"The amount the U.S. military spends annually on air conditioning in Iraq
and Afghanistan: $20.2 billion, according to a former Pentagon official."
"The proposed budget for FY 2010 would raise it to about $18.7
billion." So we spend more on air-conditioning tents than NASA annually?
Observing historical surges in technical progress it looks like the winners are
war and the space race. Personally I vote for the space race. I would rather
invest money in teaching society how to fish (the NASA investment), than give
him a fish (entitlement programs).
All while barack outsources these jobs to Russia. He's a disgrace
@CHS85: I never said the Space Shuttle program didn't need to go. Those things
were literally falling apart while in orbit. However that doesn't mean we
couldn't have created a more economical space travel system... modeled off what
the Russians have. Oh, we tried that... but the program got canned,
TWICE by Presidents who could care less about science and technology.
@DeltaFoxtrot"Just a sign of the times. In the 60's people gave
their lives to make sure we beat the Russians to the moon, now we're paying them
to put our men and women into orbit."For what purpose? If our
mission is to carry food to the space station and bring back the trash for $450
million per mission, I'm not sure we are getting the best bang for our buck.
"According to the Pew Economic Policy Group, an extension of all of the
Bush tax cuts will cost $3.1 trillion over ten years, once the costs of
servicing the debt are factored in." Where are the jobs?
Just a sign of the times. In the 60's people gave their lives to make sure we
beat the Russians to the moon, now we're paying them to put our men and women
into orbit.What would JFK say about that?
@Gr8DaneCyles of layoffs have always been a part of life at Thiokol
(ATK). My dad worked there when he graduated from college and was laid off and
re-hired several times before getting a job for another company and moving to
SLC from Brigham City. Projects come and go, and people who work in industries
that are constantly changing need to accept that, or work in another industry.
Projects that rely on federal funding aren't guaranteed to be there
forever. The previous president put began phasing us out of the Space Shuttle
program, which has been successful for 30 years. In all honesty,
though, how much does it cost the space shuttle to fly each astronaut on a
mission - taking into consideration all the contractors, NASA employees, parts,
fuel etc? I'm venturing a guess it is over $60 million per astronaut.
According to NASA it is $450 million per mission, not including the initial
investment of $1.7 billion for each shuttle.
More of Obama's "hope and change" hitting utah and the NASA manned
space program, which he killed. But take heart everyone. He's shifting NASA
funds over into redundant global warming satellites, and virtual classrooms, all
the while paying Russia $60 million per astronaut per trip aboard the Soyuz to
take what few real astronauts we will have left to the space station.Doesn't anyone else see the irony of our tax dollars subsidizing Russian Space
Rocket builders while, at the same time, putting U.S. rocket builders out of
work?It's Obamanomics at its worst. If this is hope and change,
just shoot me now.
If you're relying on the Federal meal ticket, now's probably a good time to
consider moving to the public sector.
This is an example of how companies that rely on government contracts are
impacted by federal budget cuts.
Having watched a few tests and a few launches, I hope the 5 segment motor gets a
chance to be flown and ATK can keep building them. Deep space is waiting.
That is so hard for these families.