i never thought it shouldve been manned in the first place. that was simply a pissing contest between america and russia. im still not convinced we actually got someone on the moon. we barely get rockets and shuttles lifted off now let alone back in the 60's.
i dont mind the idea of unmanned ships and rovers and drones though. i think we should start spread grass seeds on venus. experimental of course.
How about a special "space tax" on all individuals making over $250,000 per year? As we all certainly know, they don't pay nearly enough already. I'm sure our "commander in chief" would have no problem with this.
You obviously weren't around at the height of the Cold War. It wasn't a pissing contest.
As for landing on the moon. There's a big difference between a Saturn V getting off the ground with command and service modules versus the space shuttle. No doubt in my mind that we made it and came back each time.
I agree that the question is complicated. Did you read the post prior to the survey question?
But remember, we're asking if the government should be funding the SHUTTLE program. Unless you think that the movie "Armageddon" is real, there really isn't a huge national security interest in the shuttle program. Satellites can be repaired or even replaced at a cheaper cost by other means.
14 comments:
yes
Let non-union member, Maryland State employees fund it!
Right now we have problems here on earth that need to be addressed with both time and money.
Now is not the time to waste money on the black hole of space.
i never thought it shouldve been manned in the first place. that was simply a pissing contest between america and russia. im still not convinced we actually got someone on the moon. we barely get rockets and shuttles lifted off now let alone back in the 60's.
i dont mind the idea of unmanned ships and rovers and drones though. i think we should start spread grass seeds on venus. experimental of course.
How about a special "space tax" on all individuals making over $250,000 per year? As we all certainly know, they don't pay nearly enough already. I'm sure our "commander in chief" would have no problem with this.
Anon 1111 -
You obviously weren't around at the height of the Cold War. It wasn't a pissing contest.
As for landing on the moon. There's a big difference between a Saturn V getting off the ground with command and service modules versus the space shuttle. No doubt in my mind that we made it and came back each time.
Yes, and the question is more complicated than is being presented here in a survey. There is an enormous national security interest here.
Yes, definitely.
Anon 1128 -
I agree that the question is complicated. Did you read the post prior to the survey question?
But remember, we're asking if the government should be funding the SHUTTLE program. Unless you think that the movie "Armageddon" is real, there really isn't a huge national security interest in the shuttle program. Satellites can be repaired or even replaced at a cheaper cost by other means.
yes
there have been too many things that came out of the space program.
nasa is so small aprotion of the budget (.6% atm)
let get rid of welfare first
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Budget
No, definitely NOT.
No let the privet sector take over.
Yes Absolutely!!!
HELL NO! Space exploration hasn't done a darn thing for us.
-sent from blackberry ipad while navigating down the eastern shore with my gps
Post a Comment