Let's see....CAT scans, microcomputers, pretty much anything that has been made smaller and/or lighter, weather satellites to warn us of hurricanes, communication satellites to help us talk to one another in emergencies, GPS systems to locate the missing, and direct emergency aid to the correct locations, etc, etc, etc.......
All these and many more are either directly from the space program, or are spin-off technology.
The space program DOES help the world's people, and does it for a minute fraction of our budget.
Imagine what we'd have if we spent a little more....
2007-08-14 11:59:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by tyrsson58 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well, like the saying says - "Give a man a fish, and he eats for today. Teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime."
We *do* spend billions on crop research, farming techniques, clean energy research, etc. - and the 0.2% of our national budget spent on space wouldn't amount to much more than a drop in the bucket in that arena.
The fact that Earth has more than 6 *billion* humans living today is testament to the fact that research is not only extending life, but making more life possible. You want to prevent starving? Force the 1.3 billion Chinese or the 1 billion Indians or the 1.5 billion Europeans to slow down their breeding practices.
2007-08-14 15:25:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by quantumclaustrophobe 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
NASA gets $17billion this financial year. The US department of health gets $700 billion, and the department of defence gets $580billion. More money than is being spent of the space program is being spent purely on building new weapons systems. Now you tell me what difference those few billion dollars from space research are going to make to the hundreds of billions of dollars already being spent helping people.
2007-08-14 17:28:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by Jason T 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The "so-called supper powers"? Who are they? Rachel Ray? Martha Stewart? And what kind of supper powers do they have? Lobster Themador en crevette with a lovely white wine sauce and a fried egg on top and spam? Or are we talking mac and cheese?
The U.S. currently spends almost all the money that used to go to NASA on feeding the rest of the ungrateful world, only to see all that largesse pocketed by tinpot dictators and despots, who let the food rot on the docks so that they can retain control over their starving populace.
2007-08-14 15:53:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by Dave_Stark 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, I agree with you. We should use that money to buy everyone supper. Maybe even breakfast!
On the other hand if we buy all the poor people their meals, their population will increase and the problem will be worse.
How about a "sterilization for food" program, would you agree with that?
2007-08-14 15:25:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Here we go again...
The relatively small amount actually spent on space programs would hardly impact the amount of money already going towards social programs.
It seems we could use more money put towards education, though...
2007-08-14 15:24:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by most important person you know 3
·
0⤊
1⤋