Why do we have NASA? How does NASA help the world?

Answer 1

This same question was asked a few days ago. This was my answer to that qestion, and it applies equally well to this one:

I often hear people ask why we're spending money on space exploration when there are people who need food, clothing etc. on Earth, but this is a very narrow perspective. There have always been poor people, and there will always be poor people. It's a fact. Dismantling NASA and every other government organization will not change this.

As for spending the money on schools, isn't NASA an educational tool itself? The knowledge gained from space exploration and other things NASA does is a huge educational resource. Limiting our knowledge to Earth and ignoring anything beyond our atmosphere certainly won't make anyone smarter.

There are other areas that the money could be used in, but how do we decide were to spend the money? One obvious question here is why anyone would critisize NASA's budget without mentioning the military's budget. The war in Iraq costs as much as NASA's annual budget in what, two months? There are many costly government programs that are much less beneficial than NASA. And instead of spending money on hospitals, why not spend it on programs to help people quit smoking or community sports to make people healthier, thereby reducing health care costs? Or why not spend it on education, defence, building roads, foreign aid, and on and on. NASA's benefit isn't immediately recognizable to the average Joe because the average Joe probably doesn't look at the big picture and realize how necessary the ability to colonize space will soon be. To the average Joe, space colonies probably seem silly.

But the colonization of space is not silly, and it will become NASA's most important function in the future. There are 6 billion people on the planet today and this number is growing exponentially. Do you think we'll be able to maintain centuries of this growth with our limited resources? It's obvious that we'll need to expand for living space, resources and possibly a healthier environment. As a teacher of mine once said, what if we could extract all of our resources from barren, lifeless planets rather than destroying the one we live on? There's a limit to what we have on Earth, we need alternatives, and soon.

Answer 2

As an American taxpayer, I want NASA to do things that benefit the USA. I am happy when that also benefits everyone else.

The good news that all the basic research NASA does is done very publicly and shared broadly even with nations that have contributed nothing.

NASA also maintains a couple of "technology transfer" offices that help companies exploit and profit from the technologies that NASA has developed.

Some examples of NASA technology and influence: remote medical monitoring, kidney dialysis, kevlar, untold advances in metallurgy, the entire semiconductor industry, food preservation, hydroponics, and list goes on.

You can never tell what will happen when you do basic research. Something will come out of it even it it isn't what you intended. A good example is Aspartame, the artificial sweetener. It was discovered by a researcher working on a heart medication.

Answer 3

NASA was created in the 60's to head up space/rocket research for the goverment, specifically the space race with the Russians. NASA is a bargain for the public. It operates on something like 15 billion a year which pales in comparison to other government programs, yet yields many benifits to the public. NASA research is not just in space, many programs study the earth and help us better understand the damage we are doing so that, hopefully, one day we can start to solve the problem. It was NASA scientists that discovered and documented global warming. NASA also maintains an Office of Technology Transfer. Being a goverment non-profit organization, NASA shares it's technology for FREE with private industry. Some of the benefits of this are things like more efficient lasers, better navigation systems for commercial aircraft and even miniaturized efficient pumps that are now being used to make artifical hearts, just to name a few.

Answer 4

The potential of space is very great, but at present there is high risk
and little immediate payoff. The major market for space services is
government; while private markets will develop, they haven't yet, and
probably won't until access costs are lower. There isn't a great deal of
private incentive to bring those access costs down because the markets
have not been developed. Lowering access costs and developing space
markets requires a long term commitment. The return from that will be
high, but it's in the future.

The discounted value of a dollar in 15 years is effectively zero. What
will you give me if I promise to pay you $1000 in 15 to 20 years?

It isn't reasonable for private companies to do long term investments.
Bell Labs where the transistor was invented was special and doesn't
exist any more. There is nothing else like it. We have no institutions
charged with long term technology development. This puts the United
States at a distinct disadvantage, because not all nations have our
limitations on futurist development.

We all know that sometime in the next century, space will be very
important to the international economy. It's not rational for any
private company to do space development research. Someone must. That
leaves government. Adam Smith held that enterprises in which the risk is
high, the return to all is great, and the benefit to any one investor is
problematical, are proper subjects for government attention. This is a
good example: the return is high, but more to the next generation than
this one.

The legitimate mission of NASA is to do long term technology
developments in aeronautical and space sciences; and to make the results
available to American companies for exploitation.

In other words, the purpose of NASA is to look ahead of the profit
window and identify promising aerospace technologies for future
development.

The way to demonstrate new technological discoveries and identify the
technologies needing further research and development is through X
projects.

Answer 5

well this question is rather debatable. Those who are for NASA would say that the money spent is worth it as it is important for scientists to know what is in outer space. They would claim that the information that they get through launching space crafts and robots to space is essential for the advancement for science.

However those against NASA would claim that the US government has been pouring too much of the tax payers money into the organisation when it could be better used for education or health care. They would argue that there is no substantial benefit for mankind so far and the money invested in NASA is wasted.

Answer 6

Definitely Disney World

Answer 7

NASA is a make-work full-employment jobs program leftover from when we actually did things in space.

Answer 8

meteorology and mabe we may immigrate into some other planets in the next decade

Answer 9

meteorology from space?