Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: FreeReign
What part of this don't you understand?

The part I don't understand is why this country continues to allow the federal government to ignore their constitutional responsibilities by spending tax monies on programs in which they have no authority to be involved. NASA is a good thing, but it would be more in line with the constitution if the monies spent were from the DOD budget, and NASA was a subset of that.

The discretionary budget increase for NASA is about 3%.
That means that you pay LESS for this program than you did last year.

Obviously you are not going to be able to get my point, as you somehow can equate an increase in spending to be a net savings. Are you a teacher?

58 posted on 02/04/2003 6:29:52 AM PST by onceone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: onceone
Go ahead and spend the money Mr. President, after you tell us what programs you're going to cut to pay for the increase.

The discretionary budget increase for NASA is about 3%. Inflation plus population growth in this country went up around 4% for the year. That means that you pay LESS for this program than you did last year. What part of this don't you understand?

In your response in post #58, you conveniently left out one of the facts that I posted. What are you afraid of?

Per person, we will pay less for NASA in the 2004 budget. The record of my full post shows it -- even if you wish that part of my post would go away to save face from your initial above statement.

59 posted on 02/04/2003 7:09:09 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson