Topic: The Moon Mars and Behond
started by: Madd Max
Posted by Madd Max on Jan. 15 2004,12:43 pm
What are your feelings of President Bush’s Idea for space exploration? Should we spend 12 billion on space exploration or should we use that money to fix our health care system? Is it a good idea or is Bush becoming a big spender?
Posted by GEOKARJO on Jan. 15 2004,1:25 pm
We need to expand our space program or become slaves of the Goa'uld 
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 15 2004,2:15 pm
I think he is making the right moves on many fronts here.NASA has a chart showing total NASA spending, how much is to be phased out, and how much additional this will cost. TOTAL NASA spending (assuming that NASA comes in at budget, and that Congress leaves them alone) doesn't go up much. He is doing the right thing by junking old technology to embrace new.
Phasing out the Shuttle is the right thing to do. The Shuttle is old technology. It was originally supposed to be a powered spaceplane, but when Congress cut funding, they went back to a glider configuration. When Congress cut funding again, NASA cut internal engines from the design in favor of the infamous "strap on" solid-fueled, non-throttleable rockets--directly responsible for the Challenger disaster. In response to environmental concerns, the insulation on the external fuel tank was changed--and it was this insulation that peeled off on several flights--including the one that doomed Columbia. The system of tens of thousands of ceramic "tiles" is outdated--metallurgy, and ablative coatings, make them passe. The Shuttle is only approved for low earth orbit.
Bush is also right to pull back from the international space station--the Shuttle fleet was designed to bring the pieces up to it--but after it is built, there is no need for the Shuttles. The Space Station itself is an example of Congressional meddling--it has been redesigned at least 3 times that I'm aware of--each time becoming both SMALLER and MORE EXPENSIVE as the years go by.
NASA has a lot of fat left in it--they have been "studying" aircraft braking systems for 40 years--so long that the Boeing 720 they are using is the only one left in the world--kind of like "studying" Stanley Steamer cars!
It is sad, but Arthur C. Clarke's 2001, a Space Oddess[i]y, foretold the Shuttle, the Space Station, and Lunar Bases. The book and the movie were both produced in 1968--35 years ago. It has been 32 years since we last visited the moon, and will be 11-20 years more before we go back. It is sad to see the giant Saturn V rockets, left over from the cancelled lunar shots, sitting on the ground at NASA facilities. If you are under 40, you don't remember a time when man was on the moon. It is sad to reflect that, like an ageing athlete, WE ONCE WERE STRONG--we once were THERE, but are UNABLE TO REVISIT IT AGAIN. In addition to the technological spinoffs that inevitably come from NASA programs, it would be nice to REGAIN THE COHESIVENESS AS A NATION, and YES, EVEN TO REGAIN THE "SWAGGER" AND CONFIDENCE OF BEING ON TOP OF OUR GAME.
Posted by irisheyes on Jan. 15 2004,4:52 pm
| Quote (Madd Max @ Jan. 15 2004,12:43:pm) |
| Should we spend 12 billion on space exploration or should we use that money to fix our health care system? |
How do you think 12 billion is gonna fix our healthcare system? I love hearing on the democrats ads now, "I'll repeal the Bush tax cut, and use the money for healthcare for every American". They say this in every election, never even try to do it, but the American people fall for it every time. It's like kids in a candy store.
Posted by minnow on Jan. 15 2004,5:21 pm
$12 Billion is a drop in the bucket. Enough to fix healthcare? LOL 
1. Healthcare isn't broken
2. $12 billion is what goes to Isreal every year and we don't get any science value out of that.
Posted by Madd Max on Jan. 15 2004,6:26 pm
We are spending 87 billion on the war and 12 to 30 billion in space. We are giving Tax cuts to the rich. So how are we going to pay for all this? Raise taxes on the Low and Middle classes? 
One more question how large is the Federal deficit now?
Posted by minnow on Jan. 15 2004,6:33 pm
I didn't see you complaining about the money when we were sending troops into Iraq.We aren't going to pay for it dumb dumb, we're just going to pass it on....
Posted by irisheyes on Jan. 15 2004,6:43 pm
| Quote (Madd Max @ Jan. 15 2004,6:26:pm) |
| We are giving Tax cuts to the rich. So how are we going to pay for all this? Raise taxes on the Low and Middle classes? |
So you think that the rich are the only ones that invest money in the stock market? Most people I know that are saving for retirement do it, its not like everyone's gonna depend on Social Security. Besides, the economy is not a zero sum game, when tax cuts spur economic growth, it creates more revenue than what was lost in the original cuts.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Jan. 15 2004,7:05 pm
Geo- Ja'Fa Kree. heheehe good one, love that SG1..| Quote |
| Space the final frontier, these are the voyages of the Star Ship Enterprise, its continuing mission to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life, and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before... |
I myself have mixed feelings about going back to the moon, on one front yeah its kinda spendy, and with money being spent on BS projects like Homeland Insecurity and the like, to the war, but on the other hand it will create jobs, as new tech is needed to accomplish these things. But I guess I am leaning toward the idea of a moon shot.
Minnow the 12 billion sent to Isreal is not entirely wasted, atleast we have a stabil ally in the middle east, and is very well armed as well as trained, all people there must serve in the military when they turn 18.
The tax issue-
Sigh i get so tired of hearing that the tax break went to the rich and not to middle class or the poor, well I can tell you I for one seen a much needed tax break, and so did my wife, so don't tell me it was for the rich. Second of all the poor that they say doesn't get the fair shake is the poverty ladden, the ones that don't even pay taxes to begin with, so why should they get money when they don't even pay in??
Did you also know that they consider anyone making over $40,000-$100,000 is what they are considering rich, not the filthy rich, as they are hammered with an abundance of other BS tax codes. (info from the Wall Street Journal)
Since when did it become a crime to be rich, and have things others do not, well sorry, but WHAAAAAAAAAA, get over it, get a better paying job and buy things then, and keep your hands off of my money.
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 15 2004,7:08 pm
040114_space_initiative_bcol3p.standard.jpgwell, it didn't work, but if you want to see the chart, paste this into your browser
If I did this right, this should be a chart of NASA spending. As it shows, total spending doesn't go up that much, other NASA programs are ended to pay for the new program.
This is as it should be--some programs have outlived their usefulness, and should be replaced.
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 15 2004,7:56 pm
I think expansion of space exploration (manned or unmanned) is a great thing.The advances in technology that follow along with it can only serve to benefit the entire world.
Posted by Madd Max on Jan. 15 2004,9:13 pm
| Quote (irisheyes @ Jan. 15 2004,6:43:pm) |
| the economy is not a zero sum game, when tax cuts spur economic growth, it creates more revenue than what was lost in the original cuts. |
Like the jobs boom we have here in Albert Lea? I'm sorry but I haven't seen any quality jobs coming to Albert Lea. Just jobs leaving. I just don't see Bush’s economic plan doing the common people of Albert Lea any good.
Posted by Montyman on Jan. 15 2004,9:20 pm
How could Bush's plan have anything to do with Albert Lea?Why, the last US President I recall even mentioning this area was Reagan, when he spoke so elequently about Keister while he was eating another Jelly Belly.
This little burg is not the center of anybody's universe!
Posted by i_am_back on Jan. 15 2004,10:00 pm
Most of southern Minnesota is ignored in most of the national discussions that take place each day. The only time the non-metropolitan areas are even slightly thought of is when someone with outlandish ideas for increasing spending, like George W. Bush, need the money to support their programs. Their easy answer, a budget increase. But what is a budget increase if it is not taken away from some other program? It means a tax increase. Sure, the tax rebate given to families was great but those few hundreds in rebate checks will come bcak to bite the next generation squarely in the a$$.I have every reason to object being part of the next generation. I am 25 years old and predictions show that we, as a generation, will have to work far longer than our parents. We will have a shorter life expectancy than our parents. We may, or even most likely, not have the benefit of social security even though we are having those dollars deducted from each and every paycheck.
The wonders of space are unimaginable to those of us who will never see them firsthand. But, in all reality, what does this do for the good of our country? Does it give us bragging rights saying we were the first country to build a permanent base on the moon? The first to send humans to Mars? What does this do to support the citizens of our country? We need to pay attention to the issues right here on our own planet and not focus the people's tax monies on the lofty dreams of one man. Mr. Bush, it's too late to make a good name for yourself so let's stop trying to spend your way to a place in the history books.
Maybe he should do it, we'll just pass the debt along to the next generation of tax payers and let them worry about paying off that debt. Or maybe not, I sure don't want to be paying for a project like this nor do I want to have my children be burdened with this debt. Let's fix what surrounds us first and worry about sending Americans to Mars when we have a budget surplus again.
Posted by LaLaLa on Jan. 15 2004,11:39 pm
I couldn't agree with you more, Grinning Dragon. No crying here.
Posted by xFOOT on Jan. 16 2004,11:08 am
| Quote (Madd Max @ Jan. 15 2004,9:13:pm) | ||
Like the jobs boom we have here in Albert Lea? I'm sorry but I haven't seen any quality jobs coming to Albert Lea. Just jobs leaving. I just don't see Bush’s economic plan doing the common people of Albert Lea any good. |
combine no jobs/economic growth with a steady loss of an already aging/aged population, cities less then 1 hour away taking not only our youth but better paying jobs, a corupt government and you have a hell of a mess coming very soon to albert lea.
Posted by jimhanson on Jan. 16 2004,11:10 am
"Why would anyone want to leave Earth? Why would anyone want to go out there?"The Flat Earth Society is accepting members. Here is a link to their website.
< http://www.flat-earth.org/ >
Posted by MrTarzan on Mar. 24 2004,9:42 pm
I want to go. I would go as far as they would let me, even with a less than perfect chance to come back. Heck, I would go for a less than 50% chance if it was to be the first man on Mars. Cool. 
Posted by rosebudinal on Mar. 24 2004,10:26 pm
Anyone check out the moon and the planet next to it tonite. Awesome.
Posted by usmcr on Mar. 24 2004,10:26 pm
in the news awhile back it stated that China would be sending a manned mission to the moon. i just wonder if this annoucement had something to do with crancking up the space program! i have no doubt that he who rules the outer space will rule the world. i to have reservations of the huge amount of funds that will be expended on this project. the oceans cover over 75% of the earth & yet only a fraction has been explored! it would be ideal for a cooperative effort world wide to explore space, to keep it in neutral hands. i am afraid this is just wishful thinking however! sometime it will be mandatory to make the choice as the sun will make it impossible to surive on earth. that is if we do not destroy ourselves first. mother nature might just decide that she has had enough of the pollution & create some real havoc on the earth. the technology for space travel is light years away for any significant voyage into the universe. food for thought: we need to learn how to get along here on earth before we venture out into the unknown! we have seen alot of progress in the last 75 years but some things never seem to change. we are still killing each other!
Posted by Truth on Mar. 25 2004,3:54 pm
I realize this will sound very foolish to many of you, however, at that risk I'll say it anyway.For any of you that doubt the value of pushing into space, check out the PC game "Empire Earth." It very accurately and painfully teaches the player the value of researching new technology. If as a people we do not stretch out into new frontiers, where ever we find them, we will fall behind and be consumed by those who advance. To stand still is to fall behind.
Space will teach us to be better masters and keepers of our own planet. I think if we spent more on exploration and research we might not need to spend so much supporting those who don't support themselves.
All politics aside, space exploration is good for mankind.
Posted by Truth on Mar. 25 2004,4:06 pm
I also agree on the tax cut issue.Take some economics courses and you will see that the more free income people have the better our economy does. Tax cuts to the rich are not a bad thing. Tax cuts in the higher income brackets as well as tax breaks for corporate America leave more capitol in the hands of the people who make the damn jobs in the first place. That's how the economy grows adn that growth creates far more tax revenue than simple increases in taxation. DUH.
I saw a nice reduction in my taxes as a result I can buy more, I like that and so did the folks at Motor Inn and so might the folks at Northstar Power Sports.
The only thing we need to be careful about is the Democrat's tax and spend M.O. Cut the programs that are not working or at least trim them down and redirect that funding to useful projects.
Posted by MrTarzan on Mar. 25 2004,5:29 pm
Truth, I agree with you on so much here, we could hug. Seriously, the only issue I take is the party line about Democrat's tax and spend M.O. That is kind of a catch phrase that does not reflect the modern democrat. Democrats tend to believe that social programs are the key, and they make great programs, the problem in the past was blind loyalty to the party, probably exaggerated by the great depression conditions, that led Democrats to hang onto many programs long after they were no longer useful. As newer Democrats deal with some of the problem programs left behind by the "Dyed in Blue", new ideas that are more efficient are coming along. Most just don't want to see the baby thrown out with the bathwater. That is how I see it anyway.
Posted by Montyman on Mar. 25 2004,7:21 pm
And just who are these 'new' democrats, huh?Certainly not Kerry...
Posted by MrTarzan on Mar. 25 2004,8:03 pm
Lots of people. I have no choice but to vote for Bush this election, exactly because of Kerry. Kerry is Scary should be the Republican mantra because it would resonate with people like me. If Edwards had been the nominee, after Bush's illegal alien debacle, I would have gone for Edwards. But Kerry? Never. He is too Fonda Hanoi Jane for one. But seriously, would you vote for Ted Kennedy for President, they are like clones.
Posted by cwolff on Mar. 25 2004,8:42 pm
The democrats say they are going to roll back the tax on the rich, but they will not define what it means to be "rich." The truth is they will bring back taxes for many of the middle class if given the chance.
Posted by Liberal on Mar. 25 2004,9:11 pm
I'd vote for Kennedy before I'd vote for Bush/CheneyHow can you compare a decorated vietnam vet to Hanoi Jane? How many American lives do you think Kerry and protestors like him saved?
I don't understand why Geo. Bush is more qualified than John Kerry to run our country in time of war. Is it because he's a republican? Or is it because of his many hours experience in the Air Guard?
Posted by Montyman on Mar. 25 2004,9:39 pm
I'll vote for Kerry when Congress gives us back all our social security payments and lets us run our own retirements instead of letting the democrats steal our money...
Posted by Liberal on Mar. 25 2004,10:04 pm
Why do you fault the DFL? The republicans have controlled congress since Nov 6, 2002. If they wanted to give you your money back they could do it. But, if they give us this money back who would take care of the elderly that depend on social security now?
Posted by Montyman on Mar. 25 2004,10:49 pm
Who will take care of us?
Posted by Truth on Mar. 26 2004,7:26 am
Liberalism requires that its subjects believe they need the government to "take care of them."I would like to know who these new Democrats are. Don't kid yourself people like Kerry, Clinton (Mrs.) and Kennedy are all about a large governement redistributing wealth. These are the people that want to micromanage how you toast your begal. Wake up.
Our nation was fonded on individuals, strong individuals forging their own way. If you fail that's life. Demo's would would say an individuals failure is not the individuals fault, some how the government failed the individual.
New Demo's...NOT. They just have new cloths. A liberal can shop at the conservative store and buy a red tie but, they are still a liberal underneath.
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 26 2004,9:35 am
Truth--I agree completely your ideological beliefs. Your quote on the space program was dead on.CWolff--your comment on "who is rich" is also right on.
Montyman--I hope you meant it as satire when you said
| Quote |
| who will take care of us? |
Posted by rosebudinal on Mar. 26 2004,11:47 am
I agree with 90% of what you all are saying. It didn't take me long to figure out the parties once I became of age to vote. Jimmy Carter did that for me. I should thank him for it and have voted republican ever since.
Posted by cwolff on Mar. 26 2004,2:55 pm
At last a Democrat defined what rich is last night on TV. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-CA last night was asked by Mr. Cavuto at around 11:30 P.M. what is the Democrat's definition of the rich, and she stated that it is people earning a million dollars or more per year. If any one thinks that the democrats are only going to raise taxes on people making a million dollars or more if given the chance, then you are on dope!
Posted by MrTarzan on Mar. 27 2004,5:43 pm
Oh c'mon guys and gals. That is talk just as polarizing as the "liberals" that you all seem to rail against. I grew-up in a dyed in blue Democrat house, and I have two Uncles that became Sergeant Majors in the Army, my Dad a DA, my Mom a graduate of Law Enforcement who became a agent, and a conservative financial philosophy. My mother at one point should have gotten food stamps instead letting her children (me included) go hungry because of pride. I too turned against their ideas because of Carter. I went Republican because of leadership and the ideal of confronting the cold war, not appeasing it. I was a history nut, and I knew that the world was a dangerous place. Since then, I have not voted party line on everything, and I never will. I vote for the candidate, even if they are a Democrat. I consider myself more of a Liberatarian (very different than Liberal) than Republican. However, I believe that the Democrats were, and still are, very good at identifying social needs and coming up with great ideas on what to do about social problems. What was the problem was they needed seperation. You see, in a really successful business, you have creative, and practical people working hand in hand. In social work, you have mostly creative, and they easily mismanage stuff. Democrat social workers with Republican bosses would be perfect. People would get the programs they need, and they would be efficient.If you Bush supporters out there want to win, and keep voters like me that don't have an elephant tatooed on our rearends, then you need to learn to win the argument, and not just spout things like TAX and Spend MO's. That is rhetoric, it works for Rush because it is in the context of entertainment, but it does not win debates.
I voted for Jesse, only to be disappointed that he did not feel like he was busy enough and had to go be a WFL star. Sometimes I am so wrong.
I vote for who I think will be best for my family and my country, not my party. So try not to make a villian out of every person that declares they are liberals or a Democrat, you isolate people that way. Look at Liberal here on the forum. He is my hero for bringing out the dirt here. He does not sound like someone that just wants to Tax and Spend either.
Liberal, I will not answer your question about why I won't support Kerry here. I will start a new thread, and you are welcome to try to change my mind. It is still a long way to election day, and GW has not been perfect. I am still pissed about the illegal thing. That does nothing to help anyone in my opinion and was only pandering to the Hispanic vote, despite polls that prove most Hispanic citizens don't agree with it.