefit from federal spending will be missing out because a mostly white and priveliged demographic thinks space exploration is more important than the wellbeing of underprivileged people.[/QUOTE]
And if you're going to bellyache about mis-spending of federal money, our incredibly bloated military budget would be a good place to start. All that damn money and they can't even take proper care of our veterans. Fucking gross.
[QUOTE=Robert Baron;51941584]Misspent in my opinion. There are millions of people in the US starving and suffering. All of the people of color and the other oppressed groups that could benefit from federal spending will be missing out because a mostly white and priveliged demographic thinks space exploration is more important than the wellbeing of underprivileged people.[/QUOTE]
I agree! That's why I think we should scrap the Eiffel Tower for iron, quarry the pyramids, and turn the Statue of Liberty into copper wiring.
[QUOTE=Robert Baron;51941584]Misspent in my opinion. There are millions of people in the US starving and suffering. All of the people of color and the other oppressed groups that could benefit from federal spending will be missing out because a mostly white and priveliged demographic thinks space exploration is more important than the wellbeing of underprivileged people.[/QUOTE]
What?
[QUOTE=Robert Baron;51941658]Where does it end though? Why not end all welfare and spend it on exploration if it's our "endgame"? All money spent on these extraneous "future" programs is money not spent helping the underpriveged.
[editline]10th March 2017[/editline]
Caring about real issues that affect people like education, disability, food access, and affirmative action is trolling?[/QUOTE]
You are looking two days into the future. You are looking at short term.
Think long term. Don't think 'How can I put a burger in a hobo's hand today', think 'How can I make it so that hobo never becomes homeless in the first place'. Look towards investing in the future, not throwing money at the poor in the naive hope that itt'l magically help. As a poor person I can 100% assuredly say that handouts will not help us. You want to make life better for people like me who struggle to make ends meet? Fund NASA. Fund research into new frontiers. Because it's that research which will give people like me a chance at a better life, not handouts.
[QUOTE=Surplus;51941603]Here's a history of NASA's budget. Glad to see a continuing constant increase.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/lPHVsqL.png[/t][/QUOTE]
for some perspective and accounting for inflation, NASA got $43 billion 1966
I saw this cool website on reddit earlier. You can find NASA under "independent agencies" after the executive branch split off
[url]https://us.wikibudgets.org/w/united-states-budget-2016[/url]
[QUOTE=Robert Baron;51941584]Misspent in my opinion. There are millions of people in the US starving and suffering. All of the people of color and the other oppressed groups that could benefit from federal spending will be missing out because a mostly white and priveliged demographic thinks space exploration is more important than the wellbeing of underprivileged people.
[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Gimmick" - Novangel))[/highlight][/QUOTE]
I doubt NASA really competes all that much for the resources you need to help starving and suffering people in the US
[QUOTE=TestECull;51942235]You are looking two days into the future. You are looking at short term.
Think long term. Don't think 'How can I put a burger in a hobo's hand today', think 'How can I make it so that hobo never becomes homeless in the first place'. Look towards investing in the future, not throwing money at the poor in the naive hope that itt'l magically help. As a poor person I can 100% assuredly say that handouts will not help us. You want to make life better for people like me who struggle to make ends meet? Fund NASA. Fund research into new frontiers. Because it's that research which will give people like me a chance at a better life, not handouts.[/QUOTE]
I find it hilarious that this guy used the exact same argument people have against India's ISRO on fuckin' NASA.
Space programs have immense value - the satellites they send up don't just help the military or add a few extra channels on TV; they help:
a) give accurate data to farmers to improve agricultural practises
b) give weather warnings to fishermen
c) give advanced warnings and forestry data to the government to monitor resource harvesting and replenishment.
...and that's just the tip of it. The amount of exotic materials research that goes on actually trickles down into everyday use, improving quality of life on earth. It's not just about "burning cash piles of money to peer into space dust", it's a whole lot more on improving sustainability on this planet and learning how to survive on other planets as well. It's one of those things that it doesn't matter which country is doing it, it's better for the human race on the whole.
[QUOTE=Surplus;51941603]Here's a history of NASA's budget. Glad to see a continuing constant increase.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/lPHVsqL.png[/t][/QUOTE]
Is this accounting for inflation?
Because maybe I checked wrong but I think the budget is lower than in 1998, once I account for inflation.
[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;51942973]Is this accounting for inflation?
Because maybe I checked wrong but I think the budget is lower than in 1998, once I account for inflation.[/QUOTE]
Shit, my bad. It indeed does not account for inflation. Didn't think about that. Here's an excel graph to make it up to you.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/puQDyxI.png[/t]
It pretty much just keeps up with inflation.
[QUOTE=Robert Baron;51941584]Misspent in my opinion. There are millions of people in the US starving and suffering. All of the people of color and the other oppressed groups that could benefit from federal spending will be missing out because a mostly white and priveliged demographic thinks space exploration is more important than the wellbeing of underprivileged people.
[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Gimmick" - Novangel))[/highlight][/QUOTE]
Everyone's house, including under privileged people's, has something in it that they use that owes its existence to NASA, and a lot of great things that everyone uses outside of the house, too. It isn't just about space exploration, it's about solving problems, solutions of which get integrated into every day life. All of which put more money into the economy every year than NASA's yearly budget takes from our taxes.
How about $650 Billion on a defense budget when we have two allies north and south and two oceans east and west. If you want $19 Billion for under privileged people, take it from that, not NASA. All of our lives are much better, safer, and convenient today thanks to NASA, and not just American lives, either
[QUOTE=Surplus;51941603]Here's a history of NASA's budget. Glad to see a continuing constant increase.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/lPHVsqL.png[/t][/QUOTE]
It actually went down a little since 1998 if you adjust for inflation.
[editline]13th March 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;51942973]Is this accounting for inflation?
Because maybe I checked wrong but I think the budget is lower than in 1998, once I account for inflation.[/QUOTE]
I should read the rest of the thread.
still nothing, if you look at Apollo program recalculated to recent $ value
1963 19,836
1964 32,002
1965 38,448
1966 43,554
1967 38,633
1968 32,274
1969 27,550
1970 23,000
1971 19,862
the budget needs to rise radically for any serious Moon-Mars or beyond effort
i say 25-45 to ensure it actually goes well ...
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;51941699]This is a misplaced complaint considering NASA spending is an absolute pittance compared to the US yearly military budget.[/QUOTE]
"But what about the economy" is one of the conservative go to catch phrases, meanwhile not a peep from them when money is being spent on some dumb wall.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
