Space exploration is cool, and deficit moaners are nerds (WSJ)

WSJ Opinion Journal ^ | 01/17/2004 | Homer Hickam

[Warren_Piece]

Since the Apollo moon program ended, I think it's fair to say that our federal space program has muddled along without much purpose or conviction. But this week President Bush changed all that when he unveiled a straightforward plan directing NASA to explore the solar system and especially Mars with robotic spacecraft. The space agency is also to construct a human-tended laboratory on the moon. Then, if we learn enough on the moon, and if our robots on Mars have piqued our interest enough, NASA will be told to send people to Mars to investigate. We will proceed in a logical sequence, in our own good time, and with a reasonable amount of money spent each year over many years.

[Warren_Piece]

Hickam is a man I greatly respect, and he makes some good points.

[Archangelsk]

Before they complain about it, I wish the moaners would take the time to find out a few things about NASA's measly 1%. It has added billions of dollars back to our economy. It's about the only program in the federal budget that has a track record of doing that.

Ahem, he forgot the Patent and Trademark Office, which, in terms of adding to the economy, probably outdistances NASA by a quantum leap and is completely self-sustaining.

[Prodigal Son]

Dems are anti-science. Dems want to make sure every single problem is solved here on Earth before we do any exploring elsewhere. With that as a prerequisite, we will never leave Earth.

[Viking2002]

It's going to take another Apollo-style Manhattan Project before there are any more new quantum leaps in technology. A new impetus is needed other than the everyday market forces, or we'll still be taking baby steps for the foreseeable future.

[Cobra64]

Dems are anti-science.

And they're too effin stupid to recognize the commercial trickle down to the economy with scientific breakthroughs and inventions that lead to new commerical enterprises.

[dr_who_2]

It has added billions of dollars back to our economy. It's about the only program in the federal budget that has a track record of doing that.

Well, what about the defense department, department of education, welfare, social security, food stamps, etc? What he fails to mention is that before they put it into the economy, they took it out of the economy.

All I've got to say is please, for pity's sake, stop worrying about NASA stealing money from your favorite federal program and adding to the deficit. Out of a $2 trillion-plus budget in 2004, human resources programs (Education, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Social Security, etc.) will get an astounding 34%! In contrast, NASA has the smallest budget of all the major agencies in the federal government.

Oh, the humanity. That doesn't mean NASA doesn't want to grow to the size of those other bureaucracies, and no one said that those other bureacracies need to exist in their current form to begin with.

Space is a nasty and cruel place for human beings.

No shit. You like cruel and nasty places? Move to Afganistan--on your own dollar.

Antarctica is the better analogy.

The nice thing about Antarctica is that it's less expensive to get to. You want to go a large, empty, unexplored realm with untold wealth? Fine. Finance your own expedition to Antarctica.

I come from a hardheaded place, Coalwood, W.Va., where a man worked hard for a living wage and was proud to do it.

Awwwww. As a NASA employee, Did you settle for a "living wage" to do the things you did? No? Then go work for an aircraft company.

Space exploration is cool, and deficit moaners are nerds (WSJ)

Insults won't change my opinion, Homer.

[dr_who_2]

It's going to take another Apollo-style Manhattan Project before there are any more new quantum leaps in technology.

Einstein, Maxwell, Watson, and Crick needed a pen, paper, and maybe a university. There are plenty of each. The inventors of the vacuum tube, transistor, and integrated circuits were employees of private companies. The Wright brothers financed their own work. New cience and technology doesn't come about because the POTUS spent gobs of cash on it and made it so. Satellites are useful, but so are computers, fiber optics, cars, vcrs, and all sorts of boring stuff that actually improves one's quality of life (here on Earth). A new impetus is needed other than the everyday market forces, or we'll still be taking baby steps for the foreseeable future.

Spoken like a true Democrat.

[Truth666]

"Before they complain about it, I wish the moaners would take the time to find out a few things about NASA's measly 1%."
1% still is too much. How to get a red sky over Mars in three Paintshop clicks : Look at the sundial on the rover at the bottom of this image: http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/press/spirit/20040108a/color_panorama_sol6-A6R1_med.jpg Compare the color : http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/press/spirit/20040108a/PIA05018_br.jpg See, you don't need money for sophisticated tricks. Everyone just thinks "NASA can't be that stupid".

[Hank Rearden]

I'd rather spend tax money on scientists and engineers than gasbag politicians, their whores, and welfare farmers. Best, of course, is to read the Constitution and not spend it on any of these or the millions of other pork projects.

That being said, Bush Jr. just refuses to prioritize anything. He wants to spend our money on every damn thing that pops into his head, if it'll buy him a few more votes. Spend all our money, and then some - just put everything on the deficit pile.

That's not exactly the limited government we were sold, is it?

[Hank Rearden]

I've held in my hands objects that are now on the surface of Venus. I understand the need to explore.

What I object to are cheap pandering politicians who refuse to prioritize. If we're going to Mars, then get the money elsewhere in the page after page of horsesh#@ called the Federal budget. Don't just put it on the pile of obligations to be hung on our grandchildren.

[JoeSchem]

Before they complain about it, I wish the moaners would take the time to find out a few things about NASA's measly 1%. It has added billions of dollars back to our economy.

Economic growth in this country averaged 2.5% a year until the late 1960s and the success of the Apollo program. Thereafter, living standards have peaked out, even with huge numbers of women entering the official work force.

In truth, Big Government, be it NASA or some other bloated bureaucracy, has subtracted trillions of dollars from our economy.

[Viking2002]

Read my previous posts on the subject, and maybe you get the gist of what I meant.

[dr_who_2]

I already got the gist of what you mean, thanks anyway.

[pending]

Yes to everything you said...

I saw a blurb on CNN that NASA is thinking, or planning to abandon Hubble because of this new agenda?
Googled and found many stories here:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=abandon+Hubble&sa=N&tab=wn

***
Sheesh...

[Professional Engineer]

Cool post. Thanks