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.

 

ten billion to put an base on the moon? what a waste of money

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 04:13 PM
link   
NASA is a money pit. Why spend billions on a base on the Moon or a flight to Mars? There is nothing there. I guess it's higher priority to spend money on the space program then it is to have national health care. More important to not get off fossil fuel. Want to talk about national debt? 10 billion you can give 10,000 new business owners 1 million dollars each. That would boost the economy. Why is there national debt? Uncle Sam likes to dip his hands in the piggy bank and not return it. If your going to take something from the economy and society you must replace it with new businesses and jobs to help counter balance. It's simple common sense is all.




posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by sean
NASA is a money pit. Why spend billions on a base on the Moon or a flight to Mars? There is nothing there. I guess it's higher priority to spend money on the space program then it is to have national health care. More important to not get off fossil fuel. Want to talk about national debt? 10 billion you can give 10,000 new business owners 1 million dollars each. That would boost the economy. Why is there national debt? Uncle Sam likes to dip his hands in the piggy bank and not return it. If your going to take something from the economy and society you must replace it with new businesses and jobs to help counter balance. It's simple common sense is all.


Please refer to my earlier post.

I still hat short sighted people, with people like this, Im amazed we have powered flight.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by sean
NASA is a money pit. Why spend billions on a base on the Moon or a flight to Mars? There is nothing there. I guess it's higher priority to spend money on the space program then it is to have national health care. More important to not get off fossil fuel. Want to talk about national debt? 10 billion you can give 10,000 new business owners 1 million dollars each. That would boost the economy. Why is there national debt? Uncle Sam likes to dip his hands in the piggy bank and not return it. If your going to take something from the economy and society you must replace it with new businesses and jobs to help counter balance. It's simple common sense is all.


Alot of people in this thread are forgetting that this moon base is all within NASA's budget. You wouldn't have paid any attention if they went ahead with 10,000 million dollar projects, now would you have? As I stated earlier, who cares about looking for another star 459083458384058098495 miles away ... why don't we put people out to look at the closer things that actually might have some promise. Granted this will probably turn into a 100 billion dollar ISS debacle, but I at least want to see NASA try.

What I REALLY want to see is the private sector go out there.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz
What I REALLY want to see is the private sector go out there.


Bigelowe Aerospace is hiring... and so is Spaceport America


And to that person who doesn't believe the number of jobs and spin off jobs this will create?

Sir you haven't a clue

BTW the price tag to build that new PUBLIC and COMMERCIAL spaceport?

200 BILLION 20 times what NASA is putting into the Moon Base
Virgin Galactic a PUBLIC space flight company using NO TAX DOLLARS will be the first tenant and be launching space flights as early as 2008

Now if that doesn't tell you something... you need to stop playing OSTRICH!! And just as a note to put this into context.. an average Casino here in Las Vegas costs 200 billion to build as well

So yes 10 billion IS PEANUTS


[edit on 10-12-2006 by zorgon]



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Fiverz
What I REALLY want to see is the private sector go out there.


Bigelowe Aerospace is hiring... and so is Spaceport America

[edit on 10-12-2006 by zorgon]


I know ... I've inquired
I don't feel like moving out to New Mexico or Nevada right now, but they sound like they both know what they are doing from personal correspondence. Financing and motives are two issues though I had with each company ... for those that don't know check 'em out:

www.bigelowaerospace.com...

www.spaceportamerica.com...



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
And to that person who doesn't believe the number of jobs and spin off jobs this will create?
Sir you haven't a clue


So give us a clue... maybe a link to some information, rather than your unsubstantiated claim that "millions of jobs will be created" ?!? From what I can find, NASA and its contractors have currently employed 400,000 people, widly of the mark of "millions" I think you'd agree.


Originally posted by zorgon
Well I am highly in debt... mortgage, car payments etc... pretty much like most Americans...
I spend as much as I can on speculation and fun...
Otherwise what is the point of working and making money?


The point in making money could be so that you aren't in debt, rather than spending it on hedonistic pleasures...
. Also, the government can't just change the price of gold, the price of anything is how much someone is willing to pay for it.


Originally posted by zorgon
200 BILLION 20 times what NASA is putting into the Moon Base
Virgin Galactic a PUBLIC space flight company using NO TAX DOLLARS will be the first tenant and be launching space flights as early as 2008


How much money has NASA spent in order to get to the point it is at, in relative terms? I'd suspect much more than 200 billion.

This debate should be focused on pros versus cons, and within the current state of play the cons outweigh the pros.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by byhiniur
So give us a clue... maybe a link to some information, rather than your unsubstantiated claim that "millions of jobs will be created" ?!?
How much money has NASA spent in order to get to the point it is at, in relative terms? I'd suspect much more than 200 billion.

This debate should be focused on pros versus cons, and within the current state of play the cons outweigh the pros.


Just playing Devil's Advocate, but likewise, where is a link to how much NASA has spent to get to the point where it's at? Also, the pros vs. cons thing is not set in stone ... it is just an individual's opinon. I think furthering space exploration is worth more than bumping up the economy a tad. That means one less con for me than you would have.

Again I think it is all a matter of perspective. I don't make very much money, but when you put this in context of the overall NASA budget (16.2 billion in '05) and what the government is spending on other things such as border protection (21.3 billion) and war (101.8 billion this year ALONE for Iraq) it is a drop in the bucket.

I actually find it suprising that people on this board aren't more FOR something of this nature.

EDIT: I found NASA's '06 budget ... 16.623 billion.

[edit on 10-12-2006 by Fiverz]



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by thesneakiod

I seriously hope this is a joke. NASA plan to spend an obscene amount of money just
to put some sort of high tech living quarters on the moon? what in gods name for?

No normal average joe will ever get there, we will never see it being constructed, if
anything alien is there, we will never see it.

It would cost NASA millions to get people fit for space travel.

NASA also claims it will be a launch pad for our first trip to mars, so by their reckoning,
the launch of the biggest and most important space flight in history will be safer in a
dodgy cold harsh enviroment with no oxygen, instead of the tried and tested launches
from earth?

The moon is a dead rock, so they say. So whatever is there,(past relics and whatnot) we will never be allowed to find out the true secrets of the moon so whats the point.

Its funny how NASA releases pics of supposed water on mars to get people juiced up,
then announce they're going to spend a vast amount of money on a pointless project
on which we thouht they had given up on years ago.



and uhh how much do we blow daily on the war of terror?




posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by arius
I would rather have the government spend my money on space and science meant to further the human race and make life better for our children than to spend it on killing other people's children in the name of the war on terror.
im 100% agree with that

how much is the war costing anyway?, i always hear big numbers on TV, like 70 Billions or something like that, so...those numbers make the 10 B. look like nothing



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 08:12 PM
link   


So give us a clue... maybe a link to some information, rather than your unsubstantiated claim that "millions of jobs will be created" ?!? From what I can find, NASA and its contractors have currently employed 400,000 people, widly of the mark of "millions" I think you'd agree.


Unsubstantiated?...lol!...Dear friend, it would be short-sighted to assume ONLY 400,000 people at NASA benefitted from the space exploration programme, hahahaha....

Here's a clue.. Think of these '400,000' NASA folks who are employed. Do they just keep every single penny into their bank or do they circulate their money around - shoppings, homes, cars, charities, starbucks, mcdonalds, etc?...Think Keynesian economics, my dear!

Millions of labourers around the world will benefit from the demand just on these '400,000' staff alone. Not forever for sure, but as long as there is a space exploration programme, its spinoffs and outsourcing for materials and labour will benefit millions.

IF you are a social activist, you should rather press your congressman to vote not for 10 billion, but 100 billion for the space programme! Only employment and knowledge will solve majority of poverty. Furthermore, chemical rocket engines, chemical experiments, industrial production, is much better suited for space than on our environmentally challenged Earth.

[edit on 10-12-2006 by SeekerofTruth102]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by AMANNAMEDQUEST
Im really surprised that mineral, energy and such companies haven't started space exploration, as well as corporations. Sure its gonna cost alot but you have to spend money to make money.


As you noted that you are surprised by this, since they are companies, they have one common goal - to return a profit. Just what elements are there on the moon that are in such abundance and can be returned to earth for cheaper than we can currently do it here on earth?

Are there any elements within the periodic table that the moon has that is more viable to spend millions if not billions on missions to retrieve small payloads and return here and still make a profit?

The truth be told, the only mission NASA has in mind is to perpetuate itself through lofty goals of finding some holy grail in our solar system that their might be greener grass of some variety somewhere else. It is cheaper and easier to tend to our own yard than to finance these rather expensive excursions.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by byhiniur
So give us a clue... maybe a link to some information, rather than your unsubstantiated claim that "millions of jobs will be created" ?!? From what I can find, NASA and its contractors have currently employed 400,000 people, widly of the mark of "millions" I think you'd agree.


Oh good grief man...

I posted several companies and private space ports for you to google and a direct link to the FAA where there are literally hundreds of links to space based businesses licensed space ports, etc. If you are to lazy to follow up why should I waste my time doing the legwork for you?



You say NASA has 400,000 I didn't mention NASA at all I am talking private companies, government agencies like the FAA. Space research companies, Aerospace companies etc etc

Then like the other poster said the support jobs that go with that like maintenance office workers new housing near the spaceports for workers etc etc

Then add to that the military do you have ANY idea how many people are employed in the various Space Command divisions?

Now add the support people for that part of it...

Here is a link to Space Command info...

SPACE COMMAND INFO

Lots of exciting careers here for young adventurers. You ought to see the toys they get to play with

[edit on 11-12-2006 by zorgon]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 12:47 AM
link   
I had to blink a few times when i read that statement.

How could anyone not see the huge job market that would naturally be created by moving out into space by more than simply scientists? Not that i necessarily am comfortable with the idea of colonizing space, but barring acts of Yahweh and second comings of Christ, the space industry and related jobs created by commercializing space would be insanely big. Off the charts, big. Whole new frontier with so many possibilities you could lose track if you gave it any serious study.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 12:55 AM
link   
in a way seconding undo post, if you think about it in the long run, even if you think the program idea is useless, job oppurtunities would be endless, for one people qualified would get a job if needed, an people maybe not as qualified would try to get in....just for the fact that its space were dealing with.

An for the people saying that nasa is useless for all reason should maybe take a look back at things they value in life, alot of inventions a inovations we have here on earth are only here because some astronaut needed it to get the job done an it was then adapted for earth useses. without space flight an operation, you might not be able to tuern on the tv an sea what the weather was around. the army an civilians wouldnt have GPS's which if a valuable part of military work.

an yea 16 billion dollars is nothing compared to a daY in iraq oe the lesser popular afghanistan.

instead of saying the program is useless, why dont you get off your computer an find a way to spend 16 bil, instead of talking about it or get on the bandwagon an get a job with nasa



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 01:10 AM
link   
Why not take the billions that the US gov't is throwing away killing people in Iraq and do something more productive with it? I'm not sure what the budget for the Iraqi war/invasion/liberation/whateveryoucallit is, but that money could be more wisely spent on almost any other project. Certainly the space program qualifies. We will gain valuable scientific knowledge, and, as others said, possibly valuable raw materials as well, particularly the rare helium-3, which shows promise as an excellent fuel source, from what I have read.

Take the Iraqi war fund, build a space station, send a couple guys to Mars, and take the leftover and build/renovate a bunch of schools and hire some teachers and stuff like that. As I already said, I don't know what the war budget is, but I'm pretty darned sure it's more than $10 Billion.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   
HEY!!! Here is a whole line of jobs even I completely forgot about!!!

Space Doctors!!


The U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) are also looking towards a mission to Mars, a journey that will take three to four years each way.

“The longer you stay, the more potential there is for things to happen,” Dubrowski points out, noting that lacerations and trauma injuries are certainly possible. Currently, astronauts get a few hours of medical training on the ground, which is insufficient for treating more serious injuries, he says. Although typically a medical doctor is on board the space station, “everybody has to know a bit of everything.” On longer missions, he anticipates having a physician and a highly skilled medical assistant who are both trained in surgery, while the rest of the crew will be trained in the basics.

Currently, emergencies are dealt with on board the space station and surgery can be performed using a remote-controlled robot. But as spaceships get further away from Earth, robotic surgery is no longer possible because the signals take longer to reach the mission, Dubrowski explains.




Surgery by remote control robot? LOL Thats a whole new line of jobs. I wonder what a house call to the Space Station costs...


SOURCE



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
I still hat short sighted people, with people like this, Im amazed we have powered flight.


Its ok really... no problem... we have powered fly because people like that sit in there little rooms and whine a lot... but do nothing... while the people making the machines for powered flight are busy doing it...

In the same way space flight will happen...

I am sure the whiners stayed at home to when America was born.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   
I can understand many of your thoughts but I am shocked when I read such things as:

We should realize the importance of space exploration rather then "WHINING" that the money spent to FEED people who WILL NEVER contribrute back to Society that- that they absorb. Then in another post to say they HATE people without vision.

My thoughts is that space exploration is indeed important but the vision should be that it needs to be for the right reasons and at the right time.

The peoples that have these business here on Earth and the rights up there are the ones that should pay for it not the tax-payers.

Then someone wrote 10 Billion to help here would never be enough for poverty and health and at the end of the statement to write, and the result?

To me, it is saying we aren't doing it right and if it takes all the money to clean the air, water, soil on Earth then this is what we should be doing, this in itself would keep people in work for a very long time. Every human on this planet has the right to have food, clothing, housing, medicine... for one human is no better then the other.

Before we move forward maybe we need to take a step backward and see what is happening here.

One here wrote 10 Billion is peanuts and yes in the whole of things this is correct so let them use there own monies and not we the peoples. My money should be used to help home (Earth first)

Since I am an experiencer with other beings I will go with there communications that:

Whatever is meant to be, will be......................and I will leave it at that.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 04:53 PM
link   
You know the USA spends trillions on helping the world.. whenever there is a disaster who is the first to step in with aid and relief?

And what happens when we send tons of food and medicine to the poor nations? Most cases it ends up in the Black Market or the warlords pockets... never reaching the people

What is our reward for this They envy us, they hate us, they attack us, and when they need more money they hold their hands out again...

Yet still we shell out, send relief teams, provide loans, send in specialists to educate, provide medicine, whatever it takes.

Perfect? No we are not but I would stand our record on humanitarian aid up against anyones. Why does no one ever mention these figures?


So forgive me if we toss a small percentage to develop our own future for a change...

And as to those companies? THEY ARE using their own and investors money...Its NASA thats spending the 10 billion:

The spaceport in New Mexico, though state run also raised the 200 billion from independent sources and they are quite proud of that.

So stop whining and lets go to the moon!!

[edit on 11-12-2006 by zorgon]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:05 PM
link   
Zorgon I respect your thoughts but I thought maybe you would respect mine.

I don't take it kindly at my age (58) to be told by you to stop whining.

I have stated my feelings in this thread so I am done Zorgon but I think you need to (get off your horse) have a pit stop.


ps. I know your not a spring duckling yourself.


[edit on 11-12-2006 by observe50]
edit to edit my edit


[edit on 11-12-2006 by observe50]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join