Well, NASA isn't perfect but it is probably the best government program there is.

tk421;700745 wrote:Well, NASA isn't perfect but it is probably the best government program there is.

With the exception of the wasteful financial triangle between the military industrial complex, DC politicians, and the Pentagon I would argue the the men and women serving in our Armed Forces are the best government program there is.

NASA is a distant second.

Tobias Fünke;700735 wrote:I did a report on NASA and found a statistic that said the US government has made $7 off of taxes from sales of its inventions for every $1 it has spent on NASA.

Do all of you "oh god government spending!" Tea Party folk think the perfect America would be like all of us living in the woods alone in seclusion without any form of government spending? Jusgt a couple of families and some rifles and Ameria, damn it. I mean it isn't fucking 1790, a lot of what the government does is good.

I almost spewed my morning coffee when I read this one.

ytownfootball;700655 wrote:You're not going to save shit by cutting the damn NASA budget, you bitch and moan about a shitty rocket that did a splashdown a little early, so what. It's on TV, the news and on the web...small ass potatoes. You want to cut things to make yourself feel better, cut some dead wood, some line items that cost little until you total all the lines, a few million barrels of pork, the shit that isn't front and center making a splash in the big drink. Don't cut intellectually motivated endeavors like some backwoods hick.

I'd hardly call $425 million "small ass potatoes" especially since we spent this incredible sum of public money on a rocket whose mission was to study the myth of man-made global warming. It was a shitty $425 million rocket to be precise. Maybe $425 million won't save shit in the big national debt picture, but if it's no big deal for NASA to waste taxpayer dollars, they can prematurely splashdown a few million in worthless America dollars in my hick middle class backyard.

I would argue the the men and women serving in our Armed Forces are the best government program there is.

...if you want to save money, then bringing a few of them home might be more cost effective than de-funding NASA.

NASA keeps us on the cutting edge technologically and helps gives those armed forces an advantage. It is somewhat of a moment of cognitive dissonance for us conservatives, but the reality is that we have to accept that NASA pushes the envelope, and when you do that you are going to have some failures.

HitsRus;700800 wrote:...if you want to save money, then bringing a few of them home might be more cost effective than de-funding NASA.

NASA keeps us on the cutting edge technologically and helps gives those armed forces an advantage. It is somewhat of a moment of cognitive dissonance for us conservatives, but the reality is that we have to accept that NASA pushes the envelope, and when you do that you are going to have some failures.

Great post!!!

HitsRus;700800 wrote:...if you want to save money, then bringing a few of them home might be more cost effective than de-funding NASA.

That wasn't the point and you know it. My post was simply pointing out that we're getting the most bang for our taxpayer buck from our brave men and women in the Armed Forces than we are from NASA....by a long shot. But you won't get any argument out of me with regard to bringing them home.

HitsRus;700800 wrote:NASA keeps us on the cutting edge technologically and helps gives those armed forces an advantage.

The Air Force and Navy conduct their own cutting edge tests. We don't need NASA to do that.

HitsRus;700800 wrote:It is somewhat of a moment of cognitive dissonance for us conservatives, but the reality is that we have to accept that NASA pushes the envelope, and when you do that you are going to have some failures.

Failures are certainly part of life, but let's let the private sector take the risks now. In an era where our nation is in deep financial stress, our taxpayer ROI from NASA is suspect.

GoChiefs;700733 wrote:I can't wait until I'm brought back from the dead and can jump into a phone booth and travel back in time 10,000 years! I didn't name a time line, so you can't debate that either, right?

I would never debate what the future will be like thousands of years from now, no. Planet Earth's demise along with its human population is inevitable, however. It may be longer than 10,000 years from now or 1,000,000 years but it is inevitable.

Here is a little piece that scratches the surface of the topic I raised.


http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2011-02/after-earth-why-where-how-and-when-we-might-leave-our-home-planet

If you think NASA is a waste you're either uninformed or an unabashed moron.

I Wear Pants;701576 wrote:If you think NASA is a waste you're either uninformed or an unabashed moron.

You're right....in an era where unabashed Big Government spending has brought our nation to the brink of economic disaster, we are morons for questioning why NASA spends hundreds of millions of dollars on failed global warming rockets. Thanks for keeping us informed.

Sure you can question NASA, like any other part of the budget, but you know damn well it's not the problem. It's funding has been around and at a pretty steady level for 50 + years. You want to fix the problem, then look at what's changed, and the mistakes that were made that created the budget deficit. Hint: it's not NASA. Yeah, NASA lost a $400 million satellite....but we have been spending that each and every day to fund the global war on terror for 8 years, while expanding entitlements, and cutting taxes too. Let's keep our eye on the ball.

believer;700764 wrote:I almost spewed my morning coffee when I read this one.

I bet you did. I don't think you really have a clue how many in the government work hard hard and due their jobs very well.

But that's right, less government is always better. Party like it's 1799! The free market solves everything.

believer;701713 wrote:You're right....in an era where unabashed Big Government spending has brought our nation to the brink of economic disaster, we are morons for questioning why NASA spends hundreds of millions of dollars on failed global warming rockets. Thanks for keeping us informed.

You're right, I'm sure they planned for it to fail and all they do is global warming work. They do nothing else.

Tobias Fünke;701814 wrote:I bet you did. I don't think you really have a clue how many in the government work hard hard and due their jobs very well.

But that's right, less government is always better. Party like it's 1799! The free market solves everything.

Actually I don't think you have a clue. The post office ruins your entire example. Lazy, inefficient, bankrupt, that is a microcosm of the government.

I know some Ohio State students who are shitbags. Therefore Ohio State is a shit college.

Same logic.

The post office being inefficient and becoming less and less relevant does nothing to thwart his point that not every government worker is lazy and not every government program is a worthless waste of money like many think.

sleeper;701918 wrote:Actually I don't think you have a clue. The post office ruins your entire example. Lazy, inefficient, bankrupt, that is a microcosm of the government.

It's pretty hard to measure "lazy" exactly, and saying it's a microcosm of government is a huge assumption.

I'm not a fan of the federal government but the state and local governments generally have their shit together in many areas. Don't get me wrong I want a slim and efficient machine running, and the government has a long way to go, but your assumptions make you look like a fool (what else is new).

sleeper;700192 wrote:http://curiosity.discovery.com/topic/transportation-science/ten-nasa-inventions1.htm

The first thing mentioned was invisible braces with a picture of Tom Cruise. You are using that as a rebuttal?

I Wear Pants;701934 wrote:I know some Ohio State students who are shitbags. Therefore Ohio State is a shit college.

Same logic.

The post office being inefficient and becoming less and less relevant does nothing to thwart his point that not every government worker is lazy and not every government program is a worthless waste of money like many think.

That's a terrible analogy and you know it.

Tobias Fünke;702632 wrote:It's pretty hard to measure "lazy" exactly, and saying it's a microcosm of government is a huge assumption.

I'm not a fan of the federal government but the state and local governments generally have their shit together in many areas. Don't get me wrong I want a slim and efficient machine running, and the government has a long way to go, but your assumptions make you look like a fool (what else is new).

You mean the bankrupt state government?

SMH. America is in the spot it is because people like you think they government is "good". It does some things well(infrastructure, national defense), but that's about it and you can take that to the bank.

said_aouita;702641 wrote:The first thing mentioned was invisible braces with a picture of Tom Cruise. You are using that as a rebuttal?

Inventions was my rebuttal. Shouldn't you be flippin' burgers? LOL

sleeper;702647 wrote:That's a terrible analogy and you know it.



You mean the bankrupt state government?

SMH. America is in the spot it is because people like you think they government is "good". It does some things well(infrastructure, national defense), but that's about it and you can take that to the bank.

It wasn't nearly as bad as yours.

I Wear Pants;702659 wrote:It wasn't nearly as bad as yours.

Mine wasn't an analogy, nice try though.