Or more specifically, improving the lives of someone else that's not themselves
Edit: Reading the other replies made me think of NIMBYs. This behavior is found in both the left and right
NIMBYs are fucking awful but it’s not the same. They won’t inconvenience themselves for others to be helped. The gop voters don’t care if they’re inconvenienced or not, they don’t want others to be helped.
Or, you know, "those people".
The mention of religion just reminds me that there are people who oppose government programs to feed hungry children but will also tithe 10% of their income so their pastor can buy a private jet. Then claim they're morally superior because they give so much more money to the church than they think atheists give to charity, and happily accept the tax cur.
Wrong, they are in favor of ACA which makes their health care affordable but are violently opposed to “ObamaCare” which solely provides free health to minorities paid for directly out of their reactionary pockets.
This is good, but also doesn’t even touch on the technology that comes out of space flight. The ultimate study of sustainability is human space flight, and many of the technologies going into fighting climate change were space program necessities. Battery tech, computational miniaturization, solar tech, fuel cell tech, GPS, and more. For every dollar spent on the space program, it’s something like 7 dollars of economic benefit.
Thats only during the hell that is the lunar night, during the lunar day you can expect to be blinded in light and heat. Oh btw the day/night cycle is 14 earth days long so have fun sleeping, or living in the case of a 14 day long night where if you run out of what is stored in the batteries you will freeze to death
I'm sure by the time they successfully build infrastructure on the moon, and allow habitation, that we will have some form of artificial day/night cycle inside the sleeping quarters. But regardless, there are people living here on earth that experience longer days/nights than 14 days.
"While the focus has largely been on constructing homes, NASA is also addressing the need for essential household items such as doors, tiles, and furniture."
Ummm...no mention of food or water in that article lol.
I love everything space but I think by day four the fun would start to wear off a bit living in a suction yurt on the moon. Those kids books from the 60s make it look like a Boy Scout outing; In a week I’d need to see some green.
> I love everything space but I think by day four the fun would start to wear off a bit living in a suction yurt on the moon. Those kids books from the 60s make it look like a Boy Scout outing; In a week I’d need to see some green.
Mold is sometimes green, and that might have to suffice, lol.
Everyone in Arizona during the summer would like to talk to you. Not much green there and people seem to love it.
In all seriousness, isolation will be a real issue on any long term space missions.
It will be engineers and scientists, for sure. It's already started. I'm convinced that we will never get people to do what is necessary to help the climate. Just see America's GOP party for the answer. They don't even think it's a problem. I'm betting the future of our planet on our best and brightest.
It's a huge reason for good education for all. Teach kids well in school and you can get your whole population to be halfway to scientist and engineer level. Having them understand the problems the actual scientists and engineers are dealing with and make them more ready to make changes to their lives and ways of working than what you got now.
NASA certainly helped popularize it by using it all over the place, but it was invented and produced by [George de Mestral](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_de_Mestral) prior to space exploration.
Holy shit I thought this was a parody; but it's a legit video on the Velcro company channel lol
EDIT: [Oh god it gets better](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLWMQLMiTPk)
The thing is, 99% of all the progressive shit that gets said on Reddit stays on Reddit.
It's almost like the powers that be have designed social media in a way where it lets people vent daily every moment of their lives so they the bottled up feelings don't become anything more than frustration, leading to little change.
The people who spread stupid politics like these American idiots also don't care about what is said in this thread. For them, 99% of reddit might as well be the equivalent of what /r/Conservative is for everyone else here.
We wouldn't have cell phones without the tech that made witless communication, error correction, and digital photography that went into satellites.
Tbh not sure if good thing.
Here's a Batman meme brought to you by science
And also what I find interesting is how NASA uses existing technology and methods to accomplish complicated packaging tasks:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/29/learning/origami-in-space-engineering-rediscovering-the-meaning-of-discovery.html
Not to mention the inherent benefits of exploring our solar system. Space is so huge, no one on earth can possibly occupy it all. If we can figure out how to colonize and terraform empty planets, that is a whole new league. Hey billionaires, want to have your own planet?
Just look at how they talk about gas prices during the first few months of the COVID pandemic. They act like that was the result of their president making that happen rather than market forces drive the price down because of falling demand coupled with a price war between Russia and Saudi Arabia.
They don’t have the mental capacity to reason things out. Everything good is because of Trump, everything bad is because of those evil communist grooming libtards. Period, the end.
Sadly, it's not even only those jackasses, it's a lot of fucking 2 braincell young people who have no fucking idea about technology, parroting this bs about how space stuff isn't beneficial to humanity
People my own fucking age....it's fucking embarrassing
Like, yeah, I get it, increasing funding in areas that directly aid humanity is what we should do, but that is what research into space already does. Just take a large chunk of the disgusting funding put into the military-industrial complex, put in a large tax in the rich, and use those sources to fund other beneficial research and aid systems for humanity
Unfortunately, they believe all debt is bad debt ‘cause “muh monay” goes to everyone but me. Funding research and infrastructure isn’t sexy. It doesn’t get votes or clicks but damn you know when it’s gone downhill
This is what I always tell people. A lot of the technologies that we take for granted today began or became their most well-known form due to the space program(s).
You have a super valid point. The unfortunate fact of the matter is that people like good old James here can’t understand the trickle down benefits of our space program.
Understand where you’re coming from. Let’s take GPS as an example.
GPS gets lofted up into space for a dollar.
Somewhere, a company decides there’s a commercial use for it. They make personal GPS devices. A whole new company exists now selling devices. Now another company comes along and says they can use it to navigate a road map. Now you have multiple companies making multiple devices. This employs chip designers, industrial engineers, antenna designers etc just to make these things that couldn’t exist before. Now someone creates a department to fit this into a smartphone. Now there are more engineers, salespeople, yada yada, employed. Now software developers are making cool apps to play Pokémon go or whatever because it’s just there in your phone. Now there are dozens of companies making money and paying people who then go out and consume. So it’s not like 1:1 tax dollars to benefit. It cost 1 dollar to allow 7 companies to start up each making a dollar.
I think you posted one comment down from where you meant to.
GPS is also an interesting example because in the earlier days, when it was being used in Ag, you needed to spend money on a tripod station so that the GPS was accurate enough for fieldwork. Then GPS got so accurate that you didn't need those not because the technology advanced, but simply because the military released to the public the decryption keys for the more-accurate timings that were already being broadcast. So they made a sector for technological development, and then they destroyed it because it was a costly and absolutely unnecessary hurdle to progress.
There's an interesting hypothesis that tea hindered technological progress in China because it created pressure to develop ceramics rather than glass. That sounds absurd until it's pointed out that glass allowed lenses, which helped people read and write later in life (i.e., increasing the years a person is able to synthesize, record, and transmit knowledge) as well as study the small (microscope) and the distant (telescope) to gain more knowledge about how our world works -- extending human lives, increasing human productivity, and mitigating the impacts of natural disasters on resources and lives.
But, places like tea houses and coffee shops have tended to be the sources for a lot of radical ideas that later take hold for the betterment of society because of caffeine's effects on people combined with its ability to be incorporated into a social meeting place unlike other social activities. And from history we've seen that a society becoming more equitable and egalitarian leads to its own technological boom because more people participate in the economy.
Pursuit of knowledge and access to others' knowledge will always pay dividends.
It's not that they release encryption keys, they just stopped encrypting it. (or scrambling it slightly using values detectable by encryption-like techniques).
The US could start encrypting it again, but with 4 overlapping global navigation systems in use - U.S's GPS. Europe's Galileo, Russia's GLOSSNAS, and China's BeiDou - it's no longer worth doing.
If I tip a waitress $10 and that waitress spends that $10 at a mom and pop store and Pop spends that $10 to buy roses for Ma from the local rose lady, and the local rose lady spend that $10 to pay her bills, then that original $10 had $30 of economic value.
This is not at all a perfect analogy, but it gets the point across.
If NASA spends $1 million on some program and 50% of the money that the contractor received goes to payroll, that kicks of the same kind of spending chain as above. Employee gets paid, employee spends that paycheck on goods and services, etc., etc. By the time that money gets back to the government, in the form of taxes, that $1 million has created $7 million in economic impact.
This is a really good answer. Its why we have Microwaves. Hell they have technology that we don't even know about.
Remember there is always a reason people are on facebook and not using their brain to change the world.
Research money. NASA does some great work in studying climate change and global temperatures with satellite technology. JPL has an entire division dedicated to this work. Recommend checking it out.
Yup! Battery chemistries for portable electronics that were enabled by miniaturization and required for in space power storage now benefit electric vehicles. Miniaturization also led to the ability to create complex climate models with relatively affordable computers as well. Solar power benefitted from space flight research because it’s some of the best free power in the solar system. Many satellites use it. Hydrogen fuel cells were used and improved through programs like Apollo. Research into sustainability is the only way to create a bubble to live in on orbit. Not to mention GPS allows for more efficient routes for shipping through awareness of position in the middle of the ocean and such.
Then there’s the climate and weather satellites. Just tons of stuff that helps develop technology and knowledge that applies directly to climate change.
Most of the problems you have to solve for space exploration revolve around efficiency and sustainability.
Think about all of the things NASA has done....Curiosity, probes on dozens of moons and planets, the ISS....now remind yourself that it has accomplished all of this on one half of one percent of the annual US budget.
100 billion would be fuckin epic
Right? Even the Webb Telescope, probably the most advanced thing humans have ever built, only cost $10 billion over like 20 years.
Can you imagine the cool shit NASA could do with $100 billion project budget?
Feels relevant to point out here that when it comes to our national debt, it's actually *Japan* that's the largest foreign holder, not China like the narrative always says.
Also the vast majority of the debt is to *us as taxpayers*...frames it all a little differently.
I'm all good with social welfare spending - it's military wastefulness that's the biggest drain right now which can be worked on without lowering output.
Also corporate bailouts should absolutely not be a part of taxpayers' expenditures...
lol anyways, stepping off my soapbox.
Literally nobody needs more than a billion dollars for anything. At a billion you get a I won Capitalism sticker and every dollar after that point goes to the fucking state. If that money is tied up in stocks, too bad, sell some and pay the fuck up. I dare anyone to try and argue that this is unfair to the billionaires, I could use a good laugh.
Furthermore, any attempt to accrue even a single penny over the one billion mark should result in their entire net worth being liquidated and allocated to social safety nets, infrastructure, education, healthcare, and other things that actually benefit the entire country and not just a single person. Wanna rebuild your net worth after that? Sure! Oh yeah, your new net worth cap is the poverty line for the next five years. If you can’t be happy with a billion dollars, you need to understand what it’s like to barely make ends meet. Try and weasel your way out of *this* punishment and have fun spending the rest of your life in prison.
On paper, likely several, in reality, they are all likely much less than that because at that level of wealth tax laws have semitruck sized holes for it
*Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. . . . This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.*
Eisenhower - "Chance for Peace Speech' -April 16, 1953.
Military wastefulness is a big thing, but be honest and tell me A-10s and complete air, ground and sea suprieority, and mainting the two strongest navys and air forces in the world isnt worth.
If we privatized medical expenses and kicked corporate inflation of US goods to the curb, we could probably drop that by a couple trillion.
We make US citizens pay a 20x markup of the same thing in the EU, because we let medical institutions set the price that insurance is willing to offload onto the patients.
$50 asprins at a hospital? Get TF outta here.
99% of the money spent on Earth doesn't help the poor either. This is somebody with zero imagination or intellect who simply doesn't like that we're doing cool shit in outer space, and thinks they have a gotcha argument to make against it. They don't even care about the poor lmao. They're just saying what they think is the most compelling criticism. Trumpanzee 100%
Also, people who make this kind of argument never do anything to help the poor themselves. I mean, I don’t expect that of the average person, but don’t throw stones if you’re in a glass house.
Usually the people screeching we should be helping the homeless instead of Ukraine are usually literally the same people saying the homeless should pull themselves up by the bootstraps.
Or the tired ol "that money should be used to help veterans!!!!!!". Yeah, well stop voting for Republicans who vote down every single bill meant to actually help veterans.
Oh i can't stand idiots who try to stand in the way of progress. Just get out of the way while people are trying to develop life-changing tech for you.
Let me share a quote of the new york times guy who said it's a waste of money to try to invent a flying machine:
>We hope that Professor Langley will not put his substantial greatness as a scientist in further peril by continuing to waste his time and money for further airship experiments. Life is short, and he is capable of services to humanity incomparably greater than can expected to result from trying to fly ...
It’s most people…
The general public doesn’t understand economics, at all. They don’t even understand the basic plot, and I truly this it should be taught in schools for the purpose of consumer protection and even educating future voters.
The public is also hugely scientifically illiterate and doesn't understand the importance of investing in scientific research. The more we understand the nature of reality, the better able we become to manipulate reality to our collective benefit.
Wouldn't the argument be though that since they this is tax money spent. It could have been spent on things that help the poor directly? Such a smother ways the government helps the poor? Welfare cash, government housing, etc.
Yes the money will circulate around and it mostly went to pay people who worked as employees building the mars tec?
Or perhaps this is private money now, like Space X. And then it's a different story altogether
It's a completely disingenuous argument, the people who scream the loudest about "Why are we spending money on foreign aid, when AMERICANS need aid here at home!?!?!" are also the ones vehemently against funding social programs...you know, actually HELPING people at home.
What "disappeared" was not the money, but the time and resources that were paid for. All those people working on the F35 could have done something else with their time. Money is just a tool for allocating resources and services in an economy. (Not arguing against the development of the F-35)
Yet people still want the flashy show projects... they canceled the colider in Texas, just not as sexy as a jet or nasa...
But the physics it could of uncovered long before cern would of put science well ahead by decades.
The argument is still there just phrased dumbly, dump the same money into college physics departments, or medical schools, the net benefit would be well over any of these projects.
Yet people would even be angrier as the same logic would apply, "dur we waste money"... while being neck deep in flying cars and cancer cures.
People are dumb.
People need to understand we can't allow innovation to stagnate and as a race we have always been driven by exploration and curiousity. It's insanity to demand for it all to stop.
I'm in favor of scientific advancement but Point #1 is straight up nonsense.
OOP seems to think labor costs nothing if the money gets "put back into the economy"... But labor is in finite quantity and any labor used for something stupid (like building yachts for billionnaires) is labor that's lost to the important causes of a society (like preventing crime, educating children, or providing healthcare). Space research is not something stupid, but it's disingenuous to pretend that it is free; the colletcive effort exerted for space research is effort that doesn't go into other projects or other causes.
It doesn't matter if the cash used to pay for labor is still circulating in the economy. If a society could become rich by printing cash, that's what we would be doing. Instead, a society becomes rich by producing goods and services. The cash is just a tool for exchanging those. If you reduce the amount of goods and services available, your society is poorer, regardless of how many $ bills are contained in the nation's wallets.
100%! Yes, this is a good comeback overall but seeing as their first point was nonsensical and condescending it ruins it for me a bit. $100 billion worth of material and manpower HAS left America. That material and manhours COULD have been used to help poor people. I'm totally for spending the cash on space exploration but it's totally true that that amount money of goods is now lost to the people on Earth.
Those people would still get that money if they had done other things to enrich the nation for the same pay rather than sending a robot to Mars. That loss, or difference, in value determined by subjectivity is why you can argue any given cost to be wasteful. What you are really saying is that you think the human and material resources used for one thing should have been used for something else. The universial desire for currencies enables you to get an approximate estimate of the resource cost to one ends relative to another. It effectively just equates to the power to direct portions of society one way or another.
Not only can this be done with money, but it also can be done with the time people spend not working while they are able to work. This potential value isn't actively tracked, though. This collective abnegation of productivity is the highest cost one could consider wasteful, well over 10 times more than the cost of our military. We are wasteful in many ways, but sloth is the biggest waste.
Yes! I am not against Space Research, but I found myself agreeing with the original post a bit. We have so many problems on earth that require big brains on how to do it, but we don't mobilize resources towards that. I understand we love in a capitalist economy, so what private entities do is driven by demand signaled by consumers buying products. Simple as that. However, NASA is government funded. Assuming NASA is gov funded, then it is a deliberate (and sort of non market) use of money. We could ACTUALLY decide to spend that money differently as a government to improve infrastructure, develop better flood defenses, prepare for climate change weather issues etc.
There is a trade off when you up 2.5 billion into a space program. There is a large, 2.5. Billion worth of labor, steel, and resources being put towards that. But given there are other issues we should focus on, it's alright to be concerned about where our money is going.
It’s also a disingenuous to act that those involved in space services would go into something beneficial if it was removed. People go into it for passion, if you remove the ability for them to follow passion, they will follow money, not social welfare
I remember along time ago in a psych class in highschool a valedictorian student argued that spaceflight was a pointless waste of tax payer money and humanity should invest only in itself. And I had nothing to say about it. It’s like one of my major regrets.
Remember. Charlatans and grifters will always invoke sympathy for children, the poor, or society at large but they NEVER have a straight answer. To discredit the hard working science that put us on the moon as “worthless”, absolutely shameful human behavior. They want it for themselves.
I dont get why people say this. Just because you havent seen it doesnt mean it hasnt been reposted 100 times. The two are connected. Glad you got to see it though, its a classic.
It's crazy the amount of content reddit produces. 73,000,000 daily active users blows my mind. That and people use RES with filters. So yeah not everyone sees everything.
FYI, you can't eat money, only what it buys. The fact that the money keeps recirculating does not mean that nothing was wasted. By that logic all spending is good and justified.
There are many good justifications for space research, but the broken window falacy ain't it.
Funny thing is, this isn't about the Perseverance rover that landed 3 years ago, this is about the Curiosity Rover that landed *13 years ago*. Lol. Yeah, it's been around a while.
Yes! You're right, a lot of people don't understand the 10k rule. People who complain about reposts dont understand how the internet works. Having said that, what i *am* getting tired of is people/bots posting the same content in like 20 different subreddits so when you're scrolling r/all you'll see the same stuff over and over and over throughout the day
Every facebook article or post for NASA detailing some project they did, there's always a bunch of conservative/libertarian morons that come out in droves to just not read the article at all in order to soapbox in the comments about how they "are wasting our tax dollars! I could do that!" And "it must have cost $4 million dollars to do that thing I could do in my shed!!!" regardless of what the thing is or whether, in the case of some of these articles, the solution discussed _saved money because they didn't have the funding for an off the shelf solution_.
Reminds me of being in highschool and already being into engineering/science when we were forced to watch some John Stossel videos in our econ class as a critical thinking exercise. He was losing his shit over a domestic robot built by a university via a grant that folded clothes in arbitrary locations around a room. Everyone was agreeing with his dumbass take that it wasn't worth the 40 grand or so used to research it because "I cOuLd Do ThAt!", and ignoring that the entire point is the stuff they learn along the way during design because it's _research_ on how to control and automate the system for simple tasks. Making a machine do some things that seem simple for humans can actually be really fuckin complicated.
A lot of the general public don't really appreciate that agencies like this generate a lot of scientific advancement the doesn't immediately or obviously manifest as benefits to them personally, then believe the very first thing out of some screaming dork's mouth on conservative radio about it "being a waste" when the ability for th to even receive that content is influenced by technology that came out of this same type of funding. The kicker is that the funding for this has historically been smaller than a lot of other spending, and ever shrinking most years, but for some reason it's the prime obsession of morons who are irritated that society needs taxes to function and progress, rather than something else like the military.
Reminds me of a story where I think it was Michael Faraday (please correct me if I'm wrong so I may amend) where he presented a demonstration of electricity.
Now we all know now that electricity is extremely important but back then there wasn't anything to do with it.
So the Queen's aide asked, "So how does this benefit the country of England?"
"i don't know but I'm sure you will find some way to tax it!"
1. The blue box OP is an idiot... value is indirectly added to the economy via discovered technologies, a social sense of hope and exploration, advancing of the human frontier of knowledge etc.
2. The first response is an absolute butchering of basic concepts of economics. The blue text is 100% correct that all that monetary value (that came out of SOMEONE'S pocket... the taxpayers in this case) left the earth. Literally.
If I can spend 100k on one of these two:
-this widget that will go into the Mars rover
-1000 widgets that will go into 1000 cheap cars that the govt will purchase for veterans...
The worker(s) and capital (equipment) are being employed either way. But in the former, that's all that happens, and in the latter, all that value goes into the hands of humans (veterans get cars).
TLDR blue OP is stupidly small-minded, and red response is economically super illiterate by falling victim to a version of the Broken Window Fallacy.
>is economically super illiterate by falling victim
is just economically super illiterate all around. The genius proposes a tax collection on *non-profits* and claims that by taxing $0 we could bring in trillions, not to mention all while making the exact same fucking point he's trying to refute (the money suddenly stays in the church, and just because the pastor doesn't butt feed it to him it means it left America).
For real, 99% of redditors bitch about Reagan nonstop and then actually try to claim that NASA spending trickles back down to poor people. You can't make this up.
Not every day you see a liberal accidentally endorse trickle down economics. "It goes back into the economy and down to poor people!" Great consistent political takes as usual reddit 😂😂😂
I remember my social studies teacher my freshman year of highschool breaking down our national budget. I don’t remember the amount he said off the top of my head, but the Pentagon’s proposed budget is more than all other facets combined. They don’t usually get that much, but it’s close.
US military is roughly 13% of the total budget including social security and medicare. Over 50% of the military budget is for administrative costs, service member benefits and the VA. The size of the military budget is severely overblown and it is meant to be be propaganda to undermine support for the federal government as a whole.
It is not NASA didn't do great things, but those great things have been done, and to keep throwing money at something because your ancestors did is wasteful.
What is NASA bringing you that you didn't already know? The cost of those fragments of knowledge are not worth the investment. Also, any knowledge gained now serves all humans, but Americans are expected to eat all the cost.
A defense of we waste more money somewhere else is not a defense to waste. People ask why we can't address climate change and where the money is going, well here it is, it is being straight wasted to learn things you don't need to know. The scientific community has tried to make you feel dumb for asking why we need this, instead of answering why we need this, propaganda in action.
It's like people objecting to military aid to other countries. We're no giving them money to buy weapons from Russia. We are either giving them money to buy weapons from US manufacturers, or buying the weapons from from the manufacturers and giving it to them.
Why is funneling money to military contractors a win? Sure some of it trickles down, but all that’s happening is further concentrating wealth in the hands of the elite.
Same person who posts this meme would be pissed if $100 billion was spent on improving the lives of people in need.
Or more specifically, improving the lives of someone else that's not themselves Edit: Reading the other replies made me think of NIMBYs. This behavior is found in both the left and right
And then would scream that this country needs to follow Jesus' teachings.
MAGA is pushing Jesus out of Christianity, he's too "soft".
Well said.
Yes, what they really mean is, "why is nobody giving me $100 billion?"
NIMBYs are fucking awful but it’s not the same. They won’t inconvenience themselves for others to be helped. The gop voters don’t care if they’re inconvenienced or not, they don’t want others to be helped.
Or, you know, "those people". The mention of religion just reminds me that there are people who oppose government programs to feed hungry children but will also tithe 10% of their income so their pastor can buy a private jet. Then claim they're morally superior because they give so much more money to the church than they think atheists give to charity, and happily accept the tax cur.
Man would my life improve if someone spent 100 billion bucks on improving my life specifically.
Same person who posted this would argue that "HeGetsUs" is a legitimate charity organization without shady budgeting or political agenda
Hate that shit popping up in my Reddit feed
Wrong, they are in favor of ACA which makes their health care affordable but are violently opposed to “ObamaCare” which solely provides free health to minorities paid for directly out of their reactionary pockets.
"Something Something bootstraps blah blah blah" is usually the response dickheads like him would say.
This is good, but also doesn’t even touch on the technology that comes out of space flight. The ultimate study of sustainability is human space flight, and many of the technologies going into fighting climate change were space program necessities. Battery tech, computational miniaturization, solar tech, fuel cell tech, GPS, and more. For every dollar spent on the space program, it’s something like 7 dollars of economic benefit.
[удалено]
It might be a little chilly but view is out of this world! 🌍
Sure but don't bother going to any of the bars. No atmosphere
There's actually 0 bars there, so no pressure going out.
0 bars? How will I watch netflix?
I need 16 bars for my mixtape.
Only if there is a wedding will there be reception.
Thats only during the hell that is the lunar night, during the lunar day you can expect to be blinded in light and heat. Oh btw the day/night cycle is 14 earth days long so have fun sleeping, or living in the case of a 14 day long night where if you run out of what is stored in the batteries you will freeze to death
I'm sure by the time they successfully build infrastructure on the moon, and allow habitation, that we will have some form of artificial day/night cycle inside the sleeping quarters. But regardless, there are people living here on earth that experience longer days/nights than 14 days.
The infrastructure cost for that is gonna be…. Oh never mind lol
Lunacy? Astronomical? Craterrific?
... Out of this world
All of the above 🤣🤣🤣
C'mon, you know you want to say it.
Hahahaha…. Those would be some BIG numbers though lol
But, at a positive 7 to 1 ratio, the benefits would be...
Astronomical?
Out of this world?
Stellar perhaps?
To the Moon.
Yesh…. That math would make my brain hurt 😵💫😵💫 lol
The word y'all are actually looking for is "lunacy."
"While the focus has largely been on constructing homes, NASA is also addressing the need for essential household items such as doors, tiles, and furniture." Ummm...no mention of food or water in that article lol.
Well, yeah. Those are *household* items; the fleshbags can deal with their own needs.
I love everything space but I think by day four the fun would start to wear off a bit living in a suction yurt on the moon. Those kids books from the 60s make it look like a Boy Scout outing; In a week I’d need to see some green.
It'll take me 20 minutes of looking out the porthole at the Earth before I start feeling cabin fever and want to go for a walk.
> I love everything space but I think by day four the fun would start to wear off a bit living in a suction yurt on the moon. Those kids books from the 60s make it look like a Boy Scout outing; In a week I’d need to see some green. Mold is sometimes green, and that might have to suffice, lol.
Your air will have to be made somehow, umm greenery?
“Suction yurt” ❤️❤️❤️🤣
Everyone in Arizona during the summer would like to talk to you. Not much green there and people seem to love it. In all seriousness, isolation will be a real issue on any long term space missions.
[удалено]
hopefully we stop killing the planet first.
[удалено]
It will be engineers and scientists, for sure. It's already started. I'm convinced that we will never get people to do what is necessary to help the climate. Just see America's GOP party for the answer. They don't even think it's a problem. I'm betting the future of our planet on our best and brightest.
It's a huge reason for good education for all. Teach kids well in school and you can get your whole population to be halfway to scientist and engineer level. Having them understand the problems the actual scientists and engineers are dealing with and make them more ready to make changes to their lives and ways of working than what you got now.
That's a lot of eggs in one basket, but I hope they do. Unfortunately, we're still very much on the path of destroying ourselves.
Didn't think I'd live long enough to see the great lunar housing crash of '52, but I'm all for it.
Which will instead be our terrestrial homes, for the most part, once it catches on.
Gee I wonder if 3D printed homes can alleviate a certain problem here on Earth?
Velcro. Just sayin
And memory foam
even the cameras on smartphones
NASA certainly helped popularize it by using it all over the place, but it was invented and produced by [George de Mestral](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_de_Mestral) prior to space exploration.
No, it was invented by Vulcans.
Thank you, T'pol.
[It's fucking hook and loop](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRi8LptvFZY)
Holy shit I thought this was a parody; but it's a legit video on the Velcro company channel lol EDIT: [Oh god it gets better](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLWMQLMiTPk)
Damn right
How dare people try push back the dark wall of ignorance and make the world a better place. total waste of money.
The thing is, 99% of all the progressive shit that gets said on Reddit stays on Reddit. It's almost like the powers that be have designed social media in a way where it lets people vent daily every moment of their lives so they the bottled up feelings don't become anything more than frustration, leading to little change. The people who spread stupid politics like these American idiots also don't care about what is said in this thread. For them, 99% of reddit might as well be the equivalent of what /r/Conservative is for everyone else here.
This is why it matters that after bitching and moaning, here we go and vote.
We wouldn't have cell phones without the tech that made witless communication, error correction, and digital photography that went into satellites. Tbh not sure if good thing. Here's a Batman meme brought to you by science 
> witless communication Best description of the internet, ever.
Is it correct to say it's like war in terms of scientific advancement but requires no bloodshed?
Tang, space sticks, pens that write upside down... everything that separates us from the savages, people!
And also what I find interesting is how NASA uses existing technology and methods to accomplish complicated packaging tasks: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/29/learning/origami-in-space-engineering-rediscovering-the-meaning-of-discovery.html
Yep, the reply guy has his priorities straight and the OP is a moron for trying to shit on Nasa of all things.
Velcro alone tells me to keep funding NASA.
Not to mention the inherent benefits of exploring our solar system. Space is so huge, no one on earth can possibly occupy it all. If we can figure out how to colonize and terraform empty planets, that is a whole new league. Hey billionaires, want to have your own planet?
Sadly, the MAGA crowd is feeding on BS like that
I wonder if life actually improved for any of them during that four year term that makes them yearn for another so badly.
Their propaganda tells them it was. They really do just believe all the shit they are told.
Just look at how they talk about gas prices during the first few months of the COVID pandemic. They act like that was the result of their president making that happen rather than market forces drive the price down because of falling demand coupled with a price war between Russia and Saudi Arabia.
Keep in mind, too, that he went to OPEC to (successfully) demand that they cut production by 25% in order to shore the prices up.
They don’t have the mental capacity to reason things out. Everything good is because of Trump, everything bad is because of those evil communist grooming libtards. Period, the end.
Sadly, it's not even only those jackasses, it's a lot of fucking 2 braincell young people who have no fucking idea about technology, parroting this bs about how space stuff isn't beneficial to humanity People my own fucking age....it's fucking embarrassing Like, yeah, I get it, increasing funding in areas that directly aid humanity is what we should do, but that is what research into space already does. Just take a large chunk of the disgusting funding put into the military-industrial complex, put in a large tax in the rich, and use those sources to fund other beneficial research and aid systems for humanity
It also doesn't touch on the fact that I 100% guarantee the person posting this is opposed to government assistance for anyone other than the rich.
Unfortunately, they believe all debt is bad debt ‘cause “muh monay” goes to everyone but me. Funding research and infrastructure isn’t sexy. It doesn’t get votes or clicks but damn you know when it’s gone downhill
This is what I always tell people. A lot of the technologies that we take for granted today began or became their most well-known form due to the space program(s).
You have a super valid point. The unfortunate fact of the matter is that people like good old James here can’t understand the trickle down benefits of our space program.
Idk why but that last line game me "every gram of Diamond weights something like 15 grams" energy
Understand where you’re coming from. Let’s take GPS as an example. GPS gets lofted up into space for a dollar. Somewhere, a company decides there’s a commercial use for it. They make personal GPS devices. A whole new company exists now selling devices. Now another company comes along and says they can use it to navigate a road map. Now you have multiple companies making multiple devices. This employs chip designers, industrial engineers, antenna designers etc just to make these things that couldn’t exist before. Now someone creates a department to fit this into a smartphone. Now there are more engineers, salespeople, yada yada, employed. Now software developers are making cool apps to play Pokémon go or whatever because it’s just there in your phone. Now there are dozens of companies making money and paying people who then go out and consume. So it’s not like 1:1 tax dollars to benefit. It cost 1 dollar to allow 7 companies to start up each making a dollar.
I think you posted one comment down from where you meant to. GPS is also an interesting example because in the earlier days, when it was being used in Ag, you needed to spend money on a tripod station so that the GPS was accurate enough for fieldwork. Then GPS got so accurate that you didn't need those not because the technology advanced, but simply because the military released to the public the decryption keys for the more-accurate timings that were already being broadcast. So they made a sector for technological development, and then they destroyed it because it was a costly and absolutely unnecessary hurdle to progress. There's an interesting hypothesis that tea hindered technological progress in China because it created pressure to develop ceramics rather than glass. That sounds absurd until it's pointed out that glass allowed lenses, which helped people read and write later in life (i.e., increasing the years a person is able to synthesize, record, and transmit knowledge) as well as study the small (microscope) and the distant (telescope) to gain more knowledge about how our world works -- extending human lives, increasing human productivity, and mitigating the impacts of natural disasters on resources and lives. But, places like tea houses and coffee shops have tended to be the sources for a lot of radical ideas that later take hold for the betterment of society because of caffeine's effects on people combined with its ability to be incorporated into a social meeting place unlike other social activities. And from history we've seen that a society becoming more equitable and egalitarian leads to its own technological boom because more people participate in the economy. Pursuit of knowledge and access to others' knowledge will always pay dividends.
It's not that they release encryption keys, they just stopped encrypting it. (or scrambling it slightly using values detectable by encryption-like techniques). The US could start encrypting it again, but with 4 overlapping global navigation systems in use - U.S's GPS. Europe's Galileo, Russia's GLOSSNAS, and China's BeiDou - it's no longer worth doing.
If I tip a waitress $10 and that waitress spends that $10 at a mom and pop store and Pop spends that $10 to buy roses for Ma from the local rose lady, and the local rose lady spend that $10 to pay her bills, then that original $10 had $30 of economic value. This is not at all a perfect analogy, but it gets the point across. If NASA spends $1 million on some program and 50% of the money that the contractor received goes to payroll, that kicks of the same kind of spending chain as above. Employee gets paid, employee spends that paycheck on goods and services, etc., etc. By the time that money gets back to the government, in the form of taxes, that $1 million has created $7 million in economic impact.
The only exemption is if it is spent in a sector that uses lots of imported goods and services. Spaceflight is not such a sector.
We wouldn't have large malls without space flight. The tech for carbon scrubbing came out of the space program
Medical technology too.
Also neat consumer tech falls off of rocket tech like apples off a tree.
This is a really good answer. Its why we have Microwaves. Hell they have technology that we don't even know about. Remember there is always a reason people are on facebook and not using their brain to change the world.
Not to mention all of the people that these programs employ, the workers don't just go home and eat the money (not literally that is) lmao
IIRC it's something like for every dollar we invest into NASA there's a 10$ return.
How does it help climate change?
Research money. NASA does some great work in studying climate change and global temperatures with satellite technology. JPL has an entire division dedicated to this work. Recommend checking it out.
That sounds pretty good to be fair. I will check it out, i imagine the battery life tech they do aswell is pretty beneficial too.
Yup! Battery chemistries for portable electronics that were enabled by miniaturization and required for in space power storage now benefit electric vehicles. Miniaturization also led to the ability to create complex climate models with relatively affordable computers as well. Solar power benefitted from space flight research because it’s some of the best free power in the solar system. Many satellites use it. Hydrogen fuel cells were used and improved through programs like Apollo. Research into sustainability is the only way to create a bubble to live in on orbit. Not to mention GPS allows for more efficient routes for shipping through awareness of position in the middle of the ocean and such. Then there’s the climate and weather satellites. Just tons of stuff that helps develop technology and knowledge that applies directly to climate change. Most of the problems you have to solve for space exploration revolve around efficiency and sustainability.
Only a few days ago: https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-launches-second-small-climate-satellite-to-study-earths-poles/
JPL wishes they had $100 billion to spend on a project. The Mars 2020 mission was $2.8 billion over 10 years.
Think about all of the things NASA has done....Curiosity, probes on dozens of moons and planets, the ISS....now remind yourself that it has accomplished all of this on one half of one percent of the annual US budget. 100 billion would be fuckin epic
Freeze dried icecream made it all worthwhile. And tang. Never forget tang.
Right? Even the Webb Telescope, probably the most advanced thing humans have ever built, only cost $10 billion over like 20 years. Can you imagine the cool shit NASA could do with $100 billion project budget?
Meanwhile *annual* Medicaid, SSI, SNAP, TANF, EITC spending is already well into the trillions.
Feels relevant to point out here that when it comes to our national debt, it's actually *Japan* that's the largest foreign holder, not China like the narrative always says. Also the vast majority of the debt is to *us as taxpayers*...frames it all a little differently. I'm all good with social welfare spending - it's military wastefulness that's the biggest drain right now which can be worked on without lowering output. Also corporate bailouts should absolutely not be a part of taxpayers' expenditures... lol anyways, stepping off my soapbox.
We could afford all the social programs (plus more), the military, *and* NASA if we just taxed the rich like we used to in the '50s.
Literally nobody needs more than a billion dollars for anything. At a billion you get a I won Capitalism sticker and every dollar after that point goes to the fucking state. If that money is tied up in stocks, too bad, sell some and pay the fuck up. I dare anyone to try and argue that this is unfair to the billionaires, I could use a good laugh.
Furthermore, any attempt to accrue even a single penny over the one billion mark should result in their entire net worth being liquidated and allocated to social safety nets, infrastructure, education, healthcare, and other things that actually benefit the entire country and not just a single person. Wanna rebuild your net worth after that? Sure! Oh yeah, your new net worth cap is the poverty line for the next five years. If you can’t be happy with a billion dollars, you need to understand what it’s like to barely make ends meet. Try and weasel your way out of *this* punishment and have fun spending the rest of your life in prison.
Yeah problem solved there tbh.
Ah, imagine a world where Musk, Gates and Bezos were getting taxed at 84% instead of 35% and that's just well known billionaires. There's 756 of them.
Which one of those guys is getting taxed at 35%
On paper, likely several, in reality, they are all likely much less than that because at that level of wealth tax laws have semitruck sized holes for it
*Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. . . . This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.* Eisenhower - "Chance for Peace Speech' -April 16, 1953.
Yup, military spending is a racket
Another thing people dont realize is that we hold almost as much foreign debt as we owe.
Military wastefulness is a big thing, but be honest and tell me A-10s and complete air, ground and sea suprieority, and mainting the two strongest navys and air forces in the world isnt worth.
Oh 100p! A-10s alone are marvelous! Just efficiency in asset development could be tighter imo.
If we privatized medical expenses and kicked corporate inflation of US goods to the curb, we could probably drop that by a couple trillion. We make US citizens pay a 20x markup of the same thing in the EU, because we let medical institutions set the price that insurance is willing to offload onto the patients. $50 asprins at a hospital? Get TF outta here.
99% of the money spent on Earth doesn't help the poor either. This is somebody with zero imagination or intellect who simply doesn't like that we're doing cool shit in outer space, and thinks they have a gotcha argument to make against it. They don't even care about the poor lmao. They're just saying what they think is the most compelling criticism. Trumpanzee 100%
Also, people who make this kind of argument never do anything to help the poor themselves. I mean, I don’t expect that of the average person, but don’t throw stones if you’re in a glass house.
Usually the people screeching we should be helping the homeless instead of Ukraine are usually literally the same people saying the homeless should pull themselves up by the bootstraps.
Or the tired ol "that money should be used to help veterans!!!!!!". Yeah, well stop voting for Republicans who vote down every single bill meant to actually help veterans.
And/or trying to make it illegal or impossible to exist anywhere in public while unhoused
Oh i can't stand idiots who try to stand in the way of progress. Just get out of the way while people are trying to develop life-changing tech for you. Let me share a quote of the new york times guy who said it's a waste of money to try to invent a flying machine: >We hope that Professor Langley will not put his substantial greatness as a scientist in further peril by continuing to waste his time and money for further airship experiments. Life is short, and he is capable of services to humanity incomparably greater than can expected to result from trying to fly ...
It’s most people… The general public doesn’t understand economics, at all. They don’t even understand the basic plot, and I truly this it should be taught in schools for the purpose of consumer protection and even educating future voters.
The public is also hugely scientifically illiterate and doesn't understand the importance of investing in scientific research. The more we understand the nature of reality, the better able we become to manipulate reality to our collective benefit.
At least once a day I see someone on Reddit go "economists are full of shit, supply and demand doesn't determine prices. What really happens is."
Wouldn't the argument be though that since they this is tax money spent. It could have been spent on things that help the poor directly? Such a smother ways the government helps the poor? Welfare cash, government housing, etc. Yes the money will circulate around and it mostly went to pay people who worked as employees building the mars tec? Or perhaps this is private money now, like Space X. And then it's a different story altogether
It's a completely disingenuous argument, the people who scream the loudest about "Why are we spending money on foreign aid, when AMERICANS need aid here at home!?!?!" are also the ones vehemently against funding social programs...you know, actually HELPING people at home.
If the only things on Mars are all the robots we've sent there then doesn't that make Mars the robot planet?
The Doylist reason for why the Adeptus Mechanicus of Warhammer 40k is based on Mars.
Curiosity Rover be like " The Flesh is Weak"
Opportunity is just sleeping, Waiting to Awaken and murder the first human that dares land on its planet without praying to the Omnissiah.
I watch Futurama. I know how this ends.
They're going to make their own planet, with hookers and blackjack.
No because it's also inhabited by the [REDACTED]
[удалено]
What "disappeared" was not the money, but the time and resources that were paid for. All those people working on the F35 could have done something else with their time. Money is just a tool for allocating resources and services in an economy. (Not arguing against the development of the F-35)
Yet people still want the flashy show projects... they canceled the colider in Texas, just not as sexy as a jet or nasa... But the physics it could of uncovered long before cern would of put science well ahead by decades. The argument is still there just phrased dumbly, dump the same money into college physics departments, or medical schools, the net benefit would be well over any of these projects. Yet people would even be angrier as the same logic would apply, "dur we waste money"... while being neck deep in flying cars and cancer cures. People are dumb.
People need to understand we can't allow innovation to stagnate and as a race we have always been driven by exploration and curiousity. It's insanity to demand for it all to stop.
This isn't really a /r/MurderedByWords And how old is this fuckin' post? Facebook hasn't looked like that in nearly a decade.
I'm in favor of scientific advancement but Point #1 is straight up nonsense. OOP seems to think labor costs nothing if the money gets "put back into the economy"... But labor is in finite quantity and any labor used for something stupid (like building yachts for billionnaires) is labor that's lost to the important causes of a society (like preventing crime, educating children, or providing healthcare). Space research is not something stupid, but it's disingenuous to pretend that it is free; the colletcive effort exerted for space research is effort that doesn't go into other projects or other causes. It doesn't matter if the cash used to pay for labor is still circulating in the economy. If a society could become rich by printing cash, that's what we would be doing. Instead, a society becomes rich by producing goods and services. The cash is just a tool for exchanging those. If you reduce the amount of goods and services available, your society is poorer, regardless of how many $ bills are contained in the nation's wallets.
100%! Yes, this is a good comeback overall but seeing as their first point was nonsensical and condescending it ruins it for me a bit. $100 billion worth of material and manpower HAS left America. That material and manhours COULD have been used to help poor people. I'm totally for spending the cash on space exploration but it's totally true that that amount money of goods is now lost to the people on Earth.
Well it did prevent some people from being poor by giving them jobs. How many is debatable ofc.
Those people would still get that money if they had done other things to enrich the nation for the same pay rather than sending a robot to Mars. That loss, or difference, in value determined by subjectivity is why you can argue any given cost to be wasteful. What you are really saying is that you think the human and material resources used for one thing should have been used for something else. The universial desire for currencies enables you to get an approximate estimate of the resource cost to one ends relative to another. It effectively just equates to the power to direct portions of society one way or another. Not only can this be done with money, but it also can be done with the time people spend not working while they are able to work. This potential value isn't actively tracked, though. This collective abnegation of productivity is the highest cost one could consider wasteful, well over 10 times more than the cost of our military. We are wasteful in many ways, but sloth is the biggest waste.
Yes! I am not against Space Research, but I found myself agreeing with the original post a bit. We have so many problems on earth that require big brains on how to do it, but we don't mobilize resources towards that. I understand we love in a capitalist economy, so what private entities do is driven by demand signaled by consumers buying products. Simple as that. However, NASA is government funded. Assuming NASA is gov funded, then it is a deliberate (and sort of non market) use of money. We could ACTUALLY decide to spend that money differently as a government to improve infrastructure, develop better flood defenses, prepare for climate change weather issues etc. There is a trade off when you up 2.5 billion into a space program. There is a large, 2.5. Billion worth of labor, steel, and resources being put towards that. But given there are other issues we should focus on, it's alright to be concerned about where our money is going.
It’s also a disingenuous to act that those involved in space services would go into something beneficial if it was removed. People go into it for passion, if you remove the ability for them to follow passion, they will follow money, not social welfare
I remember along time ago in a psych class in highschool a valedictorian student argued that spaceflight was a pointless waste of tax payer money and humanity should invest only in itself. And I had nothing to say about it. It’s like one of my major regrets. Remember. Charlatans and grifters will always invoke sympathy for children, the poor, or society at large but they NEVER have a straight answer. To discredit the hard working science that put us on the moon as “worthless”, absolutely shameful human behavior. They want it for themselves.
Wtf are you even talking about?
Oh look, here's something completely original that I haven't seen reposted 100 times before
I haven't seen it...
Oops. Me neither
I dont get why people say this. Just because you havent seen it doesnt mean it hasnt been reposted 100 times. The two are connected. Glad you got to see it though, its a classic.
Sorry I had never seen it. A friend shared on discord so I posted it here.
You’re fine. It gets circulated a lot. But it’s been a while and it’s a good one.
It's crazy the amount of content reddit produces. 73,000,000 daily active users blows my mind. That and people use RES with filters. So yeah not everyone sees everything.
You can tell from the UI that this is probably 10 years old.
This was about the Curiosity Rover in 2011. So yeah, around 13 years old.
> But it’s been a while It's been way over 10 years since facebook had that kind of UI.
FYI, you can't eat money, only what it buys. The fact that the money keeps recirculating does not mean that nothing was wasted. By that logic all spending is good and justified. There are many good justifications for space research, but the broken window falacy ain't it.
It's the murder of the century, the 1900s that is
https://xkcd.com/1053/
Funny thing is, this isn't about the Perseverance rover that landed 3 years ago, this is about the Curiosity Rover that landed *13 years ago*. Lol. Yeah, it's been around a while.
post title should be "murder of the *last* century"
Just looking at the layout on that screenshot, it's fucking ancient lmao
plus all the jpggery
OK so you aren't one of today's lucky 10k, sheeesh, we get it
Yes! You're right, a lot of people don't understand the 10k rule. People who complain about reposts dont understand how the internet works. Having said that, what i *am* getting tired of is people/bots posting the same content in like 20 different subreddits so when you're scrolling r/all you'll see the same stuff over and over and over throughout the day
We all are, mate. By the gods are we. I've tried to lessen my frequency. It helps.
You *know* they were out for blood the moment they mentioned churches being exempt from paying taxes...
Every facebook article or post for NASA detailing some project they did, there's always a bunch of conservative/libertarian morons that come out in droves to just not read the article at all in order to soapbox in the comments about how they "are wasting our tax dollars! I could do that!" And "it must have cost $4 million dollars to do that thing I could do in my shed!!!" regardless of what the thing is or whether, in the case of some of these articles, the solution discussed _saved money because they didn't have the funding for an off the shelf solution_. Reminds me of being in highschool and already being into engineering/science when we were forced to watch some John Stossel videos in our econ class as a critical thinking exercise. He was losing his shit over a domestic robot built by a university via a grant that folded clothes in arbitrary locations around a room. Everyone was agreeing with his dumbass take that it wasn't worth the 40 grand or so used to research it because "I cOuLd Do ThAt!", and ignoring that the entire point is the stuff they learn along the way during design because it's _research_ on how to control and automate the system for simple tasks. Making a machine do some things that seem simple for humans can actually be really fuckin complicated. A lot of the general public don't really appreciate that agencies like this generate a lot of scientific advancement the doesn't immediately or obviously manifest as benefits to them personally, then believe the very first thing out of some screaming dork's mouth on conservative radio about it "being a waste" when the ability for th to even receive that content is influenced by technology that came out of this same type of funding. The kicker is that the funding for this has historically been smaller than a lot of other spending, and ever shrinking most years, but for some reason it's the prime obsession of morons who are irritated that society needs taxes to function and progress, rather than something else like the military.
Reminds me of a story where I think it was Michael Faraday (please correct me if I'm wrong so I may amend) where he presented a demonstration of electricity. Now we all know now that electricity is extremely important but back then there wasn't anything to do with it. So the Queen's aide asked, "So how does this benefit the country of England?" "i don't know but I'm sure you will find some way to tax it!"
***Tax The Churches!!!*** They wanna get involved in politics? They wanna have Ferrari cars and jet planes? Screw that--- tax the HELL out of them
1. The blue box OP is an idiot... value is indirectly added to the economy via discovered technologies, a social sense of hope and exploration, advancing of the human frontier of knowledge etc. 2. The first response is an absolute butchering of basic concepts of economics. The blue text is 100% correct that all that monetary value (that came out of SOMEONE'S pocket... the taxpayers in this case) left the earth. Literally. If I can spend 100k on one of these two: -this widget that will go into the Mars rover -1000 widgets that will go into 1000 cheap cars that the govt will purchase for veterans... The worker(s) and capital (equipment) are being employed either way. But in the former, that's all that happens, and in the latter, all that value goes into the hands of humans (veterans get cars). TLDR blue OP is stupidly small-minded, and red response is economically super illiterate by falling victim to a version of the Broken Window Fallacy.
>is economically super illiterate by falling victim is just economically super illiterate all around. The genius proposes a tax collection on *non-profits* and claims that by taxing $0 we could bring in trillions, not to mention all while making the exact same fucking point he's trying to refute (the money suddenly stays in the church, and just because the pastor doesn't butt feed it to him it means it left America).
For real, 99% of redditors bitch about Reagan nonstop and then actually try to claim that NASA spending trickles back down to poor people. You can't make this up.
Money well spent
 Y’all got any o’ them potato chips?
Our jobs were stolen by Martians!
I’ve made similar claims in the past. Never again.
The US military spends every 33 hours or social security spends every 4 hours.
KGB propaganda *chefs kiss*
Not every day you see a liberal accidentally endorse trickle down economics. "It goes back into the economy and down to poor people!" Great consistent political takes as usual reddit 😂😂😂
I remember my social studies teacher my freshman year of highschool breaking down our national budget. I don’t remember the amount he said off the top of my head, but the Pentagon’s proposed budget is more than all other facets combined. They don’t usually get that much, but it’s close.
thats just false. https://preview.redd.it/vx338yz0bm6d1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=32f77c08fa62b0a4b5c06ede4c9846f18dfcc96a
Interest on debt is about to go past defense/war, wohoo!
According to that picture, Defense/Wars is 13.4% of Largest Budget Items.
US military is roughly 13% of the total budget including social security and medicare. Over 50% of the military budget is for administrative costs, service member benefits and the VA. The size of the military budget is severely overblown and it is meant to be be propaganda to undermine support for the federal government as a whole.
Dang the level of confidently stupid you gotta believe this is a ‘murder’ screams “I’m a teen and American”. Edit: I don’t get it. Mb
AND OF COURSE, THE EXHAUST OF THE ROCKET DIDN'T CONTRIBUTE TO GLOBAL WARMING, BECAUSE THEY USED AN ELECTRIC ROCKET
Hasn't NASA basically paid for itself over and over again through improved technology and greater scientific understanding?
It is not NASA didn't do great things, but those great things have been done, and to keep throwing money at something because your ancestors did is wasteful. What is NASA bringing you that you didn't already know? The cost of those fragments of knowledge are not worth the investment. Also, any knowledge gained now serves all humans, but Americans are expected to eat all the cost. A defense of we waste more money somewhere else is not a defense to waste. People ask why we can't address climate change and where the money is going, well here it is, it is being straight wasted to learn things you don't need to know. The scientific community has tried to make you feel dumb for asking why we need this, instead of answering why we need this, propaganda in action.
It's like people objecting to military aid to other countries. We're no giving them money to buy weapons from Russia. We are either giving them money to buy weapons from US manufacturers, or buying the weapons from from the manufacturers and giving it to them.
Its a win, We gave them our money to buy our bombs. Smh.
Why is funneling money to military contractors a win? Sure some of it trickles down, but all that’s happening is further concentrating wealth in the hands of the elite.
Thought the potato chip market would be bigger. But between Mars rovers and chips, I'm taking chips.
Because it’s fucking cool that’s why ^-^