NASA vs. World Hunger?

Question

Does it bother anyone else that billions of dollars are being spent on space exploration while we have loads of problems at home on Earth? Wouldn't it make sense to give NASA a rest for a few years to solve some worldly problems and then maybe worry about what the hell is in space?

I'm not saying that NASA doesn't do good. I'm just saying that if we worked harder towards perfecting our home world, then it would be easier and more logical to explore further. It's like building another room onto your house when you've got holes in every other wall. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Answer 1

The money spent on NASA is negligible compared the the money being spent on wars, arms, and affiliated businesses (eg. oil).

If the money spent on wars and armaments, globally, in ONE DAY was spent toward eliminating poverty, it could eliminate global hunger for ONE YEAR!!

NASA - forget about it - - let's just stop fighting for ONE DAY!! This would probably eliminate most of the current conflict in the world!

I believe this to be the most horrible human trait, and there is certainly no lack of poor judgment and immorality in politicians!

Answer 2

First off, I am no fan of NASA. I think it wastes a lot of taxpayer money on programs that are of dubious value. That being said, I have to defend them here.

First off, the total budget for NASA is like 1 percent of the total federal budget. The entire NASA budget is about 10-12 billion a year. More is spent in Iraq in one week.

Second, as the other person said, many of the experiments that NASA does or finances have direct applications to problems here on earth. Even the ones that don't add to the total scienctific knowledge of the human race. And that may help world hunger.
Third, the world hunger issue is 100% political, not because there isn't enough money. As of today, there is enough food grown to feed everyone on earth enough food to survive on and then some. Did you know the government pays some farmers NOT to grow certain crops? Not too mention all the land used to grow crap like tobacco and stuff. So NASA isn't causing world hunger.

Forth, By that same logic, what else should we cut? Should we cut the EPA or DOE budgets too? What about the money that goes to the Smithsonian, or the national mall? It's not like those have a real critical purpose.

Fifth, the earth might one day become uninhabitable, be it due to global warming, a giant asteroid, nuclear war, alien invasion, whatever. Or maybe if we feed everyone it will just get too crowded. In any case, we need to have a backup plan to go elsewhere in the solar system and survive. Sitting here "solving earth problems first" won't help any of those problems.

Sixth, I want to go to space. Failing that, I want my daughter to go into space.While I think the private sector is the answer to that dream, you still need a government infrastructure and agency to help shepard that a long.

Answer 3

Money spent on NASA should in some way shape or form end up helping world hunger through research... But is there a better way to help solve the world hunger problem then putting money into NASA im sure there is... But But But Population control is probably the best long term answer to world hunger and sadly that should be something every person should be a part of helping with. Less people on the earth means more resorces for the living things on the earth. But I really dont think this is a job for goverment its more of a job for people like you and me who can make a choice to have a large family or a small one and the benefits / costs of making thouse choices. Some would argue that this isnt the best option and I can see there point of view a lil bit but as far as im concerned if I have children its gona be through adoption and thats a big if. I would much rather spend my time / energy helping thouse that are already here then to spend it on bringing more people into the world. Of course this is a long term plan as for short term plans... People need to learn to eat less and more friendly foods to the enviorment so it can support more foods. Right now we are running ourselfs out of food sorces and eating everything in sight its sickening in a way.

Answer 4

How about Iraq war vs. world hunger? How about education vs. world hunger? How about any other gov't program vs. world hunger? Is there a world hunger dept in the gov't? If we gave back all the money from NASA, would they just spend it on world hunger instead? Of course not.

The rest of us have some intellectual curiousity about the universe; I'm sorry you don't. NASA has the smallest budget of any gov't agency, but for every dollar they get, seven dollars are spent in the economy as a result. It's a fantastic investment in our country and our future.

Edit: Sure, we need to fix the world. Starting wars with other countries isn't the way to do it. If you cut anything, taking NASA's budget away does the least good and gets you the least money. Besides, we're quickly running out of room and resources here, and we need the technology to get them from space. Not to mention keeping the human race alive by diverting asteriods if necessary.

Answer 5

This same argumetn was brought up during Apollo when we were going to the Moon.I would suggest visiting the Center For Defense Information websites to get an idea of the Federal Budget is allocated (www.cdi.org). The respondents are correct. Most of our money is tied up in defense projects we don't need or a war which we don't need. NASA receives very very little projects.

George Bush gotta give him credit. He really knows how to put *** on the line and lead his troops on the front lines.

NASA has a number of peaceful applications. If you watch TV, want to know the weather, make long distance phone calls, you're using communication satellites. Take a guess who put them there. Who's maintaining them. What about the GPS system, that your cell-phone and maybe you're cars use? Not to mention all work that NASA does for other countries.

In addition, research performed in space has led to countless new produts and innovations. By studying Venus we learned about the Greenhouse effect on Earth. When we visited the Moon we learned how it was formed. With NASA we've been able to finally mankind's greatest questions.

In addition, NASA satellites are used by farmers an impoverished African counties to determine where to plant their crops. NASA is helping to bring the fight to world hunger by helping African-coutneis grow their agricultural output and feed their people.

From a Defense perspective, space is the ultimate high ground. It enables the military to track enemy movements and rescue lost soldiers.

Finally to quote a NASA astronaut, 'We came to explore the Moon and instead we ended up discovering ourselves'..

The issue isn't NASA vs. World hunger. It's politics in Washington that allow both good causes to be underfunded and underappreciated.

If you really want to attack the problem, impeach Bush and rescind the tax cuts to the wealthy.

Answer 6

Hell man, from what everyone else has said, I say we put NASA in charge.

**** Congress.

But no, honestly, why NASA man? They're the only ones that actually pull their weight and produce results.

More than half our budget is spent on the Millitary, why not just cut a couple NASA's out of their fatasses? They couldn't even prevent stop some yahoos from flying bowings into the WTC, after bening funnled billions of dollars a year for five decades. Then we give them even more money and they can't even stabalize a country the size of two Idaho's.

Heck! Let's put these NASA guys at the helm over there, they couldn't screw it up much worse.

So, yeah, back-off NASA, man. They're working on one of the BIGGEST problems and that is getting some of us the hell off this crowded, violent rock.

Answer 7

No. NASA's science division has provided extremely accurate weather forecasting and invaluable crop forecasts. The two things alone have saved millions of people. The technologies that NASA develops are worth more than the cost of agency. Kidney dialysis, remote medical monitoring, kevlar, and the entire semiconductor industry are just a few of the benefits of NASA. It might even be true that abolishing NASA would cost more lives.

Answer 8

I like the previous answer, and would like to add something. NASA does hundreds of experiments on the Space Station trying to solve the worlds problems. For example, on a mission my friends' father was on, they studied farming methods for the harsh Mars terrain, and in the process discovered a new irrigation method now used to farm in the Middle Eastern deserts. This is just a taste of the good things that come from NASA. I also think that studying beyond our visible horizons inspires us to think beyond what may seem reasonable, forcing us to think new thoughts; a very important aspect of science.

Answer 9

No one has said anything about what each of us can do.
How many dollars do each of us spend each year on the newest computers, MP3 players, PlayStations, the hottest new cell phones, software, DVD players, and all the rest of that technology that none of us really need.
Instead of hundreds of dollars on an iPod, that money could go to the Daily Bread Food Bank to feed hundreds of families in our own communities. Or to WorldVision to help third world countries help their people build lives.
Why do we have to assume the government is responsible for helping others if we aren't willing to do anything ourselves?
We can't blame the people we elect for spending money on "frivolous" things when we all do it ourselves every day.

Spend a few bucks where it REALLY counts.
Check out www.worldvision.com for some real inspiration.

Answer 10

The only thing we can really hope for is that they make a discovery in space that will actually help us eliminate hunger. Because they sure as heck are'nt doing much about it now. Of course, being able to zap greedy war and ganglords from outter space would really help too.