Well Tyson’s personal stats are not what the debates about.
Your attacking the messenger, not the points made.
There are plenty of right wingers that support NASA and you of course know that.
I think your too extreme in being anti-government views.
A tiny portion of the federal government takes human presence beyond earth and benefits our nation in manifold ways. You could cancel NASA or double it. It wouldnt’ matter to the federal budget. It’s tiny.
“Our progress in space, taking giant steps for all mankind, is a tribute to American teamwork and excellence. Our finest minds in government, industry and academia have all pulled together. And we can be proud to say: We are first; we are the best; and we are so because we’re free. “America has always been greatest when we dared to be great. We can reach for greatness again. We can follow our dreams to distant stars, living and working in space for peaceful, economic, and scientific gain.” -Ronald Wilson Reagan
You chose Tyson as your standard bearer for the need of taxpayer funding for NASA. His politics are relevant. He’s a statist. In this case the messenger and message jibe completely.
Here’s the problem - if NASA is so small and so beneficial as to not be eliminated what about NPR, the Ad Council or numerous other “little” departments?
Even in the aggregate they don’t amount to much relative to entitlements. It’s the philosophy and the philosophy that got us the entitlement disaster. It’s the philosophy that is driving QE3 and the entire mess.
Reagan was wrong on NASA. He’s not infallible. He’s a politician.