18 Billion isn't a whole lot if you want to do something on the scale of the apollo missions again...
Eg,
At year-end 2012, SpaceX had over 40 launches on its manifest representing about $4 billion in contract revenue.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX[/url]
The ISS is arguably the most expensive single item ever constructed. As of 2010 the cost is estimated to be $150 billion.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station[/url]
etc
[QUOTE=gk99;43586730]Can we try to fix the economy somewhat first?
That's a lot of money.[/QUOTE]
1 its pretty much fixed already
2 NASA is actually profitable
3 its really not. That's like one fighter plane and is nothing compared to our 20 trillion deficit.
I suggest you shut the fuck up if you seriously consider cutting NASA budget.
It amazes me how people complain about NASA' budget when [URL="http://useconomy.about.com/od/usfederalbudget/p/military_budget.htm"]the military budget is $612 billion[/URL], which they never complain about.
NASA has brought a surplus for every expense which has been spent on it. At the current moment, the F35 program is doing similar numbers, but that's only because the US has everyone cockslapped in NATO to buy it.
[QUOTE=luck_or_loss;43586742]They asked for $17.72 billion but congress would only give them $17.65. Seriously? the 0.4% more was too much?
And this is only 1.5% of the entire federal budget.
Oh come on[/QUOTE]
Meanwhile they give the army 500 extra tanks they don't want.
DURRRRR FREEDOME!
[QUOTE=gk99;43586730]Can we try to fix the economy somewhat first?
That's a lot of money.[/QUOTE]
most nasa projects pull about double the money back into the economy.
[QUOTE]A November 1971 study of NASA released by the Midwest Research Institute of Kansas City, Missouri ("Technological Progress and Commercialization of Communications Satellites." In: "Economic Impact of Stimulated Technological Activity") concluded that "the $25 billion in 1958 dollars spent on civilian space R & D during the 1958-1969 period has returned $52 billion through 1971 -- and will continue to produce pay offs through 1987, at which time the total pay off will have been $181 billion. The discounted rate of return for this investment will have been 33 percent. A 1992 article in the British science journal Nature reported:[14]
"The economic benefits of NASA's programs are greater than generally realized. The main beneficiaries (the American public) may not even realize the source of their good fortune. . ."
Other statistics on NASA's economic impact may be found in the 1976 Chase Econometrics Associates, Inc. reports ("The Economic Impact of NASA R&D Spending: Preliminary Executive Summary.", April 1975. Also: "Relative Impact of NASA Expenditure on the Economy.", March 18, 1975) and backed by the 1989 Chapman Research report, which examined 259 non-space applications of NASA technology during an eight-year period (1976–1984) and found more than:
— $21.6 billion in sales and benefits;
— 352,000 (mostly skilled) jobs created or saved,and;
— $355 million in federal corporate income taxes
According to the "Nature" article, these 259 applications represent ". . .only 1% of an estimated 25,000 to 30,000 Space program spin-offs."
In 2002, the aerospace industry accounted for $95 billion of economic activity in the United States, including $23.5 billion in employee earnings dispersed among some 576,000 employees (source: Federal Aviation Administration, March 2004).[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Techno-Man;43587569]It amazes me how people complain about NASA' budget when [URL="http://useconomy.about.com/od/usfederalbudget/p/military_budget.htm"]the military budget is $612 billion[/URL], which they never complain about.[/QUOTE]
but we need that for the terrorists in mexico and africa!
[t]http://static4.demotix.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/a_scale_large/1500-7/photos/1351242127-the-first-day-of-the-muslim-holiday-of-eid-aladha-in-gaza_1550047.jpg[/t]
(((no but seriously you're a fucking imbecile if the military budget is OK to you but nasa's is way too high and should definitely not vote in the next election, else you will seriously mess this country up)))
[URL="http://pennyfournasa.tumblr.com/post/36042495903/nasatech"]For anyone thinking NASA is a waste of money.[/URL]
I want to live on the Moon
[t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/66/NASA_dollars.jpg[/t]
its sad that congress's science committees are too interested in everything that doesn't involve placing NASA jobs in their state
[editline]18th January 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=LarparNar;43587241]Also I don't know why the article says the entire federal budget is $1.1 trillion, according to Wikipedia it's much bigger: [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_United_States_federal_budget[/URL]
[/quote]
we bring in 3.3 trillion, the money to cover last year's expenses + inflation is 1.1 trilllion, the expenditures being higher becomes deficit
I remember reading somewhere that for every $1 that goes in to NASA, a lot more comes out.
Like, space shit (sic) provides so many jobs and the technologies produced stimulates so many people financially and erotically.
Isn't this less than what they had before?
NASA should have just said they wanted to invade the moon, there's at least $500 billion in the bag easy
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;43587097]Compared to what is spent on other less necessary/more menial things (ie: bloated military industrial complex) 17.6 billion is chump change.[/QUOTE]
It's more than the NSA gets. Funding is a relative thing.
For all the talk about how high the military budget is and how much NASA brings in, nobody mentions the return on military or non-NASA civic spending and the technologies that have been developed. I mean, hell, the Internet people are using to complain about NASA's budget was originally developed by DARPA as a military technology. It's not like NASA is the only agency to get a return on the investment.
^
ARPANet
developed originally as a command and control system, later a communications network eventually snowballed into a classified materials transmission network and finally a method of transmitting research securely between universities, goverment facilities, and research facilities before the consumer was allowed to hear of it
[QUOTE=urbanmonkey;43588054]NASA should have just said they wanted to invade the moon, there's at least $500 billion in the bag easy[/QUOTE]
Part of the reason for the Moon Landings was to beat the Soviets up there...
So I guess we need more Soviets.
Man, I would only need $19.8b to do it with a TU-160.
[QUOTE=Beafman;43587100][video=youtube;3WzHXI5HizQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WzHXI5HizQ[/video]
One can hope...
Can anyone tell me why i can't link to youtube, even when i press in the right code?[/QUOTE]
You have to remove the "s" in https.
[video=youtube;3WzHXI5HizQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WzHXI5HizQ[/video]
[QUOTE=Techno-Man;43587569]It amazes me how people complain about NASA' budget when [URL="http://useconomy.about.com/od/usfederalbudget/p/military_budget.htm"]the military budget is $612 billion[/URL], which they never complain about.[/QUOTE]
What are you talking about? Like everyone I know who isn't very right wing complains all the time.
At first I thought it said $176 billion, I was disappointed.
[QUOTE=ElectricSquid;43586708]Wasn't their budget before only a quarter of this or less? I remember looking up the figure for a class presentation and finding out that it was laughably minuscule next to the defense budget.[/QUOTE]
Well, yeah, but he signed a budget a few years ago that decimated their budget in the first place.
LFTR powered Mars Craft please.
All NASA has to say is that Mars has oil. Bam, budget increased by two hundred billion.
[QUOTE=IrishBandit;43587637][URL="http://pennyfournasa.tumblr.com/post/36042495903/nasatech"]For anyone thinking NASA is a waste of money.[/URL][/QUOTE]
Thank you for posting this. Penny Four NASA is a great program to get involved with.
Also, NDT
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbIZU8cQWXc[/media]
[QUOTE=soccerskyman;43587032]Read NASA as NSA and was really worried for a sec.[/QUOTE]
I guarantee the NSA's budget is a hell of a lot more.
isn't NASA's budget supposedly a scam to the American people to get into why and how and think more....
Well NSA is spying on people so NASA probably is making the the drones for the air force can fly for the NSA....
Also if you haven't noticed yet I am a person who belives in conspiracy's....
[QUOTE=ionuttzu;43588002]Isn't this less than what they had before?[/QUOTE]
They also increased the chocolate ration to 20 grams.
[QUOTE=G3rman;43589511]I guarantee the NSA's budget is a hell of a lot more.[/QUOTE]
Except it's not, because budget allocation was leaked and the NSA [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/black-budget-summary-details-us-spy-networks-successes-failures-and-objectives/2013/08/29/7e57bb78-10ab-11e3-8cdd-bcdc09410972_story.html]doesn't even get eleven billion[/url].
great, now build an matter assemblier so we don't need money anymore and make anything out of freakin matter, like I literally scientifically form wood and furniture out of fucking matter itself.
[QUOTE=areolop;43589425]Thank you for posting this. Penny Four NASA is a great program to get involved with.
Also, NDT
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbIZU8cQWXc[/media][/QUOTE]
Reminds me of Aldrin's article with Tech Review on: [URL="http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/429690/why-we-cant-solve-big-problems/"]Why We've Stopped Solving Big Problems[/URL]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.