Re: Space funding (was Re: Hillary needs to quit)

Dano wrote:
> Mac Breck wrote:
>> Dano wrote:
>>>
>>> It all adds up.  You have to start somewhere.
>>
>> Yes, but you don't *START* with a relatively small budget like
>> NASA's. They (politicians like Obama) go there because NASA looks
>> like an easy target, *BECAUSE* there are soooo many people who think
>> solely short term and close to home.
>>
>
> Relative to *what*?

The military, definitely.  Education, probably.


>>> And I'm certainly *not*
>>> suggesting we *only* cut the funding of NASA.  I'm not even
>>> proposing...nor is Obama that we disband the entire program...just
>>> delay this specific, very expensive one.
>>
>> Hasn't NASA had its budget cut in the past, probably several times?
>>
>
> I honestly don't know.  This seems to be *your* binky.  You tell me.

I wasn't asking just you, but the group.  I was hoping somebody else
here would know.


>>> We ARE fighting a war you
>>> know.  In case you missed every daily paper for several freaking
>>> years!  End *that* first and let's talk.
>>
>> That's a bit of a strawman.  It's not an either/or situation.  NASA's
>> funding is not dependant upon the ending of the war.  The NASA budget
>> and the war don't make up the entire budget.
>>
>
> I know NASA's is "relatively" small.  I think you need to pull your
> head out of the stars for a second if you can't recognize the size,
> impact and cost of this war.  You're the big "science" guy...the math
> should not give you such a problem.  You could start by googling the
> federal deficit and it's increase during thse war years.  We are
> going very deeply into debt...much of it held by our good friends the
> Chinese.

There you go again, going off of the topic, practicing diversions.


> <snip>
>
>>> Unfortunately, it's not done.  Private enterprise could be much more
>>> cost effective...even profitable.
>
>> Business thinks short term, too.  Nobody wants to take the risk.  A
>> government agency has to pave the way.
>
> We won't even think long term about our mundane affairs here on
> earth...like health care...education...our infrastructure, you know,
> our roads and bridges, like the one that collapsed in Minnesota last
> summer.  Do you realize how many of those are lacking in the funds to
> repair them?  How many pennies a day to "fix" all of that?

More diversions.


>>>> So, profit is a better motivator than survival?
>>>
>>>
>
>>> If you're talking imminent survival it might be...
>
>> If we were talking imminent survival, you can kiss your butt goodbye,
>> 'cause were all as good as dead.
>
> Really?  Then why are we even having this conversation.  That might
> be the dumbest thing you've said.

?  No, I think your reply won the "dumbest thing said" prize.


>> If NASA's budget is up to op****tunistic politicians, bean counters
>> and voters like you, they might as well close up shop right now,
>> because pretty soon, they won't be able to afford coffee.
>
> If you don't care about all the other things these "beans" are needed
> for, then I agree.  Close up.  Might as well anyway since you don't
> even think we're going to survive.  **** it.  Let's all just get high
> and watch Battlestar Galactica!

Good grief, you're not making *any* sense.  Hell, I think my dog has
better comprehension.  Don't feel too bad though; he is a German
Shepherd and is a pretty damned smart dog.

This is pointless.

-- 
Mac Breck (KoshN)
-------------------------------
"The Dresden Files" (2007)
Harry Dresden: [re. Bianca] What is it about bad girls?  They lie,
cheat, won't suck your blood even when you beg them to, and for some
reason, no matter how badly they treat us, we still can't walk away.