English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-12-04 05:23:04 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

17 answers

Yes.

Considering the tiny fraction of the U.S. federal budget NASA actually gets (look it up yourself, and be astonished), it's excellent value. Quite different from flushing gigabucks down the toilet in Iraq.

Sure, NASA has its issues. But that doesn't mean the money is wasted.

2007-12-04 06:04:29 · answer #1 · answered by laurahal42 6 · 2 0

. This is really a tough question. I like space exploration a lot. But the arguments made for continuing space exploration are disengenuous. We do not really expect that research on the international space station or anything which comes from a trip to Mars will really improve the quality of life on Earth in a physical sense. The only reason to go to Mars is to satisfy the human drive to explore. For some people, that is reason enough. An economic analysis would say it is a foolish endeavor.
. On the other hand, there is no reason to think that the money spent on space exploration would be redirected to the starving if space exploration were discontinued. It would logically be retained by the taxpayers if it were not going to be spent on NASA. Then you would be back to hoping that individuals would form and fund an organization which would make a substantial impact on the plight of the hungry.
. So far, the individuals, that is the taxpayers, have been, in the aggregate, through the representation of their legislators, willing to fund NASA, while they have made no outcry to give their tax money to the hungry.

2007-12-04 05:55:45 · answer #2 · answered by PoppaJ 5 · 1 0

NASA is the one US government agency which is a demonstrable positive return on investment. A large amount of the great technology we enjoy today exists because of NASA and it's efforts. Satellites in space make so much of what we take for granted possible in this world including cell phones, television, weather monitoring both for short-term forecasting and long term observation to better understand weather in general, GPS, and so much more.

The money spent on NASA doesn't get loaded into a space ship and launched into space never to be seen again. It goes back into our economy. The work NASA does creates thousands of skilled jobs all over the country and has always stimulated economic and technological growth in many industries. The money given to NASA pays professional workers and gets filtered back into our own economy.

What's more, the amount of money NASA gets from the gov't is so very small compared to many other things that we do, not the least of which is wartime spending. If you want to find sources of government wastefulness, NASA is one of the last places that one should look. The amount of money that goes there is not significant, and what does go there brings many benefits to the US and mankind as a whole.

2007-12-04 06:31:57 · answer #3 · answered by Arkalius 5 · 3 0

Sadly we have no choice on how nasa is given money because all we do is pay taxes and our amazing government takes alot of money from other programs such as social security as a loan but it never pays it back and then claims that social security is going broke, But on the good note nasa does need to study and explore space because we must have a place to go to after humans have destroyed the earth and over populate it so far that it can no longer be the mother earth that it was just 100 years ago, So yes we need to support nasa, in my own opinion

2007-12-04 05:49:19 · answer #4 · answered by SPACEGUY 7 · 2 0

There is hardly a choice here. What NASA does can not be replaced easily by a non-government entity sufficiently different from NASA.

The questions have to be:

Should we change NASA management structure and oversight? Absolutely.

Should we give the science community control over NASA science and technology goals rather than Congress and the president? Absolutely.

2007-12-04 05:35:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

We should spend money on manned and unmanned space exploration and colonization. Whether NASA should be involved should be reconsidered. The private sector, constrained by acquisition of capital to fund the development of spacecraft, and dependent upon incremental successes to continue, will always be much more successful than government projects attempting to do the same thing and having an unlimited budget with which to do it.

2007-12-04 05:55:08 · answer #6 · answered by David Bowman 7 · 0 0

yes because that NASA gave use tools that we use on earth they measure soil the know what is coming to earth and they can help geologist,math,astronomers,physics,engineers,and they make dreams that people on earth wants to do and they can even win a war like the space race with the russians and the americans when they where at war. that is my we should spend our money to space exploration. LADRE WERO future astronaut

2015-02-02 12:11:02 · answer #7 · answered by Ladre 1 · 0 0

Yes, so long as we don't spend $300 on a hammer, $450 on a socket wrench, or $1500 for a toilet seat cover!
But, even with that, it sure makes for a better government investment than killing Iraqi babies!

2007-12-04 15:08:06 · answer #8 · answered by David H. 5 · 0 0

Absolutely. NASA, or any other entity which strives to expand Man's presence into space.

2007-12-04 05:48:43 · answer #9 · answered by quantumclaustrophobe 7 · 1 0

No, they have proven they can't make good on the investment.

However, we should definitely spend lots and lots of money on some sort of space program, possibly run by private enterprise. The potential rewards of space travel are frankly ridiculous. It would be the worst kind of stupidity to give up on the infinite wealth of space because some government eggheads can't be practical.

2007-12-04 05:27:56 · answer #10 · answered by juicy_wishun 6 · 3 3

fedest.com, questions and answers