Re: NASA: Forget Space-- Go Deep

From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Fri Feb 28 2003 - 11:33:23 MST

  • Next message: Dehede011@aol.com: "Re: IRAQ: resignation letter"

    --- Spudboy100@aol.com wrote:
    > I believe the author was stating that the greater
    > resources are closer, at
    > hand, on the ocean floor; while space colonization
    > and exploration might cost
    > trillions and will not happen soon, in any case.

    Again, that's because of NASA, not because of space
    itself. As I have posted on this list before, there
    are several ventures operating right now that believe,
    with significant justification, that they can create
    their own manned "space programs" (space tourism and
    other commercial ventures) for far less than one
    billion dollars (investment before the operation
    becomes self-financing, even profitable).

    As others have pointed out, there's also the flaw of
    attacking this as "either/or". One of the main rules
    of political budgets: if you successfully attack one
    organization's budget, that frees up the money for
    *ANY* other use, not just the one you were trying to
    divert its resources towards. If you shut down NASA,
    who is to say the money won't go to, say, welfare or
    the latest War On X instead of to undersea R&D? Lobby
    for something on its own merits; don't lobby by
    comparing it to a specific other.

    Though, that said, attacking the largest budgetary
    consumptions, for instance the parts of the defense
    budget even the DOD never asked for, could free up a
    lot of money for other uses. One could lobby for
    oceanic R&D as boosting the economies of (read: pork
    to) every coastal state, which accounts for over 1/3,
    maybe over 1/2 depending on how much coast you need
    (especially if you include development of the Great
    Lakes), of the United States. Which is how these
    unwanted DOD expenditures get approval in the first
    place.

    So...anyone want to contact this author and get him to
    form a suitably pork-barrel version of what he wants
    and propose it to Congress? If he proposes it that
    way, he might find unexpectedly easy passage.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 28 2003 - 11:37:05 MST