whats the point of NASA?

[SSSnail]

My dad said this "You think that every time NASA announces a trip, that's the ONLY thing they do up there? What about all the communication satellites, spy satellites? When did they install those? Were there announcements for their installations? Who knows what they're doing up there, not like they're gonna write detail reports about everything they do so you'd know too".

 

[BUTCH1]

NASA= "never any ships available"..

 

[Gibsons]

I thought this was cool
http://www.nasa.gov/missions/research/twist_wing.html
Little or nothing to do with space.

 

[Colt45]

to beat the russkijs into space, obviously.

 

[beepandbop]

I'll tell you something you guys probably don't know--probably not most of you anyway.

In the last two years or so, I have been working with and seeing a number of prominent rocketeering guys. I'm not talking bottle rockets or toy rockets, I'm talking satellites, aeronautics, etc. these guys are intense.

They generally agree (and many of them work for NASA) that NASA has become a welfare essentially and that NASA should be shrunk and mean to develop a form of comet protection network and let space exploration proper be developed by private industries. NASA by itself is too swamped with bureaucratic mess to be effective at managing all of the goals it wants to accomplish. Such goals are better managed by individual private companies.

So is NASA the worst thing tax payers are funding? No.

We're funding hundreds of thousands of dollars into Nancy Pelosi's ornate dietary tastes on aircraft, we're in effect funding gang members to shoot each other and not try to get out of the ghetto. We're funding incompetent judges who dish out petty punishments and useless bureaucrats who make our lives more difficult.

That said, NASA has become enveloped in this bureaucratic-welfare department expansion for the sake of expansion mentality that has encroached on the U.S. for the last 80 years. If such bureaucratic expansionism keeps up, funding NASA will be the least of our worries.

We'll have to worry about the dissolution of our own country as the bureaucratic sludge that has grown chokes on its own fumes and begins its slow and disastrous implosion.

 

[rudeguy]

My dad said this "You think that every time NASA announces a trip, that's the ONLY thing they do up there? What about all the communication satellites, spy satellites? When did they install those? Were there announcements for their installations? Who knows what they're doing up there, not like they're gonna write detail reports about everything they do so you'd know too".

but why not have the NSA or the military budgets cover those instead of a whole separate agency with a whole different budget?

I'm not against NASA...I just don't understand why it needs that much money. I also don't understand what we are getting in return for such a large investment.

 

[Gibsons]

but why not have the NSA or the military budgets cover those instead of a whole separate agency with a whole different budget?

I'm not against NASA...I just don't understand why it needs that much money. I also don't understand what we are getting in return for such a large investment.

There's a large chunk of military funds that goes into space stuff. It's kind of interdependent with NASA stuff. e.g. the KH 11s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-11_KENNAN

 

[Schadenfroh]

It is basically an ongoing government stimulus that produces loads of inventions, jobs (blue-collar and white-collar) and scientific data (for both space and here on earth) that also increases national pride.

While NASA has produced countless innovations, here is a list HowStuffWorks put together of ones in common, everyday use:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/ten-nasa-inventions.htm

 

[Jeff7]

My dad said this "You think that every time NASA announces a trip, that's the ONLY thing they do up there? What about all the communication satellites, spy satellites? When did they install those? Were there announcements for their installations? Who knows what they're doing up there, not like they're gonna write detail reports about everything they do so you'd know too".

Though it's not like the general public would actually read or understand any of those reports though.

And here's a bigger list of spinoffs.


Concerning spending on NASA, here's two possible outcomes if NASA's budget magically went away:
1) The government gets the remaining $17B. I'm absolutely certain that they'll spend it on some humanitarian aid mission or something, and it won't go toward pet projects, or else simply disappear.
2) The population gets the money, which would amount to less than $60 per person per year. Best bets for where it'll go: Cellphone bills, McDonalds, some movies, garettes, greeting cards, etc.

So yeah, I hear people say that NASA's money should be diverted to more immediate needs.
I say that if the money were allocated away from NASA, it would never really find its way to any other cause. I also think that there are many more frivolous expenditures that we incur regularly, which also cost a lot more money than NASA. Tobacco and alcohol - I'd guess that annual sales of those top $100 billion. And of course there's the economic damage caused by their associated health problems. So, push the limits of human knowledge and technology, or get drunk and get cancer. Incidentally, some NASA tech is helpful in diagnosing and treating cancer.
Or hell, greeting cards. I think the sales of those are $2-$3 billion a year, just for an overpriced piece of paper to convey some packaged, commercialized feeling.

We sure got our priorities straight.

 

[Random Variable]

What's the point of anything? Is anything worth anything?

 

[Gibsons]

Though it's not like the general public would actually read or understand any of those reports though.

And here's a bigger list of spinoffs.


Tobacco and alcohol - I'd guess that annual sales of those top $100 billion. And of course there's the economic damage caused by their associated health problems. So, push the limits of human knowledge and technology, or get drunk and get cancer.

Pretty good guess, at least on the alcohol part

According to the Economic Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture, retail sales of alcoholic beverages totaled approximately $115.9 billion in 2003, up from $102.4 billion in 2000.

 

[frostedflakes]

I'll tell you something you guys probably don't know--probably not most of you anyway.

In the last two years or so, I have been working with and seeing a number of prominent rocketeering guys. I'm not talking bottle rockets or toy rockets, I'm talking satellites, aeronautics, etc. these guys are intense.

They generally agree (and many of them work for NASA) that NASA has become a welfare essentially and that NASA should be shrunk and mean to develop a form of comet protection network and let space exploration proper be developed by private industries. NASA by itself is too swamped with bureaucratic mess to be effective at managing all of the goals it wants to accomplish. Such goals are better managed by individual private companies.

So is NASA the worst thing tax payers are funding? No.

We're funding hundreds of thousands of dollars into Nancy Pelosi's ornate dietary tastes on aircraft, we're in effect funding gang members to shoot each other and not try to get out of the ghetto. We're funding incompetent judges who dish out petty punishments and useless bureaucrats who make our lives more difficult.

That said, NASA has become enveloped in this bureaucratic-welfare department expansion for the sake of expansion mentality that has encroached on the U.S. for the last 80 years. If such bureaucratic expansionism keeps up, funding NASA will be the least of our worries.

We'll have to worry about the dissolution of our own country as the bureaucratic sludge that has grown chokes on its own fumes and begins its slow and disastrous implosion.

There's really no money in space at this point in time, so I don't know why anyone thinks the private industry would pick up the slack left by NASA. Most of the space research currently being done is purely scientific. Once we have the technology to make space travel affordable, the private industry will run with it, but until then, companies aren't going to waste money sending probes to far-away planets just to expand humanity's knowledge of the universe. There's no incentive for shareholders in that.

edit: Or were they talking about the government contracting the design out to private companies, instead of doing it in-house? If that's the case, I think NASA already does quite a bit of that. I think they work closely with Boeing on a lot of stuff, for example.

 

[Freshgeardude]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingtip_device#NASA_development

that simple thing added to air plane wings saves millions of dollars in fuel. And for the global warming people, less carbon emissions.

 

[beepandbop]

There's really no money in space at this point in time, so I don't know why anyone thinks the private industry would pick up the slack left by NASA.

Oooh, I don't know about that. The guys who I talk to are all entrepreneurs one way or the other, or have some interest in the subject (if they're NASA employees) and they believe there is a lot of money to be made in this infinite gold mine.

Most of the space research currently being done is purely scientific. Once we have the technology to make space travel affordable, the private industry will run with it, but until then, companies aren't going to waste money sending probes to far-away planets just to expand humanity's knowledge of the universe. There's no incentive for shareholders in that.

They feel this kind of attitude is actually why government control is expanding and neutering individual initiative. The horse and buggy was a perfectly adequate form of transportation, the horse was fairly quiet, rugged, could go fast, and looked nice. Trains could cover the long distance part.

Under this thought process, there was no logic for Benz, Ford, or Mercedes to pursue the various fuel technologies of the internal combustion engine. The internal combustion engine needed more though, so Benz obliged with the Carburetors...that certainly required a lot of scientific research. And indeed, the muscle car race spurred research to get more efficient carburetors. And the private industry worked to develop fuel injection and electronic fuel injection etc.

Scientific advancement can be achieved through individual initiative. People I know right now are working on some very BIG ideas that will help the planet--and yet I have a bad feeling, the government will get all the credit for their ideas.

The reason NASA existed was the same reason all these other government branches existed--people believed them to be necessary at the dawn of Big Government back in 1933.

edit: Or were they talking about the government contracting the design out to private companies, instead of doing it in-house? If that's the case, I think NASA already does quite a bit of that. I think they work closely with Boeing on a lot of stuff, for example.

All of the above, in a way. They're not necessarily motivated by any ideology (left vs. right for example) so for them, money is money. That said, they believed that at a certain point, that's all NASA should really be doing at this point, is act as a contracting agency, and even then they believed that was prone to abuse (and is currently).

 

[BudAshes]

When a meteor comes to wipe us out we might need some space programs.

 

[Sadaiyappan]

Whats the point of you?

 

[squirrel dog]

velcro,tang,freeze dried icecream . Nasa ftw .

 

[eLiu]

To boldly go where no man has gone before!

 

[BeauJangles]

And is it really worth over $17,300,000,000.00 a year?

That money is better spent on discovering more about who we are, where we came from, and what the universe we live in is like rather than being wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[beepandbop]

That money is better spent on discovering more about who we are, where we came from, and what the universe we live in is like rather than being wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I knew some pinko would show up at some point and drop that earth shatteringly brilliant phrase we have come to know and loathe from our incompetent leftist friends.

 

[Nik]

And is it really worth over $17,300,000,000.00 a year?

Considering the gub'ment dropped 700 billion to save a few companies and still didn't go bankrupt, 17 billion is a drop in the bucket.