Why does the world waste so much money on space exploration, and mars rovers???

Question

I just think it is such a waste with millions of people in the world starving and homeless, or without clothing or meds. Dont you think we could use the money helping with these things instead?

Answer 1

Because their priorities are mixed up.

It's all about who can do what amazing thing before the other and the "look what we can do" factor. This goes for sports too. All the money put into the space program and the incomes of the pro. athletes should go for poverty and the people in the USA who needs help. How about the deficit and health care and social security!?!?!!

Answer 2

The world is NOT wasting huge amounts of money on space. We ARE wasting huge amounts of money on war. The cost of space exploration is insignificant by comparison while its value for humanity is enormous. Do you have any idea how byproducts of space exploration, like solar power and cheap computers, have improved the lives of the very poor you speak of? What benefits for humanity has that little chindig in Iraq yielded? Or maybe you think weapons of mass destruction are a better investment since it would be so much easier to just kill all the poor and starving. Problem solved, right? If all americans would get off their fat asses and exercise for just 30 minutes per day it would save the US health care system several NASA budgets every year in reduced obesity related illnesses...

Answer 3

18 answers in 45 minutes has to be a record. Without reading any of them I'm sure the consensus is that it is hardly a waste for all the knowledge we have from the cost of the projects. That knowledge always trickles down and spreads out to the benefit of the whole civilization. We must evolve because stagnation as a species means we will die out, and knowledge is the upward movement to a greater and higher level of being. The whole universe is waiting for us, not this tiny ball on the far arm of an average to small spiral galaxy.

Answer 4

You are under the misguided impression that the "saved" money would be spent on starving and homeless people. We already have the means to feed and house everyone on earth. We have chosen not to, because it helps us make even more money.

We have excess food stocks that we prefer to destroy in order to maintain the high prices needed for our system to be profitable. As for the meds, we all know that we, ourselves, are so greedy that if we gave meds away to the poor, we would find a way to bribe them into selling them back to us at a price lower than the companies charge us. Because we are greedy.

The money used for space exploration does not come from a "feed the poor" budget. It comes from a combination of "defense" and "scientific research" budgets, and it is a very small percentage of the money we use to build new weapons to protect ourselves from the rest of the world. So, any money "saved" from space exploration will simply return to defense.

Personally, I believe that the money spent on exploration is less wasted than when it is spent on the next generation of nuclear weapons.

Answer 5

True, but millions of people are also curious. In addition, they are thinking that once the earth is on the verge of overpopulation, they would be able to terraform mars (change the landscape) to be more like earths and send people to live there. But mainly, it is curiosity. Why do people study quantum physics and all that? its the same thing, it is not helping people but still lots of money goes or went into research. its also a waste to spend a billion dollars a day to kill people in where there was no need. Also, we have the money to do these things, but millions of us govt dollars of whose know where for pointless stuff that politicians make bigger or go unnoticed

Answer 6

Damnit! I'm so sick of hearing this argument, especially from people who aren't doing THEIR part! You've obviosly got a computer, eh? Why did you buy it instead of helping the homeless? Why do you have any of the luxury things you own when so many in this world are starving?? How much have you contributed to the poor this week? This government spent $4 billion on welfare JUST THIS WEEK! And you want to piss and moan about the 1 or 2% that goes toward scientific research that is constantly adding to the quality of your life, whether you know it or not?

So what's the deal? As long as their's one hungry person in the world, not a dime goes toward advancing the knowledge of humanity, even though this world is already so much better for it? Tell me that after you've given away everything to the poor except one change of clothes and a tent.

In 2005, total federal revenue for the US was about $2 trillion. Of that, $25 billion went to funding for science research and space exploration - sounds like a lot, huh? About 1%? A bit more ($5 billion more) went to food stamps. About twice as much more, $50 billion, went toward Iraq operations. About 8 times as much went toward criminal justice, prosecuting and incarcerating people who think they they have a right to take your life or property for themselves. 12 times as much, $300 billion went to Medicare, to make up for those who don't have enough of their own health insurance. And 20 times as much went to defense, to protect your sorry whining azz from all the fuggin' psychos busting their azzes to nuke New York, DC, and L.A.

Sorry for sounding like a rant, but the fact is, I think there would be LESS people starving and homeless right now if in the last 20 years, our government had spent just a couple percent more on advancing science and medicine for EVERYONE'S benefit and shaved a bit off of defense and welfare rather than caving in to the ill-informed and short-sighted attitude that you are projecting.

.

Answer 7

I agree with you, we shouldn't be wasting money on any space exploration when we've got starving, homeless people in the world. In fact, we should stop wasting money on movies, music, sports, because they don't do anything for the starving, homeless people (well, but we do have Bono). Let's also stop wasting money on celebrities, Harry Potter books, yachts, because the money going to them could have fed and housed so many people around the world. As a matter of fact, we can stop wasting money on most of the churches and what they spend for televised shows, because, really, only a tiny fraction of it is going anywhere near the people they are claiming to help. And unless you plan on a career in helping the starving, homeless people in the world, we should not waste money in your college education. What's the point?

Answer 8

I do agree with you, but also put my hand up for science.
Nothing should ever stand in our way when it comes to learning.
Many people don't agree with me, but I think that the money put into exploring space will be rewarded for human beings one day. In many many years from now, people will be able to live in space and create a whole new planet that humans can actually live on. How? I don't know, but did people just one hundred years ago imagine that an American would be able to talk to an Australian and send him letters instantly through the net, I really don't think so.

So back to your question:
I think there should be a good balance between spending money on learning (and exploring space comes under that), and between helping the needy people. I also don't think that money should be clustered in some rich celebrity's account waiting to be spent on a plastic surgery or house number ten. I don't mean to go and take those people's money and for them to spend it on needy ones - but to create a balance.

Now how, that's another question! Interesting, huh?

Answer 9

I believe it should be privately funded. If space exploration is so important then convince some philanthropists to plunk a chunk of cash into it. Why not spend the saved money on paying down our debts or for better education - just not on endless war or some hobby for some wannabe astronauts.

Answer 10

This is an age-old question, and has to do with the future of mankind.

The simple version of the argument is that man can only advance if he moves into the future (climbs the mountain), but cannot advance if all he does is try to solve current problems (lives in the past).

There is no way that all current problems can be solved, because as quickly as one is solved, people will come up with another one.

An example of alternatives would be to ask about feeding starving peoples. Is it better to feed them, always, or try to convince parents not to have any more kids? You see? Solve the current problem, or address the future.

Positions are cast in concrete, and totally inflexible. Those who want to solve current problems are unable to look into the future - they only see NOW as the imparative. They will feed starving children, only to have them grow up and have MORE children, because someone is feeding them. It is an endless circle.

Can't you see that it may be more kind to let a few die to make a point, and then tell them that the world cannot continue to feed you, so STOP HAVING KIDS! But I doubt you can even understand that argument...

Answer 11

A lot of people feel as you do.I think it's a mistake.There's no guarantee that money would be spent on the poor or starving.Besides History has taught us throwing money at these things,does not really help at all.Plus do you like cell phones,cable TV,GPS? all of it the fruits of the Space program.In addition many medicines have been developed in space.A broader look at the Space Program is a good idea for everyone.