It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

President Trump should pledge to increase NASA's annual budget to 2.5% of Federal Budget

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Federal spending roughly exceeded US$4.4 trillion. Spending on space/NASA was around 0.49% of this or just over US$21 billion or so.


Congress provided $21.5 billion to NASA in fiscal year 2019.


Planetary Society - NASA just got its best budget in a decade

Now, I obviously understand that private companies are making strides and this can only be applauded.

Nevertheless, I propose that a drastic increase should be authorized, with annual spending increased to between US$95 billion and US$100 billion. This would represent an increase in NASA's budget of nearly 5 times the current budget. This is doable in reality.

To support this, a reorganization of defense spending and defense-related spending should occur for example. Cutting several billions of dollars from the annual defense budget (and defense-related spending) would occur (won't have a noticeable effect on the USA's global standing as a military superpower).

I think President Trump should drastically increase the annual space budget.
edit on 12-10-2019 by TheRepublicOfCanada because: Link




posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 09:19 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRepublicOfCanada


Ummm...how about...instead the “republic of Canada”...fund it’s own version of NASA...you could even call it CASA...a home for all the bureaucratic boondoggle you can stomach...

It’s innovation from recent private enterprise...(read...Spacex)...that has drastically reduced the per launch cost of doing business and dragged NASA kicking and screaming into a realistic space age...

So...no thank you...I’d rather leave the future of space travel in the hands of private enterprise...not in the tired old lap of bureaucracy...









YouSir



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRepublicOfCanada

Why would he do that? He has already promoted the "space force" idea, which is really (like the premise, or not) the next logical step for our immediate vicinity.

Other countries, as well as the private sector you mentioned, are carrying on the exploration aspect. We have sent crafts to every planet in our solar system, and layed the foundation for the future there. Astroid mining, and that type of thing will progress as private entities see fit (profitable).

We already have plans for moon, and Mars manned bases, with very little return on investment projected.

Don't misunderstand. I'm not in favor of disbanding NASA. I just think priorities need to shift. One example would be the search for dangerous asteroids, and the ability to alter their path. I don't see the value in increased funding.



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: TheRepublicOfCanada

Why would he do that? He has already promoted the "space force" idea, which is really (like the premise, or not) the next logical step for our immediate vicinity.

Other countries, as well as the private sector you mentioned, are carrying on the exploration aspect. We have sent crafts to every planet in our solar system, and layed the foundation for the future there. Astroid mining, and that type of thing will progress as private entities see fit (profitable).

We already have plans for moon, and Mars manned bases, with very little return on investment projected.

Don't misunderstand. I'm not in favor of disbanding NASA. I just think priorities need to shift. One example would be the search for dangerous asteroids, and the ability to alter their path. I don't see the value in increased funding.



But why leave it to just the private sector? Why not also have the public sector also conducting more projects as well?

Consider the example of defense spending. Annual defense (and defense-related) spending exceeds US$900 billion. This is from the total federal budget (yes, the government). This also includes contracts with private companies who build equipment, vehicles, ships, weapons manufacturing etc for the US military, USAF and the Navy etc. That's like telling us to leave defense to private companies, when the United States is a nation protected by it's military, navy and air force with many private companies benefitting from government related contracts etc.



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRepublicOfCanada

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: TheRepublicOfCanada

Why would he do that? He has already promoted the "space force" idea, which is really (like the premise, or not) the next logical step for our immediate vicinity.

Other countries, as well as the private sector you mentioned, are carrying on the exploration aspect. We have sent crafts to every planet in our solar system, and layed the foundation for the future there. Astroid mining, and that type of thing will progress as private entities see fit (profitable).

We already have plans for moon, and Mars manned bases, with very little return on investment projected.

Don't misunderstand. I'm not in favor of disbanding NASA. I just think priorities need to shift. One example would be the search for dangerous asteroids, and the ability to alter their path. I don't see the value in increased funding.



But why leave it to just the private sector? Why not also have the public sector also conducting more projects as well?



Primarily because of the fact that our government is the most inefficient entity I've ever seen. For every dollar they spend effectively, to accomplish a given goal, they waste three dollars with beurocrocy. Tax money is not an endless reservoir.

To your other point, I agree the proportion of defense spending is very high, but it's not something that would fall within the purview of the private sector, for obvious reasons. The biggest being the MIC is already too powerful, and out of control.



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Mach2

... with very little return on investment projected.

It is called research. The ROI is knowledge, scientific and technological advancement. Something that is not of primary interest to private companies.



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: TheRepublicOfCanada

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: TheRepublicOfCanada

Why would he do that? He has already promoted the "space force" idea, which is really (like the premise, or not) the next logical step for our immediate vicinity.

Other countries, as well as the private sector you mentioned, are carrying on the exploration aspect. We have sent crafts to every planet in our solar system, and layed the foundation for the future there. Astroid mining, and that type of thing will progress as private entities see fit (profitable).

We already have plans for moon, and Mars manned bases, with very little return on investment projected.

Don't misunderstand. I'm not in favor of disbanding NASA. I just think priorities need to shift. One example would be the search for dangerous asteroids, and the ability to alter their path. I don't see the value in increased funding.



But why leave it to just the private sector? Why not also have the public sector also conducting more projects as well?



Primarily because of the fact that our government is the most inefficient entity I've ever seen. For every dollar they spend effectively, to accomplish a given goal, they waste three dollars with beurocrocy. Tax money is not an endless reservoir.

To your other point, I agree the proportion of defense spending is very high, but it's not something that would fall within the purview of the private sector, for obvious reasons. The biggest being the MIC is already too powerful, and out of control.


But your point about inefficiency could be said about any government department or whatever for example. I really don't think that this is enough of an argument to not increase funding for NASA etc.

On the face of it, a quick reorganization of the Federal budget could easily free up several tens of billions of dollars, with primary cuts coming from slashing defense spending (albeit, not to a great degree and hence won't rile up the "MIC" to too much of a degree). Also, as I said above, the cuts to annual defense spending would not be too noticeable because annual US defense spending is already at the highest ever (and will continue to increase for many years to come - probably will surpass a trillion dollars next year or thereafter).
edit on 12-10-2019 by TheRepublicOfCanada because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: moebius
a reply to: Mach2

... with very little return on investment projected.

It is called research. The ROI is knowledge, scientific and technological advancement. Something that is not of primary interest to private companies.


I believe the R and D that came out of the "space race" was truly invaluable. What we learned through that accomplishment changed the world for the better. Don't forget though, that it wasn't done out of benevolence. It was a biproduct of cold war politics. JFKs "moon speach" was just a sales pitch.

There is no way a government run progam can compete with Silicon Valley when it comes to tech. Goverment subsidised universities, as well as pharmaceutical companies now do medical research.

What type of research are you looking for?

I understand where you are coming from, but it has never beem abou research for the sake of research. It's always the byproduct of a specific goal.

Now, if you are thinking along the lines of faster space travel, you may have a point with ion drives or some other tech, but the reality is, we have nowhere to go.



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 11:57 AM
link   
So the proposed 2020 budget for Nasa is roughly between $22 billion and 23 billion.


The White House released its Presidential Budget Request (PBR) for NASA's fiscal year 2020 on March 11th, 2019, followed by a supplemental budget request on May 13th. Together they propose a top-line NASA budget of $22.6 billion—a 5% increase compared to the previous year.


Planetary Society - 2020 NASA budget

The proposed increase in the OP to $95+billion could be pushed as early as for either 2022 or 2023.

If so, I really cannot see who would frustrate attempts to stop this budget from being authorized. I can't forsee any Dems trying to stop this or even Republicans. Sure, if defense spending was slashed slightly, there may be a few murmurs, but if the greater picture is displayed and the increased NASA budget proposed, then this could actually happen.

The modest increases that we see every year for NASA's budget are just that - modest. I think that, coupled with the great strides seen in the private sector with private companies etc, we could really go further, much further.
edit on 12-10-2019 by TheRepublicOfCanada because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-10-2019 by TheRepublicOfCanada because: Link



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 12:41 PM
link   
I wouldn’t mind giving more funds to NASA. If the government is going to waste our tax dollars anyway then space exploration is a much better use of those funds than wars.



posted on Oct, 12 2019 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRepublicOfCanada
So the proposed 2020 budget for Nasa is roughly between $22 billion and 23 billion.


The White House released its Presidential Budget Request (PBR) for NASA's fiscal year 2020 on March 11th, 2019, followed by a supplemental budget request on May 13th. Together they propose a top-line NASA budget of $22.6 billion—a 5% increase compared to the previous year.


Planetary Society - 2020 NASA budget

The proposed increase in the OP to $95+billion could be pushed as early as for either 2022 or 2023.

If so, I really cannot see who would frustrate attempts to stop this budget from being authorized. I can't forsee any Dems trying to stop this or even Republicans. Sure, if defense spending was slashed slightly, there may be a few murmurs, but if the greater picture is displayed and the increased NASA budget proposed, then this could actually happen.

The modest increases that we see every year for NASA's budget are just that - modest. I think that, coupled with the great strides seen in the private sector with private companies etc, we could really go further, much further.


I mean, NASA got its largest budget in a decade earlier this year.

Who decided to change NASA's mission a decade ago?



posted on Oct, 13 2019 @ 05:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: TheRepublicOfCanada
So the proposed 2020 budget for Nasa is roughly between $22 billion and 23 billion.


The White House released its Presidential Budget Request (PBR) for NASA's fiscal year 2020 on March 11th, 2019, followed by a supplemental budget request on May 13th. Together they propose a top-line NASA budget of $22.6 billion—a 5% increase compared to the previous year.


Planetary Society - 2020 NASA budget

The proposed increase in the OP to $95+billion could be pushed as early as for either 2022 or 2023.

If so, I really cannot see who would frustrate attempts to stop this budget from being authorized. I can't forsee any Dems trying to stop this or even Republicans. Sure, if defense spending was slashed slightly, there may be a few murmurs, but if the greater picture is displayed and the increased NASA budget proposed, then this could actually happen.

The modest increases that we see every year for NASA's budget are just that - modest. I think that, coupled with the great strides seen in the private sector with private companies etc, we could really go further, much further.


I mean, NASA got its largest budget in a decade earlier this year.

Who decided to change NASA's mission a decade ago?


Yes, I do find it strange how NASA's mission was changed.

And even though it's its largest budget in a decade, I still think it could be increased further. For some reason it's being tempered and restrained...



posted on Oct, 13 2019 @ 06:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRepublicOfCanada

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: TheRepublicOfCanada
So the proposed 2020 budget for Nasa is roughly between $22 billion and 23 billion.


The White House released its Presidential Budget Request (PBR) for NASA's fiscal year 2020 on March 11th, 2019, followed by a supplemental budget request on May 13th. Together they propose a top-line NASA budget of $22.6 billion—a 5% increase compared to the previous year.


Planetary Society - 2020 NASA budget

The proposed increase in the OP to $95+billion could be pushed as early as for either 2022 or 2023.

If so, I really cannot see who would frustrate attempts to stop this budget from being authorized. I can't forsee any Dems trying to stop this or even Republicans. Sure, if defense spending was slashed slightly, there may be a few murmurs, but if the greater picture is displayed and the increased NASA budget proposed, then this could actually happen.

The modest increases that we see every year for NASA's budget are just that - modest. I think that, coupled with the great strides seen in the private sector with private companies etc, we could really go further, much further.


I mean, NASA got its largest budget in a decade earlier this year.

Who decided to change NASA's mission a decade ago?


Yes, I do find it strange how NASA's mission was changed.

And even though it's its largest budget in a decade, I still think it could be increased further. For some reason it's being tempered and restrained...


Perhaps some "other countries" could put some $ in the kitty. Wait....we tried that with the ISS, amd they didn't live up to obligations.

OK, lets refocus, and draw down our military strength. Wait.....we tried that and got world wars.

I'm exaggerating to make a point.

Obviously, only a few nations have the resources for a full blown space program. At this point, probably the US, and China are the only ones whos economies could support it on a long term basis.

I think, since space travel is an endeavor of mankind as a whole, rather than a mationalistic one, an organization like the UN would be perfect for a major project, which would funded by dues payed by all members, according to their ability.

In this way, it would be a "fair" way to pay for any R&D, as well as attract the brightest minds from all disciplines, across the planet.
edit on 10132019 by Mach2 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10132019 by Mach2 because: Sp



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join