$100Bn to go the moon? I think not.

[Olds442]

Woo Hoo! I feel a rant coming on.....

NASA said it will spend $100 billion to go to the moon by 2018.
As an american tax-paying citizen I say "Been there, done that."
I think the money can be better spent elsewhere.
NASA can't even get a shuttle off the ground without shaking in their boots, wondering if it will explode.

Let's look at $100bn.

$1,000 - I could pay bills.
$10,000 - I could pay off some bills.
$100,000 - I could pay off all bills for myself and the wife and get new windows for the house.
$1,000,000 - I could pay off all bills, buy a new house and make investments.
$10,000,000 - I could pay off all bills, buy new houses, make investments, and get a Bugatti Veyron.
$100,000,000 - I can become an evil genius and take over the world.
$1,000,000,000 - This is now just silly money.
$10,000,000,000 - This is now ludicrous money.
$100,000,000,000 - This is such an unreal amount that it's imaginary.

Ok, so that's 11 zeros. At this point they might as well make it a trillion dollars and go to Mars. I'd be more impressed.

Does the government think that the rest of the world will turn around and say "Oooo, look at America, they are going to the moon. How impressive. We will stop cursing them and love them again."

We have starving people, a city in ruins (and it might get hit again this year), homeless folks, unemployed, and a negative world opinion and we are using 100Bn dollars to go to the moon?

Oh come on.......

[avanti]

Totally agree with you, been there done that. But why are they waiting so long? If they managed to land in 1969, one would think they could manage to do it again now without preparing 13 years and spending $100 billion

[YF19pilot]

It isn't just to go to the moon. NASA is planning on construction of a moon base to use as a launch platform/checkpoint for going to mars (rather than just launch one massive ship from earth, why not a smaller one from the moon).

$100 billion seems reasonable when you look into the costs of R&D to build something to go to the moon and back, and to start construction of a permanent moon base. NASA needs new vehicles (including a new shuttle, I've seen time tables putting the current shuttles' replacements around 2012 or so). Also there's all the training and what not that needs to be done.

Things will be hella expensive to do this, but at least our guys will be much safer than if we were to recommision the old Appollo capsules...


Though I could have sworn the time tables were set for 2015 for a return to the moon and mars by 2020/2025...


Hopefully NASA gets their shit straight and won't fuck this up...

[ESPNSTI]

I believe the $100 billion in question is money that was scheduled for the shuttle program, so I don't think this is "additional" money.

Even though space programs might seem to serve no purpose, at least in the past they have contributed to many technological innovations that are currently used by the private sector. (And I don't think these innovations would have happened without it).

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/tec.../spinoffs.html
http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/

[Olds442]

^
I understand that the money is "budgeted" but that is part of the problem.
Budgeting $100Bn is crazy in this day and age with so many other things on the plate. For GWB in 2004 to announce a return trip was foolish.

Here is the link I am using as reference:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...llflytothemoon

[DJ]

Originally Posted by avanti

If they managed to land in 1969

Maybe they didn't

[ESPNSTI]

Originally Posted by DJ

Maybe they didn't

And perhaps I'm a figment of your imagination.

[Raheel]

Thats a lot of money.... They could spend this much money on research at earth to find new methods of making power to fuel the earth.....or feed the hungry and poor..... make more jobs.......

[YF19pilot]

Originally Posted by raheel_qamar

Thats a lot of money.... They could spend this much money on research at earth to find new methods of making power to fuel the earth.....or feed the hungry and poor..... make more jobs.......

Yeah, sure, if it weren't NASA. NASA's mission is space exploration. And this whole going to the moon will open up new jobs, and I'm sure new technologies will come about that may help the other two problems as well.

[Olds442]

Originally Posted by YF19pilot

Yeah, sure, if it weren't NASA. NASA's mission is space exploration. And this whole going to the moon will open up new jobs, and I'm sure new technologies will come about that may help the other two problems as well.

But we can do that with the Space Station.
The point is that it isn't needed. Is space exploration really a priority now?

[YF19pilot]

Originally Posted by Olds442

But we can do that with the Space Station.
The point is that it isn't needed. Is space exploration really a priority now?

For me, it is. But then again, I'm planning on entering the Aerospace Industry in about another year or two, so my views are a bit skewed you could say.

[kanderson]

feed the hungry and poor..... make more jobs

This is 99% the reason why the government is spending $100b to go to the moon. Tax cuts rarely help poor people, but large, government funded projects create a lot of labor-class jobs, scholarships, supplier contracts, and general economic stimuli. That's the point. And consequently, same thing with spending $200b on rebuilding the coast after Katrina. There's nothing better for an economy than an excuse for the government to dump hundreds of billions of dollars into the lower end of the economy.

[Olds442]

Originally Posted by YF19pilot

For me, it is. But then again, I'm planning on entering the Aerospace Industry in about another year or two, so my views are a bit skewed you could say.

"YF19PILOT"

Ya think???

[YF19pilot]

Originally Posted by Olds442

"YF19PILOT"

Ya think???

Actually my handle is a referance to an anime (and is quite old)...and I'm actually going to school to be an Engineer...

[jayjaya29]

I think its a bad time right now, but lets say 2 years from now I would fully support it. I think Space Exploration is essential to the world for innovation and it gives the people something to watch, brings people together.

[BlaRo]

It would be nice for 2009; y'know, 40th anniversary and all that. Great publicity as well, but I think NASA's just showing off. "Hey, European Space Agency! Suck on THIS! Apollo on steroids! Hey Russia, where's your Sputnik now? Sputnik THIS!"

[Dr. Woo]

I think NASA should be disbanded, its technology sold to the private sector's highest bidders, its blueprints made freely available. The market is a better environment for something like space travel to truly blossom and advance. How old are those Orbiters? Pretty freakin' old.

$100 billion for something that I may find exciting, but something I think whose money spent would be better focused elsewhere. Take the government out of space travel.

[Silverstar]

....that much?? Jesus

And think that back in the day we got there for WAY less then that...

[flyingfridge]

Forget the bloody moon, they should be going to Mars. What's on the moon that they haven't done before? Or is there this great new pub that's opened up around on the dark side?

[Silverstar]

Originally Posted by flyingfridge

Forget the bloody moon, they should be going to Mars. What's on the moon that they haven't done before? Or is there this great new pub that's opened up around on the dark side?

There has been many documentaries I have watched on The Science Channel about how the moon actually would be very usefull for traveling to Mars and beyond.