NASA takes first step toward landing on the moon.

[lawdog77]

Because the federal government has the ability to piss away more taxpayer money.
And we know what the federal government loves.

NASA's budget is .24% of the federal budget. I think we get a good ROI for that amount. Some nice shiny things for what is actually less than a drop in the bucket.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

*gestures at the world around us*

All kidding aside, to see if we can become an interplanetary species.  Harder to go extinct that way.

Next step for humanity.

The history of the earth suggests that we will go extinct at some point.  Almost all species have.  And regardless, unless we perfect interstellar travel, we will be going extinct when the sun goes red giant.

[brewcity77]

The history of the earth suggests that we will go extinct at some point.  Almost all species have.  And regardless, unless we perfect interstellar travel, we will be going extinct when the sun goes red giant.

I don't know, the wealthiest of us seem intent on accelarating that timetable significantly.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Different topic dip.  Piss, let me know when the 30 trillion debt gets paid off.

There are many, many places one might examine in order to reduce government spending. NASA's budget is miniscule. Fully eliminating its ~$20B annual budget would amount to less than a rounding error.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Different topic dip.  Piss, let me know when the 30 trillion debt gets paid off.

It won't be and doesn't need to be.

[NCMUFan]

Guess that is the attitude that got us a 30 trillion debt.
Solution, print more phony money and go into debt more.

[wadesworld]

Guess that is the attitude that got us a 30 trillion debt.
Solution, print more phony money and go into debt more.

The last time the US was nearly 200 years ago.

[NCMUFan]

Did you mean 22 years ago under Clinton?
The $ just isn't worth to much is it?

[Jockey]

OK, but why go to Mars?

Knowledge. Technological development.

I am pretty ambivalent about the whole matter, but there are definitely reasons to go. Mankind has always expanded their horizons.

I'm sure Queen Isabela had discussions about whether traveling to an unknown world was worth the trouble. Why bother? It was just more land that looked like the land they already lived on.

The only question should be about ROI.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Queen Isabela was expecting Columbus to bring her back stuff.

[Hards Alumni]

The history of the earth suggests that we will go extinct at some point.  Almost all species have.  And regardless, unless we perfect interstellar travel, we will be going extinct when the sun goes red giant.

Right, which is why we should try to change that.  Sun won't be a factor for 5 billion years.  So I think we have some time.

[NCMUFan]

Seriously, you think going to the Mars is going to save mankind.  I would have thought going to the Moon would have done the trick.  Please.

[Hards Alumni]

Seriously, you think going to the Mars is going to save mankind.  I would have thought going to the Moon would have done the trick.  Please.

It's a stepping stone, as I mentioned earlier.  Do try to keep up. 

I'm sure you'll be fine if the federal budget isn't balanced... and since the federal budget isn't a small business I think we're going to be just fine.

[jesmu84]

Did you mean 22 years ago under Clinton?
The $ just isn't worth to much is it?

The US didn't carry federal debt while Clinton was in office?

[NCMUFan]

Below are the budgetary results for President Clinton's two terms in office:

Sorry, guess he turned it around.

He had budget surpluses for fiscal years 1998–2001, the only such years from 1970 to 2018. Clinton's final four budgets were balanced budgets with surpluses, beginning with the 1997 budget.
The ratio of debt held by the public to GDP, a primary measure of U.S. federal debt, fell from 47.8% in 1993 to 33.6% by 2000. Debt held by the public was actually paid down by $453 billion over the 1998-2001 periods, the only time this happened between 1970 and 2018.
Federal spending fell from 20.7% GDP in 1993 to 17.6% GDP in 2000, below the historical average (1966 to 2015) of 20.2%

[Jockey]

Queen Isabela was expecting Columbus to bring her back stuff.

That's why I said that our biggest criteria should be ROI. Elon Musk isn't investing his own money because he wants to help mankind. He is looking only at his bottom line. He will make money by going to Mars.

So, regarding NASA, the question becomes - can the gov't get a positive ROI?

[NCMUFan]

Remember, the government isn't a small business that needs to be fiscally accountable.

[JWags85]

Seriously, you think going to the Mars is going to save mankind.  I would have thought going to the Moon would have done the trick.  Please.

You're missing the point of every tangential benefit to NASA.  For 60+ years, NASA has been unintentionally inventing products that improve human life as it attempts to solve problems with space travel.  So there is 60+ years of track record showing that an attempt to travel to/inhabit/colonize Mars will not just make humans "interplanetary", but more realistically will create 10s, if not hundreds, of new technologies or uses for existing tech, that will make the lives of normal earthbound people.  Thats why you keep pushing

[NCMUFan]

Geeze, I would have thought all these great inventions would have created tremendous tax revenues to keep the government out of debt.

[JWags85]

Geeze, I would have thought all these great inventions would have created tremendous tax revenues to keep the government out of debt.

In the best of years, erasing NASA wouldn't even remove 10% of the annual deficit.  And the benefits of NASA and its scientific endeavors are vast, no matter if you want to mock them or not.  But you keep wanting to boil it down to DURR SPACE TRAVEL DURR.  There are countless other government waste spots to b***h about.  If you want to carve out defense spending to go to NASA instead, you won't get complaints from me, but NASA is a really stupid "anti-government debt" punching bag.

[NCMUFan]

Wow, sorry, guess I hit a sore spot.
It's all a sham buddy.

[wadesworld]

Geeze, I would have thought all these great inventions would have created tremendous tax revenues to keep the government out of debt.

Again, the government hasn't been out of debt in almost 200 years. I don't know what you mean by Clinton years, but the US has been in debt since 1837.

[Hards Alumni]

Geeze, I would have thought all these great inventions would have created tremendous tax revenues to keep the government out of debt.

Smooth brained people worry about government debt, and just see a number getting bigger.

HOW ON EARTH WILL WE AFFORD DIAPERS NEXT QUARTER????????

[Jockey]

Smooth brained people Mediocre white people worry about government debt, and just see a number getting bigger.

HOW ON EARTH WILL WE AFFORD DIAPERS NEXT QUARTER????????

FIFY

[NCMUFan]

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/102413/why-and-when-do-countries-default.asp