After watching this video, anyone still wants to cut funding for NASA?

[erowe1]

I don't hold everything our goverment does at fault or should be done away with. I don't hold everybody who works for the goverment at fault or should be fired. I hold those who are responsible, the ones in charge. There are good people at NASA, there are bad people at NASA. There were good programs and bad programs. There was money wasted and money well spent. You can't just say everything NASA has done has been a waste or everyone who has worked for them are unexceptional people. Your either this-or that is not applicable here, only a Sith speaks in absolutes. There were exceptional NASA programs and people, and unexceptional NASA programs and people. Everything our goverment touches has been corrupted, no doubt about that. But that does not mean EVERYTHING is bad, or corrupted, or unexceptional. The NeoCons would love nothing more then endless wars partially enabled by a society that thinks itself so rightous and exceptional that whatever we are doing must be rightous. What I am saying is America and Americans have good reasons to feel that they/we are exceptional and that the NeoCons are trying to hijack it for their own purpose. But just because they are trying to use our pride against us to comit attrocities is no reason to go around and say we have no reason to be proud of what we are. If this was the case the Tea Party would not exist. Guns don't kill people, people kill people...pride doesn't inflict injustice, the inflictors inflict injustice. If you want to ban our pride because the NeoCons are trying to use it to harm people, then why not ban guns because the criminals are trying to use them to harm people.

American exceptionalism and pride is justified, truthful, and beneficial. It can also be manipulated, harmful, and dangerous. But I will be damned if I'm gona give up my gun because others are trying to use them to harm people, and I will be damned if I'm gona give up my American pride because others are trying to use it to harm people.

I still don't know the answer to my question. Which kind of American exceptionalism are you for, exceptionalism of the people or exceptionalism of the federal government?

Your earlier comment was about the latter (NASA), but your subsequent defense of it only mentioned the former.

 

[Fredom101]

If by "funding" you mean anything taken by force, by all means cut it.

As a matter of fact I'll bet if it wasn't for the various government monopolies crippling our advancement there would be a bunch of private organizations with space tech far surpassing anything NASA has ever offered.

Exactly! +1000

 

[devil21]

You don't have to be better than everyone else to be exceptional.

This is true. Don't they call retarded kids "exceptional"? "Special" too? lol

The american people are exceptional, not all but alot, but not our goverment.

See above. In this context I think the federal government is also extremely exceptional.

 

[Texan4Life]

The only things that would survive are the things that make money (telecomunication satellites, geographical satellites for business purposes, etc). The "curiosity" stuff would totally disappear...im cool with that. Mankind will never exit the solar system or colonize anything...so...

maybe, maybe not. a lot of discoveries/inventions are made out of curiosity or even a lucky hunch. With all levels of funding. Excluding that though, imagine commercial companies wanting to build better rockets/propulsion systems/electronics, ect. for launching satellites. While this technology isn't necessarily made for space exploration, it can be adapted/modified/improved on easier than starting from scratch NASA style.

Though I think we can all agree NASA isn't anywhere near to top of the "programs to cut" list.

 

[spudea]

if NASA is so great, put it in the private competitive marketplace

It would probably get a lot more funding that way than having a central authority dictate its budget.

 

[doodle]

if NASA is so great, put it in the private competitive marketplace

It would probably get a lot more funding that way than having a central authority dictate its budget.

The risk is that opening up the competition and allowing free market enterprise into this field might diminish their "greatness".

 

[BlutStein]

If the government took over shopping malls, people like you would pop up a generation from now insisting that government shopping malls never be defunded because of all the good things about shopping malls that wouldn't exist any more if the government didn't make it happen.

Your reply would be correct if this weren't the Ron Paul Forum. I'm here for a reason remember? NASA does do it correctly, but I won't claim they the only ones that can...just that they currently are the only ones doing it. I'd love to have a private alternative but for $15 billion a year they are the slimmest project the government has going and the only the one that gives us back results equal to or multiple times what is paid in. Some of their discoveries are priceless.

I understand none of the arguments I put forth that are pro-nasa will work here but for the money, NASA is the only thing you can point to and say the government can do something right.

BTW the multiple space shuttle launches a year that NASA does is less than 20% of their budget, the rest is all research which you personally have benefited from whether you will admit it or not.

 

[mczerone]

Surprisingly NASA is the one single part of our government that I don't think should have anything cut from it. Rather sure I'm in the minority on this one though.

NASA is either the smallest government program we have or one of the very smallest ($15-17 Billion) and is the only part of our government that gives us back way more than we ever put into it.

1) Source?

2) All the more reason to allow competing private investments in the stuff NASA does. If a worthy project can make money, would it make more money in the hands of a monopolist, or distributed among competing firms?

Not only do it help us further our education system with discoveries that force us to rewrite our textbooks, but they do also create thousands of technologies and patents that create spin-offs that make it into the economy. These spin-offs form companies, release new products onto the market and create jobs.

Website showing everyday items that stemmed from NASA: http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/nasacity/index2.htm

Edocation system embiggened by NASA? What has been learned by NASA that couldn't have been learned from private research? How many dozens of Hubble-type telescopes would have went up and actually worked the first time?

And your link has absolute crap, for a illustrative example: In the Kitchen (great UM song, btw) lists "water purification" as one of the things "NASA brought us", but the accompanying text and video explain that NASA is working with private industry to adapt previous technology to the needs of space. So not only is NASA dependent on private R&D for such basic things as water filtration, but they can't even adapt the designs on their own. And little to none of NASA's work helps, can help, or will ever help you.

What seals the deal for me is when you compare the whole of NASA's budget for one year next to the Iraq War. Would you rather expand Man's knowledge of our Universe or pay roll maybe 2 week in Iraq blowing up children and country side.

See...I even made it really easy for you there. Seriously, NASA is one of the very few things are government does correctly. I'm for private companies working in space too but while getting close, we aren't there yet and I doubt some of the for profit space companies will be doing as much medical research and helping to fund a lot of University research.

Ahh... "would you rather"... watch a Rosie O'Donnell movie marathon, or run a marathon carrying the actress on your shoulders? To answer your question, I'd rather spend my money on NASA. Which is why they should stop paying their own salaries as a cut for my support to NASA. It's called the internet. I can donate to, patronize, or buy an interest in private companies 24/7 from wherever I can find wifi. I don't need DC spending money to first take it from me, then decide how to spend it, then defend their choice, and then set up an agency to decide how best to spend it, and then actually get around to doing so space research. You advocate taking money from NASA for the benefit of suits in DC.

And you do realize that the only reason private industry isn't "there" to compete against NASA is because the govt doesn't need to worry about profit and losses in areas that crowd out competition, like buying labor, right? NASA enjoys a govt-subsidized monopoly. How do you compete against that?