Bush to announce manned moon mission another fine example of bait and switch

[TartPops]

Link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107807,00.html)

He also wants to build a permanent space station on the moon.:rolleyes:

Why do I think that no word about how much this little scheme will cost will be brought up during his announcement.

'Of course, we know that over a decade ago, the cost was estimated to be over $400 billion.

So I think it's quite fair to assume that since this is a program that would pretty much have to start from the ground up, we are looking at a cost of at least $150 billion, and that is probably way, way, way on the low side

Tell me, Shrub, where the fuck is the money for this going to come from?


Yet another tax cut?

And spare me the whole "it will be an international effort" crap.

The way the rest of the world feels about the US these days, there is little to no chance they would chip in any monetary or scientific help.

[Ogre]

God save us. Another One Trick Pony in the making.

[Frank]

Hurray! Hurray!

What a wonderful thing to have happen! Now I can finally start my "good things about Bush" list:

1) Reinvigorated the exploration and exploitation of space resources.

I'm serious. This is great news!

[SPOOFE]

Why do I think that no word about how much this little scheme will cost will be brought up during his announcement.
How about "pocket change compared to the rest of the national budget", like it already is?

Seriously, this is probably one of the best things Bush has done. Though I'm disappointed that he's backed off on the nuclear rocket proposals (or has he? I haven't heard anything in that regard since the shuttle lit up).

Of course, sometimes I get the impression that some people would call Bush a monster no matter what he does. "That asshole! He bought girl scout cookies! He's the worst President ever!"

[laigle]

Oh goody gumdrops. We're what, a half trillion in the red? Good, let's start building a space station on the moon, with no present or conceivable future purpose, at unimaginable expense. Then let's send up supply shipments to it at a few billion a launch, every few months. Maybe if we're really interested, we can start mining perfectily conventional ore up there, and send it back to Earth at a cost several million percent above market value.

Next time I hear the phrase "tax and spend Democrat" somebody's getting kicked in the nuts.

[The Long Road]

Originally posted by TartPops
Link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107807,00.html)


And spare me the whole "it will be an international effort" crap.

The way the rest of the world feels about the US these days, there is little to no chance they would chip in any monetary or scientific help.

I don't see any reason why the international community would not want to be a part of this. They can ignore it and not be a part of it while the US moves ahead with a moon base on its own or they can share a small portion of the costs and be included in the project. Russia would probably jump on this to gain funding for its space program and boost its prestige.

If other nations don't want to participate because of bad feelings about what the US is doing in Iraq, that's the perfect example of "cutting off your nose to spite your face".

If you think this is stupid, then Kennedy's giving NASA the mission of putting people on the moon was idiotic. It has absolutely no long range goal besides putting having two guys walk on the moon and then coming back with some rocks.

[SPOOFE]

We're what, a half trillion in the red? Good, let's start building a space station on the moon, with no present or conceivable future purpose, at unimaginable expense.
"he envisions preparing for the mission more than a decade from now, one official said."

Learn to read, jackass.

[manhattan]

Yeah, but still. The last time we combined an unpopular war, expanding social spending and a big honkin' space race it ended up in the seventies. First guy to try to sell me Barney Miller lapels is gonna get popped in the mouth.

[John Carter of Mars]

Has TartPops paid his/her dues to the Brotherhood of Bush BashersTM yet?

Post your membership card number, Sir or Madame, or the Brotherhood will submit us to abuse for reading unauthorized rants.

There are several members of the Brotherhood here already, any one of which will be glad to accept your dues.

[5-HT]

Wow, I can't stand Bush, but this rant is fuckin' weak.

[Frank]

Originally posted by laigle
Oh goody gumdrops. We're what, a half trillion in the red? Good, let's start building a space station on the moon, with no present or conceivable future purpose, at unimaginable expense. Then let's send up supply shipments to it at a few billion a launch, every few months. Maybe if we're really interested, we can start mining perfectily conventional ore up there, and send it back to Earth at a cost several million percent above market value.

Next time I hear the phrase "tax and spend Democrat" somebody's getting kicked in the nuts.

Oh goody gumdrops. We're what, a half million pounds in the red? Good, let's start building a colony in Virginia, with no present or conceivable future purpose, at unimaginable expense. Then let's send over supply shipments to it at a few thousand a ship, every few months. Maybe if we're really interested, we can start chopping perfectily conventional wood over there, and send it back to England at a cost several million percent above market value.

:rolleyes:

[John Mace]

Originally posted by manhattan
Yeah, but still. The last time we combined an unpopular war, expanding social spending and a big honkin' space race it ended up in the seventies. First guy to try to sell me Barney Miller lapels is gonna get popped in the mouth.
The war is not unpopular, at least if we define unpoular as >50% of the citizens against it. You might be able to avoid the lapels after all. Let's just hope we don't start hearing "stagflation".:)

[Gadfly]

Originally posted by This Year's Model
Oh goody gumdrops. We're what, a half million pounds in the red? Good, let's start building a colony in Virginia, with no present or conceivable future purpose, at unimaginable expense. Then let's send over supply shipments to it at a few thousand a ship, every few months. Maybe if we're really interested, we can start chopping perfectily conventional wood over there, and send it back to England at a cost several million percent above market value.

:rolleyes:

Excuse me? Sorry, but the colonies in what is now the US and Canada were profitable, gave the Europeans contact with another civilization (for better or worse), and gave those who moved there freedom of belief.

[Duke]

Originally posted by This Year's Model
Oh goody gumdrops. We're what, a half million pounds in the red? Good, let's start building a colony in Virginia, with no present or conceivable future purpose, at unimaginable expense. Then let's send over supply shipments to it at a few thousand a ship, every few months. Maybe if we're really interested, we can start chopping perfectily conventional wood over there, and send it back to England at a cost several million percent above market value. Well, when the first Virginian colony didn't prove profitable, England stopped sending supply ships. When somebody did finally get around to checking back on the colonists, they were all dead.

I hope you are not suggesting this is what's going to happen to the moon colony...we're having a hard enough time recruiting astronauts as it is! :D

[Frank]

Originally posted by Gadfly
Excuse me? Sorry, but the colonies in what is now the US and Canada were profitable, gave the Europeans contact with another civilization (for better or worse), and gave those who moved there freedom of belief.

No - excuse me? Read your history, pal, especially on the early years of Jamestown. The post after yours is more correct, though not entirely.

My point, to all who are sarcasm-impaired, is that there is tremendous potential wealth in space, great opportunities for those who are so inclined to risk life and limb in the pursuit of fame and glory, and last but not least, we get the human race's eggs out of one basket.

Ah, the Age of Exploration all over again.

[Squink]

Let's not count our chickens before they're hatched.
UPI (http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st%2Fsn%2F01080002aaa05132.upi&Sys=siteia&Fid=LATEBRKN&Type=News&Filter=Late%20Breaking) has a bit of information on how Bush wants to pay for this:
Sources said Bush will direct NASA to scale back or scrap all existing programs that do not support the new effort. Further details about the plan and the space agency's revised budget will be announced in NASA briefings next week and when the president delivers his FY 2005 budget to Congress. I'm waiting for all the shoes to drop before deciding whether this is a good thing or a bad thing.

[Duke]

Originally posted by This Year's Model
The post after yours is more correct, though not entirely. I did stretch the Lost Colony story a bit there for comic effect. Still, I'm not so sure that you can compare colonization of the "New World" with space colonization, as you do. When the English, French, Dutch et al began colonizing, they did so in the knowledge that the Spanish were bringing back boatloads of gold and silver, so there was ample evidence that colonization of the New World was potentially extremely profitable. We don't have that evidence with space colonization yet.

[gobear]

Does this mean Dubya is Prince Henry the Navigator?

[Frank]

Originally posted by Duke
When the English, French, Dutch et al began colonizing, they did so in the knowledge that the Spanish were bringing back boatloads of gold and silver, so there was ample evidence that colonization of the New World was potentially extremely profitable. We don't have that evidence with space colonization yet.

Well, that is true, and a good point. If I remember correctly, part of the reason Jamestown had such a hard time was because too many were looking for gold rather than planting corn.

If this thread's still active tomorrow, I'll dig up some cites to counteract your last sentence, though.

[Ilsa_Lund]

'Of course, we know that over a decade ago, the cost was estimated to be over $400 billion.

Hey, TardPops; isn't this eerily close to the figure you pulled out of your ass for a manned mars mission?

[Frank]

Originally posted by Squink
Let's not count our chickens before they're hatched.
UPI (http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st%2Fsn%2F01080002aaa05132.upi&Sys=siteia&Fid=LATEBRKN&Type=News&Filter=Late%20Breaking) has a bit of information on how Bush wants to pay for this:
Sources said Bush will direct NASA to scale back or scrap all existing programs that do not support the new effort. Further details about the plan and the space agency's revised budget will be announced in NASA briefings next week and when the president delivers his FY 2005 budget to Congress.
I'm waiting for all the shoes to drop before deciding whether this is a good thing or a bad thing.

I'm not so sure that would be an unmitigated bad thing. How much cheaper would the Mars probes and so on have been if we didn't have to punch them through the Earth's atmosphere first? Also, once we've taken that first step, I think every next step is easier. I could be convinced that this would be better in the long run. But, you're right: I'm counting chickens.

[Michael Ellis]

Oh TardyPoo, I've got something for ye... (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=234014)

[SPOOFE]

Does this mean Dubya is Prince Henry the Navigator?
I thought JFK would already have that title. He was a little ballsier about space challenges (but then, he had a slightly different reason...)

[Tars Tarkas]

LAME

[Venoma]

Originally posted by laigle
Maybe if we're really interested, we can start mining perfectily conventional ore up there, and send it back to Earth at a cost several million percent above market value.

I have an even BETTER idea! after the ore is mined, why don't we process it up there! and leave it there! In the end it would probably cost a lot less than sticking it on a rocket and sending it into orbit!

Really long term plans make sense - we do have a lot more manufacturing equipment down here on Earth, but viable Lunar ore deposits would likely be a lot more valuable to the moon itself than to Earth.

[Michael Ellis]

Yatta! Yatta! Yatta!

[Ace_Face]

What the hell are they going to do on the moon? The same exciting stuff they do on the ISS? Boy what a thriller that program has been. Even with Apollo the public lost interest pretty quickly. Fact is, the moon is quite a boring place. After a few days of watching astronauts hop around on that gray, monotonous surface again, the taxpayer hangover will begin to kick in. I just hope this idea never gets off the ground.

I'd much rather the money be spent on sustainable technologies for our own beautiful planet.

[Ogre]

Hey Ace, the biggest benefit, IMO, would be to get a launch station a good deal of the way out of the Earth's gravity well, thus making further exploration from there much easier and cheaper.

[RickJay]

Outstanding. Space exploration is wonderful. If Canada doesn't get in on this, can I send cash donations directly to NASA?

[Ale]

Originally posted by Ogre
Hey Ace, the biggest benefit, IMO, would be to get a launch station a good deal of the way out of the Earth's gravity well, thus making further exploration from there much easier and cheaper.

Setting up satellite/probe construction facilities sounds like a very, very big endeavour; and I don´t see that happening for the next few decades at least.

My take on this is that the most feasible use for a lunar base now is an observatory, on the dark side of the moon there are no electromagnetic interferences from Earth sources, so a radio-telescope would be shielded against them. An optical telescope would benefit from the absence of an atmosphere and the lower gravity force, so a larger mirror could be constructed... YMMV, FWIW and all that.

[gobear]

Originally posted by Ace_Face
What the hell are they going to do on the moon? The same exciting stuff they do on the ISS? Boy what a thriller that program has been. Even with Apollo the public lost interest pretty quickly. Fact is, the moon is quite a boring place. After a few days of watching astronauts hop around on that gray, monotonous surface again, the taxpayer hangover will begin to kick in. I just hope this idea never gets off the ground.

I'd much rather the money be spent on sustainable technologies for our own beautiful planet.

Let's have both. Space exploration WILL happen; the problem right now is the the practical technology, the money, and as demonstrated, the popular will are all not available.

But we have to get off the planet and became a spacefaring race. Our security and future as a species are out there, not here.

[neuroman]

That story reads like an Onion article.

He wants to build a space station on the moon. You just can't make this stuff up, folks.

[SPOOFE]

You didn't actually read the story, didja, Neuroman? 'Cuz a second re-reading fails to yield the supposed claim of a lunar space station... :D

Or maybe Bush wants to blow up the Moon FIRST to make room for the new space station! That fiend!

[Brutus]

Originally posted by neuroman
That story reads like an Onion article.

He wants to build a space station on the moon. You just can't make this stuff up, folks.

FNC's words, not his.

Regardless, he should call it 'Future World'. Or better yet, 'Lunar Base 3', just to fuck with people.

[The Long Road]

Originally posted by SPOOFE
You didn't actually read the story, didja, Neuroman? 'Cuz a second re-reading fails to yield the supposed claim of a lunar space station... :D

Or maybe Bush wants to blow up the Moon FIRST to make room for the new space station! That fiend!

Would a second re-reading be the third reading or the fourth? Let's see, you read it once, then re-read it, then performed the second re-reading.

OK, you read it three times, all's clear now ;)

[SPOOFE]

Excellent math, Roady.

Actually, I read it once at the office, the first time I saw this thread... read it again - well, skimmed it, really - when I got home, and then read it again after I saw Neury's post. So really, I read it 2.5 times. But "r-rea" doesn't make any sense, so I just rounded up.

[Miller]

Originally posted by SPOOFE
Or maybe Bush wants to blow up the Moon FIRST to make room for the new space station! That fiend!

Well, come on. Would you really miss it that much?

[SPOOFE]

Well, yeah. What else would I use for navigation when migrating?

[rjung]

I'm no fan of George W. Bush, but I think a serious emphasis on getting back into space is a damn good thing.

I just wish the country was in better shape so we could actually support this effort in earnest. As it is now, I wonder if it's just election-year pandering...

[Grumple Grommit]

rjung-
I'm no fan of George W. Bush, but I think a serious emphasis on getting back into space is a damn good thing.
Why? Can you explain how this will benefit most people?

[Miller]

Originally posted by Grumple Grommit

Why? Can you explain how this will benefit most people?

Well, for starters, their species won't be wiped out when the next giant space rock falls out of the sky and kills all the higher life forms on the planet. I'd say that's a benefit.

[duffer]

I've seen it alluded to before, but allow me to come out and say it. We can afford it. Most people don't have a concept of how much money the US has at its disposal.

To all Bush haters, you should be the first to ask this be put on a fast-track. That way, you can escape the tyranny by being the first to colonize. You're already living in outer space, why not forward your mail there?

[Tars Tarkas]

Originally posted by Grumple Grommit

Why? Can you explain how this will benefit most people?

more Tang.

[The Long Road]

Originally posted by Miller
Well, for starters, their species won't be wiped out when the next giant space rock falls out of the sky and kills all the higher life forms on the planet. I'd say that's a benefit.

This won't be the case until the colonies/bases/whatever they are called are self-substaining. Even if we start tomorrow, that's a long way off. The sooner the better.

[Rune]

Hey, count me in on this one. I’ve got the space bug big time. Anything to do with space snaps my nipples to attention and gives me wet knickers. Robot exploration, great! Manned space missions, greater! We (mankind) got to learn how to live and colonize the moon and planets. Also while I think the knowledge gained from robot missions is splendid, I believe ultimately knowledge should be used for something more directly involving man.

I was overjoyed when I heard of the Chinese space program. Hopefully it’d prod the lazy Americans’ to resurrect their space program I dreamt. Perhaps some dreams do come true.

I want Europe in on this, sprit and valet. Also as a side benefit, a great opportunity for Europe and America to make up and start sleeping together again (just don’t hog the blanket ok. – and let’s hope it’ll fare better than France and UK nearly going to war over the Concorde. Incidentally France is the backbone of Europe’s space program ESA. If you would want one European country, it’d be the one with the frogs)

From an American perspective, I think this is a unique (and fairly inexpensive) way for you to show superpower status, and earn international goodwill, respect and love (yah!). Something the latest Iraq adventure was not so successful at, to use a bit of British understatement. Thirty years past, many still associate America with walking on the moon - your finest hour. Perhaps a lunar colony will give you another thirty years of international goodwill.

Besides the direct scientific results, I believe one of the reasons big government science programs is a good idea is that they’re very good at training engineers and scientist, giving them qualifications much sought for by private companies afterwards.

Be the launching pad in bringing colonies to space, and four hundred years down the road, perhaps the US will be to the colonies as the UK is to the US today – influential way beyond its size and means.

Let’s get out there and show the universe what stuff man is made of! (water mostly)

- Rune

[Windwalker]

The romantic part of me loves the idea of space exploration, of discovering things we could never conceive of, of possibly encountering alien life, of boldly going where no...

Ahem.

But I have to wonder if it is a wise budgetary decision for species to devote massive resources to a project that may not have any clear benefit for us for decades to come, or maybe never. I know that a lot of research is done without any immediate apparent benefit, but the scale here is off the charts; we're talking trillions and trillions of dollars in expenditures if we keep going the next step. That's a lot of cash that could be going towards more clearly beneficial humanitarian and terrestrial scientific endeavors, which would probably be more helpful in spreading and preserving a sustainable high quality of life for the human race. Can't we turn to grand projects here on Earth, such as exploring ways to tap the huge potential of our oceans, as someone else mentioned? Not as sexy, but so much less expensive and more likely to yield tangible benefits sooner...

Will we, in 50 years time, wish we had not wasted so many resources in a romantic stab at the stars, and instead invested it here, where it may have helped prevent some catastrophe that befell our species (which caused us to abandon the space program before any ground-breaking benefit was found)? Or will we be thanking the lucky stars that we were ballsy enough to devote so much to an iffy bet?

I wonder.

[duffer]

I wonder how we will feel in the future about spending public funds on Polio research, Atomic energy, aid to West Germany, airlifts to East Berlin, economic aid to Poland, the Marshall Plan, reconstruction to England, the bail-out of Japan, additional rebuilding of France after WWI, billions in AIDS assistance in Africa, massive programs to ease the Ethiopian famine, multi-milions to Iran earthquake victims....oh, wait. I forgot we have no expendable funds.

Romantic stabs at stars? That is exactly what the elite said about expeditions to the "New World". A stepping stone is nothing to scoff at. It's what humans have dreamed of for Millennia.

[bluecanary]

Wow, that rare thing, a pro-Bush pile-on!

Well, I agree with TartPops (even though it's one of the worst user names I've ever seen :D), or, more to the point, with duffer

You guys never heard of getting your own house in order?

[bluecanary]

CORRECTION:

In last post, cross out duffer, replace with Windwalker

Now it makes sense. :smack:

[World Eater]

Originally posted by Ogre
God save us. Another One Trick Pony in the making.

Yes, a Bush basher that only bashes him on space policies.

Strange indeed.

[duffer]

bluecanary, thought I had a new friend. I hope you know how much pain I'm in. You big meanie!

[Genghis Bob]

Finally, the President starts sounding Presidential. This is what he's supposed to do - appeal to our higher ideals, motivate us to reach beyond what we think we can do. Force us to think big, plan big, try big.

Mankind needs to go to space, eventually, because that's what we do. We explore, expand and push outward (sure, then we despoil, rape, pillage and plunder, but that's another story).

I'm all for it (I know Bush was just waiting for my approval). The benefits will come, probably in ways none of us can predict now.

I would feel better about the whole think if I didn't suspect this was motivated more by election-year opportunisim and "hey-look-over-there" attention-shifting. Still, it's a good thing. And even a blind pig finds the ocassional truffle.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

My thoughts:
-Space exploration is wonderful, and I would love to see humans devote themselves ot it more seriously.
-Space exploration is tremendously expensive: the figure I heard on the radio this morning was one trillion dollars. Compare that to NASA's current annual budget of fifteen billion. Compare that to the budget of the department of education, the costs of healthcare, etc.
-Right now, the US sees expanding deficits, a potential Iraq quagmire, and an economuy in which a lot of people are still out of work and desperately need services. The space program can wait until better times.
-Wait -- is any big event happening this autumn? Anything that might possibly persuade Bush to announce a big Vision-Thing project? Lemme think.

I like the idea. I don't trust Bush's reasons for announcing it now, and I don't think we can afford it now, but I like the idea.

Daniel

[squeegee]

I think space travel is one of the most worthy things this country -- any country -- can do.

But, jeez: the budget's a mess, our foreign policy is a mess, the economy is a mess (improving, but ugly). George, clean up your other messes before playing with space toys, kay?

[duffer]

well, if Sen Byrd cut his pork funding in half, we'd have the money to colonize Saturn and change left to build a co-op (yes, hyperbolic rhtoric, but think of the money we waste on both sideds of the aisle)

[JRDelirious]

Originally posted by Left Hand of Dorkness
-Space exploration is tremendously expensive: the figure I heard on the radio this morning was one trillion dollars. Compare that to NASA's current annual budget of fifteen billion. Compare that to the budget of the department of education, the costs of healthcare, etc.

Well, the Federal Dept. of Education has a $56 Billion budget. The states' local school systems vary, but for example PR has 3 Billion between public schools and Higher Ed. What we're talking is ratcheting up NASA to near-DoD levels.

I'm a bit more worried about the "call off everything unrelated to this goal" bit. Jeez, already the various space programs have spent decades sacrificing straight research science to "prestige" manned missions.

[TartPops]

Originally posted by Ilsa_Lund
Hey, TardPops; isn't this eerily close to the figure you pulled out of your ass for a manned mars mission?

Unlike you, Ilsa dear, I never pull things out of my ass, I Have cites to back them up.

The figure in question is $450 billion and I came across it while reading Bill Bryson's new book A Short History of Nearly everything.

Judging from Bryson's endnotes, the primary source for the monetary figure is a New Yorker article entitled "medicine on Mars, in the February 14, 200 issue on page 39.

Now, the New Yorker is renowned for their fact checking, sowhy don't you go back to eating whatever it is that you've pulled out of your ass this time and leave the debunking and trashtalking to the experts.

Schmuck

[Revtim]

Originally posted by Ace_Face
What the hell are they going to do on the moon? The same exciting stuff they do on the ISS? Hey, I was always curious about the effect of weightlessness on tiny screws....

[Neurotik]

What a fucking retarded idea. Goddam it, can this president stop wasting my fucking money please? Between Iraq, tax cuts, missile defense, and now this nonsense I find myself closer and closer to the tax evader lunacy.

Buld a fucking lunar space station? Does this mean he's going to cut funding to the ISS? Or stop the Mars probes? What a jackass. Just so he can seem like Jack Kennedy. We're going to Mars in ten years. Hey wonderful. Let's make a bunch of long range commitments that he'll never have to take any heat for when the budget is completely fucked yet again. Weren't Republicans supposed to be fiscally responsible? Fuck them.

Here's a fucking plan. Instead of wasting our money on this bullshit, fund the schools so we can have the engineers and scientists ready to start doing it instead of raising a generation of undereducated retards.

Now, if he decides to cancel the tax cuts in order to fund this, I'll be a bit more supportive. But he wont. What a fucking asshole. Laying down the groundwork for a long term fuck up of the country. Any bets on when Halliburton announces its new space program that gets a closed bid?

[Grey]

Here's a look at the NASA budget (warning PDF) (http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/2167main_04budget_sum_030227.pdf)

Shuttle flights cost ~ $4 billion a year. $4 billion just to go to low earth orbit and come back. ISS itself costs about $1.7 Billion a year. Now, I’m not sure they could punt the ISS off to anyone but just by grounding the shuttle fleet they free up $4 Billion for this Moon/Mars plan. Even if a ride on a Russian rocket cost $20 million a person it would only come to 4 trips of 3 at $20 million each ~$240 million dropping the saving to a little more than $3.5 billion. Not bad.

[scr4]

Anyone else find this scary? (from here (http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st%2Fsn%2F01080002aaa05132.upi&Sys=siteia&Fid=LATEBRKN&Type=News&Filter=Late%20Breaking))
Sources said Bush will direct NASA to scale back or scrap all existing programs that do not support the new effort.

I sure hope they meant all existing manned space flightprograms. Cutting back on the scientific programs will be a big mistake. (And not just because I'll most likely lose my job as a result!)

[Psycho Pirate]

Originally posted by Neurotik
Goddam it, can this president stop wasting my fucking money please? Between Iraq, tax cuts, missile defense, and now this nonsense I find myself closer and closer to the tax evader lunacy.
Typical liberal mindset.

Removing a dangerous murderer from power is a waste of money.

Tax cuts (also known as giving people their own money back) are wasting your money.

Missile defense to protect the country from terrorists and other loonies with missiles is a waste of money.

But pumping money into the public school system (in which we already spend more dollar per child than private schools and with worse results) is not a waste of money.

[Knowed Out]

Back when Europeans were going west and discovering the new world, they had visions of finding gold and riches. They didn't. Instead, it was richness of opportunity. People moved out of the oppressive regimes they had endured all their lives and developed something new, that eventually led to a world power.

Outer space colonization may not may not be too profitable for our planet in the short run, but centuries from now we could have a new system of governments that will save us from ourselves.

My question is how are we going to shield ourselves from radiation? Those who fly on extended voyages are going to be infested with so many millrads of radiation poisoning, they'll be dead of cancer years before they get to where they're going.

[Neurotik]

Originally posted by Psycho Pirate
Typical liberal mindset.
Listen, you stupid fucking shit, I'm not a liberal.
Removing a dangerous murderer from power is a waste of money.
Yes, it was. And it continues to be a waste of money and a giveaway to Bush cronies. How much of my money was given to Halliburton so it could overcharge the government?

Remind me again how Hussein was a threat to the US? Was it the non-existent terrorist ties? The non-existent weapons of mass destruction? You stupid fuck.
Tax cuts (also known as giving people their own money back) are wasting your money.
When I'm going to be the one to have to have my taxes raised in the future to pay off stupid Republican spending and crony givebacks, then yes, it is wasting my money.
Missile defense to protect the country from terrorists and other loonies with missiles is a waste of money.
Yes, because ICBMs has been the chosen method for terrorists to attack countries. Why, Israel has all sorts of problems with Hamas strapping ICBMs onto their bodies and launching them from the West Bank. And it was ICBMs that blew up the Cole, the embassies, the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, the Murrah Building, the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the Bali nightclub, et fucking cetera.

You dumb fuck.
But pumping money into the public school system (in which we already spend more dollar per child than private schools and with worse results) is not a waste of money.
Exactly right.

[aaslatten]

Originally posted by gobear
But we have to get off the planet and became a spacefaring race. Our security and future as a species are out there, not here.

Especially if we keep treating the planet like we have been.

[Sofa King]

duffer, you do recall that Senator Byrd, Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, was locked out of his own conference deliberations this year by the Republican majority, don't you?

Republicans were also good enough to not invite the Democrats into final deliberations over the Energy bill, which is why Senate Democrats filibustered the ever lovin' shit out of it, and which is why they may vote against invoking cloture on the omnibus appropriations bill when they return in a couple of weeks.

Some $23 billion (http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2003/12/reich-r-12-24.html), coincidentally very close to NASA's total budget, went primarily to Republican pork-barrel projects. The not-so-fun part of being a tyrranical majority is that you also get to take responsibility for everything you fuck up. So you can take a big old bite of that shit sandwich right now.

[The Hamster King]

Originally posted by duffer

Romantic stabs at stars? That is exactly what the elite said about expeditions to the "New World". A stepping stone is nothing to scoff at. It's what humans have dreamed of for Millennia.


No, that's not at all how the rulers of Europe saw expeditions to the new world. Columbus got funding because he pitched a radical new trade route to the Spice Islands. If he'd been right there would have been an immediate and very lucrative feedback. Other expeditions were searches for other trade routes (the fictional Northwest Passage), blatant treasure hunts (Ponce DeLeon in Florida), or just religious fanatics trying to escape persecution. All had very immediate and obvious real-world benefits. The flinty-nosed monarchs of the 15th and 16th centuries would have laughed their heads off at the romantic day-dreams in this thread.

You want humanity to colonize other planets some day? Great, then push for more funding for more basic physics research. We need stronger materials, more concentrated sources of energy, a better understanding of how the universe works.

Stone-age Europeans didn't colonize the New World by paddling their dugout canoes further and further from shore. They did it by building a technological infrastruction that could support long-range sailing ships. And we should be doing the same.

But more manned missions right now? It's an expensive stunt, not a real step toward long-term colonization of space. It's just NASA masturbating on camera for the fanboys.

And worse, Bush plans to pay for it by cutting all NASA programs that don't contribute directly to the manned program. Which means bye-bye to lots of cool and useful research.

Of course, I don't expect Bush to really do it. The man's got a history of talking big and then wimping out when he actually has to spend money. No Child Left Behind? Economic aid for New York after 9/11? AIDS Relief in Africa? Rebuilding Afghanistan? He's just a blowhard who likes to grab headlines with big promises then quietly let them wither on the vine when he doesn't think anyone is paying attention.

[Psycho Pirate]

Neurotik,
I'm not a liberal.
I never said you were a liberal. Just that your views were typical of a liberal mindset.
Remind me again how Hussein was a threat to the US?
I never said that Hussein was a threat to the US. Just that he was a dangerous murderer.
When I'm going to be the one to have to have my taxes raised in the future to pay off stupid Republican spending and crony givebacks, then yes, it is wasting my money.
As far as your taxes being raised, Bush has spent the first four years of his administration cutting taxes. I bet he won't significantly raise them during the next four years either.

And how do you think I feel that planned abortion, er parenthood gets my money?
Yes, because ICBMs has been the chosen method for terrorists to attack countries.

People build missiles for two reasons: to either threaten to use them or to actually use them. Thank God nobody has attacked us with an ICBM yet. But if they did, and we had no defense, we would be in serious trouble.
Exactly right.
Exactly wrong
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard//pubs/main1999/2000469.asp
Not exactly an extreme increase in test scores to go along with the extreme increases in public school funding. Math has shown the most improvement, but Reading and Science are either barely statistically significant, or not at all.

And go ahead and curse at me if it makes you happy. It is the language of the ignorant, and only makes you appear as such.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

Oh, sure, Sofa King, very impressive that you can cite something to prove your point. ANYONE (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=234060) can do that -- do you think it makes you a big man or something?

Once we get our house in some semblance of order, I really hope we can head into space. Not before.

Daniel

[Sofa King]

Sorry, I need to correct myself. NASA's budget has actually been hovering in the $13-15 billion dollar range since the early 1990s, according to my budget records.

[Sofa King]

Well shoot, Left Hand. Fuckin' Iowa is getting a $50 million four and a half acre indoor rain forest. I'd say our house is pretty damned sqared away--as far as the terrarium goes, anyway.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

Woah! In that case, I retract my point. To the moon!

Daniel

[Spectre of Pithecanthropus]

[I apologize for the possible double post].

I'm more or less with Dorkness, at least in my initial reaction. I think it would be so cool, but doubt that we can afford it now.

On second thought, though, maybe it isn't so far fetched after all. Think of it this way. Just about any time you hear engineers and rocket scientists explaining the basics of space travel, they always tell you that the hardest part is overcoming the Earth's gravity and getting into orbit. Once there, it takes far less fuel to send the same payload to the moon, and maybe even Mars. With that in mind, it's disheartening to note that the entire world effort towards human space travel, in the last 30 years, has been limited to putting heavy objects in Earth orbit. Surely we can do better. Instead of having mission specialists cooling their heels in low earth orbit for three months, why not have some of them spending three months on the moon? It seems to me that this would do a lot more for the cause of science.

I don't know about the whole Mars thing, though. I think we have many more technical problems that must be overcome before we can think about that.

[Lord Ashtar]

Originally posted by Windwalker
Will we, in 50 years time, wish we had not wasted so many resources in a romantic stab at the stars, and instead invested it here, where it may have helped prevent some catastrophe that befell our species (which caused us to abandon the space program before any ground-breaking benefit was found)? Or will we be thanking the lucky stars that we were ballsy enough to devote so much to an iffy bet?

I wonder.

Hindsight is always 20/20. Still, I think this is something we should explore.

And to those who are saying we should "get our own house in order" before we venture out into space...is that ever going to happen? Not in our lifetime, and probably not in our grandchildren's lifetime, either. There will always be things popping up which need immediate attention which would distract from space exploration.

We'll find a way to pay for it. We always do.

[Dob]

money...money...money. Does anyone honestly think that by NOT going to the Moon life here on earth will somehow magically become better?? Using money as an excuse to not push the boundaries of mankinds limits is shortsighted and foolish.

We should have never LEFT the damn moon. The manned program was stopped in what...73-74? Did the country go thru an economic boom the next year?? Not that im aware of!

I cant stand GW, but if he could actually commit to this, I might consider sending my vote his way.

[Ilsa_Lund]

Originally posted by TartPops
Unlike you, Ilsa dear, I never pull things out of my ass, I Have cites to back them up.

The figure in question is $450 billion and I came across it while reading Bill Bryson's new book A Short History of Nearly everything.

Judging from Bryson's endnotes, the primary source for the monetary figure is a New Yorker article entitled "medicine on Mars, in the February 14, 200 issue on page 39.

Now, the New Yorker is renowned for their fact checking, sowhy don't you go back to eating whatever it is that you've pulled out of your ass this time and leave the debunking and trashtalking to the experts.

Schmuck

Oh, the irony. I'd pull some smiley art out, but I don't feel like pissing WorldEater off.

So you never pull things out of your ass, eh? Other than your political philosphy?:rolleyes:

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

Lord Ashtar, I know our house will never be entirely in order. Had we been pushing to the moon in the mid-nineties, however, when the economy was booming, it would've made more sense. Things are especially out of order right now; that's why I don't see doing it now.

It's also pretty ironic that this laudable but expensive plan is being proposed by the same guy that slashed the government's income. You'd think, were you an idealistic fool, that he would at least have the integrity to mention how much it's going to cost and how he's going to pay for it.

Daniel

[Grey]

I'm not even sure its going to cost anything right now. Say they retire the shuttles in 2-3 years. At that point about $4 billion dollars gets freed up. How's that for already committed fund for this new project?

[TartPops]

Originally posted by Ilsa_Lund
Oh, the irony. I'd pull some smiley art out, but I don't feel like pissing WorldEater off.

So you never pull things out of your ass, eh? Other than your political philosphy?:rolleyes:

And the point of this post was...what exactly?

Wait, I know the answer.

There isn't one.

You just can't face up to the fact that your earlier statement about my pulling facts out of my ass has been exposed for the utter lie that it is.

If you had the maturity level of even a 14 year old you would admit that you lied and possibly even apologize, but I bet that'll never happen.

And my political philosophy comes from a number of sources, one of which is a careful reading of various newspapers and another a great deal of reading of history.

[Brutus]

Hey, Tardpops, don't you have the minerals to show up to your own Pitting? (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=234014)

[Miller]

TartPops, have you ever read a book that wasn't written by Bill Bryson? You keep citing him like he's the be-all and end-all of knowledge about the space program. Have you considered looking into any books about space written by people who actually works in some field more directly related to the space program than a guy who's chief claim to fame is being a professional tourist?

[Lord Ashtar]

Originally posted by Left Hand of Dorkness
Lord Ashtar, I know our house will never be entirely in order. Had we been pushing to the moon in the mid-nineties, however, when the economy was booming, it would've made more sense. Things are especially out of order right now; that's why I don't see doing it now.

It's also pretty ironic that this laudable but expensive plan is being proposed by the same guy that slashed the government's income. You'd think, were you an idealistic fool, that he would at least have the integrity to mention how much it's going to cost and how he's going to pay for it.

Daniel

Wouldn't a push to the moon create jobs?

[Cervaise]

For the record, the $450 billion figure for a manned mission to Mars came from a committee proposal solicited by Bush the Elder, and shows what happens when every single department in the bureaucracy gets to write a chapter to financially justify their various projects as being part of the overall program. Bob Zubrin, the iconoclastic but technically gifted space evangelist behind the "Mars Direct" concept, calls the $450 billion plan "Battlestar Galactica." Read his book The Case for Mars to see an alternative approach that he claims would cost $20 billion but that I think he's low-balling by twenty-five percent which is still a freakin' bargain.

And re the potential Bush announcement, this makes one item in his favor, with several quadzillion still against. This stuff just makes me moist.

[Ilsa_Lund]

Originally posted by TartPops
And the point of this post was...what exactly?

Wait, I know the answer.

There isn't one.

You just can't face up to the fact that your earlier statement about my pulling facts out of my ass has been exposed for the utter lie that it is.

If you had the maturity level of even a 14 year old you would admit that you lied and possibly even apologize, but I bet that'll never happen.

And my political philosophy comes from a number of sources, one of which is a careful reading of various newspapers and another a great deal of reading of history.

It wasn't a lie, and I do apologize. Not to appease you, I may add, but because I do have more emotional maturity than a fourteen year old. I still think you're a fucking moron.

[levdrakon]

I've seen it alluded to before, but allow me to come out and say it. We can afford it. Most people don't have a concept of how much money the US has at its disposal.

Hell yeah we can afford it. Just looking at how much we spend on Iraq, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and all the billions that disappear into black budgets - building a base on the moon is easy and chump change. Heck, going to Mars is chump change.

[Michael Ellis]

Well, I see Tarty has been banned. What happened? Returning troll?

[Lynn Bodoni]

This thread was started by a returning troll, so I'm closing it. Y'all can continue to debate the merits of the space program and how it should be funded in GD, or continue to bash Bush in the Pit, but not in this thread.

Lynn
For the Straight Dope