Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Elvis
0.6% of the budget is a whole heck of a lot higher than I would of anticipated; with that big of a chunk of the budget, it is a relative boondoggle of a program when you get down to it. That is a HUGE percentage of the budget when you consider how many programs are competing for a piece of the budget pie. You look at that percentage and think it is underfunded because you personally value it so much, but I doubt that you've ever really had to look at a large overall budget before (I may be mistaken in that). NASA should have its budget whacked; the privitization of space exploration will result in much more effective results. NASA laid a lot of groundwork--it was crucial for where we are now, but we are no longer in the mid 60s. Good things still come out of it and that is why I don't advocate for abolishing it completely. Give the reigns over to guys like Elon Musk and use the money for other emergent scientific disciplines. Cut it by 2/3rds and split the money between the National Science Foundation and the National Institute for Health; you'll get more bang for your buck there.
|
This amazes me sometimes. Did you look at the defense budget? How many multi-million dollar bombs do we need? Not nearly as many as we buy, and the defense budget is a contract sweepstakes for a handful of rich investors at the expense of the american public. We cant take care of hungry or sick people, but we can line the pockets of defense contractors with tax money, and then call for budget cuts to the greatest science organization ever known. phewwwwwwwww
I mean.. you do realize NASA does more than just send robots to mars right?