What is Digg?82 Comments
- hnazareth16, on 10/06/2008, -5/+48Instead of squandering $700 billion with the Bailout Plan, the government should've given more money to NASA. Sure -- $20.2 billion is a lot, but imagine how much $30 billion could have accomplished.
As is, we're stuck working with Russia, which is absurd because as far as I am concerned the Space Race is still alive and well... Damn you, Commies! - theviceroy, on 10/06/2008, -2/+34With Japan and China looking to advance their space programs beyond ours, we should be giving even more money than this to NASA.
- inactive, on 10/06/2008, -6/+24As a former NASA employee, I can say this will be money well spent on finding how badgers develop in zero-g environments.
- Rudegar, on 10/06/2008, -2/+19I for one welcome our new zero-g badger overlords!
- EffYoo, on 10/06/2008, -2/+16Considering all the money that is wasted in this country and all the technological advances that have benefited society that were produced from research for the space program, this is the least we could do. Lets cut military spending, pet projects and corporate welfare and devote even more to NASA.
- Lazydriver, on 10/06/2008, -0/+12Well, hell, Government needs money to run period.
Since NASA is an agency that delves on the experimental, it must not have a problem with failure.
Hell, it took 50 years for private investors just to catch up to NASA - Launching into Space! And I have no doubt in my mind that the tech they used was researched by some NASA scientists.
So be grateful that your tax money is going somewhere meaningful instead of this ***** retarded bailout. Oh wait, Congress passed it. *****! - inactive, on 10/06/2008, -0/+12i hate to make you angrier but.... *$800 billion
- inactive, on 10/06/2008, -5/+17To anyone against NASA, read this http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/en/kids/spinoffs.shtml http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/en/kids/spinoffs2.shtml
Money for NASA is always well spent. More money, the better. - vroom101, on 10/06/2008, -0/+111. "Now, NASA and Russians need each other": http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26975208/print/1/displ ... (www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26975208/print/1/displaymode/1098/)
2. "U.S. to rely on Russia for manned spaceflight" http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/05/america/gap ... (www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/05/america/gap.php) - warriorscot, on 10/06/2008, -3/+12No incentive? Are you high they have a limited budget and a lot of things to do with it that is sufficient incentive in my books its an utter myth that private industry gets you more for your money it fails so often how on earth could you possibly think that I can think of dozens of cases where privatisation like that in my own small country has miserably failed.
Just because something is not driven by the acquisition of profit doesn't mean they are going to waste money that's a myth and a dumb one at that, so often its the opposite were innovation and efficiency long term are sacrificed for short term profits. Private companies so often go the opposite way cutting corners to maximise profits again there is so much evidence to this being the case how can you possibly argue it when evidence of public institution wastage is much less in comparison and analysis after privatisation so often shows you get inferior service in the long run.
If you want to provide a capitalist style incentive if you must, set up a charitable corporation to commercialise the scientific and engineering output of Nasa and use it to fund additional research or like most universities you set up subsidary companies for the commercialisation of specific technologies that the host organisation owns a large stake in. - da233, on 10/06/2008, -1/+10How about snakes and mushrooms?
- Gr1nch, on 10/06/2008, -2/+11Buried as Inaccurate, My mom works for NASA. Scientific funding has gone down, it's full steam ahead on all of the Aeries Rocket plans.
One of the worst decisions in the history of America was the disbanding of the Apollo program in the 70's. Aeronautics is one of our nations strengths, I for one have no problem putting funding into the Space program. Especially if it is kept in house/country. While the science aspect is interesting, [i.e. how does fire react in a zero gravity environment? answer: It creates one huge orb rather than a veritical pillar of flame. badass] The moon lander trips and the mars trips will truly make everyone in this country excited about the space program again.
Happy 50th Nasa! Enjoy that cash! - Jektal, on 10/06/2008, -0/+8Hey, ***** you. Two of my best friends died when Crysis crashed.
/had to - jojopumpkin, on 10/06/2008, -0/+8Imagine what 700bn would buy for NASA. We could scrap the shuttle for one thing. Why are we still using that anyway?
- MiGs2, on 10/06/2008, -1/+8If NASA got $700bn, I'd have my hoverboard and automatic shoelace Nike's by now! Curse you congress, delaying cool-ness from my lifetime!! We need more SR-71's too, but twice as fast... twice as cool (its been like 40 years since they were being used, gotta have something insanely crazy in the 21st century, amirite?).
- basex, on 10/06/2008, -1/+7If I'm not wrong ESA in europe is going well beyond the japanese and russians.
- jgzman, on 10/06/2008, -0/+6Do some checking, man. If it were not for taxation, civilization as we know it would not exist, starting with the roads built by the Romans.
Some work is too big, or too slow to be driven by individuals, and needs to be done by the government. Roads, space travel, millitary, heck, the Internet was created by taxpayer dollars, as I recall.
Additionally, some things need to belong to the government. Can you imagine if Microsoft had invented the internet? The world would be a vastly different place.
Although, come to think of it, the first computers were made for the census bureau, paid for by tax money. - lazyslacker, on 10/06/2008, -2/+7scientific advancement > everything else
- Nintendesert, on 10/06/2008, -0/+5Get off the government funded and created internet then lajaw, it's not in the Constitution either.
- Nintendesert, on 10/06/2008, -2/+7Really? What has the private space industry achieved that has come remotely close to anything NASA has done?
- Rudegar, on 10/06/2008, -0/+5Enough is enough! I have had it with these ***** snakes and mushrooms on this ***** space plane!
- tehxen3, on 10/06/2008, -4/+8NASA is not a *competitive* enterprise. They are a government agency, and they have no incentive to perform any task efficiently and without wasting money.
There would be a higher return on investment if NASA was a DARPA-like organization, awarding contracts and venture capital to private sector. - groo68, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4It's even in the right context.
- odigity, on 10/06/2008, -4/+8As a personal value, yes. At the expense of taxpayers, no. Don't steal money out of my pocket just cause you want a bloated, inefficient space program. Besides the immorality of taxation, it's also impractical. I could have a better effect investing my own money wisely in one of the many private space ventures now currently available.
Stop spending taxpayer money on non-essential services!!!!!!! It's not your god damn money! - vroom101, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4From the 27 September 2008 press release "House Sends NASA Bill to President's Desk, Reaffirms Commitment to Balanced and Robust Space and Aeronautics Program" at http://science.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?News ... (science.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=2309):
. . . The changes to the original legislation include a prohibition against NASA taking any steps prior to April 30th of next year [2009] that would preclude the President from being able to continue to fly the Space Shuttle past 2010 if he and Congress decided to do so. NASA has indicated that delaying Shuttle shutdown activities for that amount of time will not impose additional costs. "The provision should not be construed as a congressional endorsement of extending the life of the Shuttle program beyond the additional flight added by this bill to deliver the AMS to the International Space Station," said Gordon [Committee on Science and Technology Chairman Bart Gordon]. "Rather, it reflects our common belief that the decision of whether or not to extend the Shuttle past its planned 2010 retirement date should be left to the next President and Congress, especially since both of the Presidential candidates have asked for the flexibility to make that decision." . . . The Senate bill incorporates most of the provisions of the House bill, including an authorization of $20.2 billion for NASA's programs for FY 2009, which includes $1 billion to accelerate completion of the crewed vehicles replacing the Space Shuttle; a focus on the key role NASA plays in the nation's innovation agenda, as well as authorizing an 11 percent increase over the President's request in scientific research. NASA is one of the federal agencies at which key scientific research takes place. . . . - warriorscot, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4It really couldn't do it with that budget, it couldn't build the ISS on its own either on that Budget and it couldn't put the station together as quickly as it is being done now.
The japanese are pouring huge amounts into developing a space elevator and they will probable manage it first unless the US or European space agencies get a massive influx of cash to research the technology. - inactive, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4Cancer does not wait. You may ask "Does NASA do researches on cancer?" Hell yeah! In fact, there are many things you use everyday that were invented by NASA.
http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/en/kids/spinoffs.shtml
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/technologies/comb ...
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/268137main_AARP_IPP_FACTSH ... - Jektal, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4Keep in mind that it's been like 40* years since the SR-71s were -last- used, around 50* years since they were built, and 30* years since we learned about them.
*source: my arse, but you get the idea - Niocan, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3Yes, because clearly we need less information in the Information Age eh?
You're both wrong, and possibly retarded. - Bigtruck, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3Yay! :)
- TxAggie08, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3In China
- inactive, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3At least when Crysis crashes nobody gets killed.
- inactive, on 10/06/2008, -3/+6While some people may be angry about this, I'm quite happy as my father is a NASA employee.
- predakon, on 10/06/2008, -2/+5Sir, you are going in my quote book.
- tehxen3, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3Are you sure that only government bureaucracies can advance science?
- acegi, on 10/06/2008, -1/+4This is a good news
but then where do congress keep getting their money? do they have nintendo DS printing money somewhere? - omgwtflawl, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3You know what you do to a horse with a broken leg? You put a bullet in its head.
So, what are we doing with ISS? Is it anything but a gargantuan waste of money?
I'm a die hard libertarian, but I love space travel. NASA needs to cut loose from these losers on the ISS and do some real science, with way more manned and unmanned space flight, and a real goddamn space elevator. It could do it with the budget it has. I wouldn't even care much if they increased it, god knows we spend money on dumber things right now. - pepsicola, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2awesome.
- salter84, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2umm where are the pillow cases with the $ sign on it that the US Gov has stashed away.
- ChristophyBrown, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3So... you went from NASA to...... CryTek?
Hm. Not very impressive, sir. - jesse060, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3for every $1 that goes into NASA $7 comes out in scientific advancements such as more efficient means of production for commercial products, new types of lighter and stronger materials, etc. All economic advancement hinges on technological advancement. Without it the economy stagnates. We're still riding the wave from the Apollo days. It's dying out though.
- OverthrowTheNWO, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2WATCH 1996 NASA VIDEOS - STS 75 & STS 80
Listen to Richard Hoagland - NASA has always been for public relations. - akeldama, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3"Barack Obama's early education and K-12 plan package costs about $18 billion per year. He will maintain fiscal responsibility and prevent an increase in the deficit by offsetting cuts and revenue sources in other parts of the government. The early education plan will be paid for by delaying the NASA Constellation Program for five years, using purchase cards and negotiating power of the government to reduce costs of standardized procurement, auctioning surplus federal property, and reducing the erroneous payments identified by the Government Accountability Office, and closing the CEO pay deductibility loophole. The rest of the plan will be funded using a small portion of the savings associated with fighting the war in Iraq."
- rheaume, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Lets stop killing people with it and use it to heal people and explore space
- darkphenox, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3there not its at the end of its life span thats why there is going to be a large gab in launches soon, the new one will go up in 2013 I think
- randumbusername, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2im out here busting my ass hauling people's ***** around... i need to get a government job or a government-contract related job.
i have a uncle that works on making the fuel tanks (lockheed) for those shuttles and i get the impression it's a pretty easy job. - Jektal, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2ow i head orgun hert now
- mightyslick, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1This comes out the same time that a program that would turn military spy satellites on the US was approved....They just needed more money to turn the satellites or upgrade them
- esc27, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1This is some very, very good news in a time when most is bad.
- akatsuki, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2I'd be for NASA research if it wasn't just political and geek football. Kill the ISS and manned missions for now and focus on things like improving payload cost.
-
Show 51 - 83 of 83 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is