GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-24-2012, 21:36   #1
bigmoney890
Senior Member
 
bigmoney890's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Boone, NC
Posts: 1,453
NASA's budget cuts

The Department of Defense's budget for 2012 : $707.5 billion
Total Budget of NASA in it's entire 53 years: $526.18 billion

In just one year the DOD spends more money that NASA has in 53 years. And to top it off, NASA's budget is going to be cut by ~37%. Don't get me wrong, I support our troops and everything we are doing to try and stabilize the middle east, although our efforts seem to be in vein. With the national deficit nearing 16 TRILLION, it seems like we have our priorities in order, dont we?

NASA is responsible for over 6,300 patents including breakthroughs in pacemaker technology, invisible braces, improved missile tracking for defense, scratch resistant eye glass lenses, tempurpedic mattresses, improvements in prosthetic limbs, ear thermometers, and cordless tools just to name a few. It's truly remarkable that all of these innovations came from a department of the government who currently only gets 0.48% of the national budget, and during it's peak in 1966 it only had 4.4% when we were trying to reach the moon. Can you imagine what NASA could do with half of, a third of, or even a tenth of the money allocated to the DOD?

I realize that a good majority of GT'ers are conservative and support the war in it's entirety; but there has to be some conservatives out there that agree that we should more focus on space and it's benefits of innovations in the process. If anything we should be increasing NASA's budget, not cutting it. But maybe I am mistaken. Anyone out there have any input on the matter?
bigmoney890 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 22:00   #2
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 42,009


Shoulda put guns on the shuttle.
__________________
I’m for law and order, the way that it should be. This song’s about the night they spent protecting you from me.” - Waylon Jennings
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 22:02   #3
bigmoney890
Senior Member
 
bigmoney890's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Boone, NC
Posts: 1,453
Somehow I dont think that'll solve anything
bigmoney890 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 22:03   #4
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 42,009


BTW, saying NASA was responsible for much of that stuff isn't really honest. Most of it was developed by private companies FOR NASA.
__________________
I’m for law and order, the way that it should be. This song’s about the night they spent protecting you from me.” - Waylon Jennings
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 22:10   #5
bigmoney890
Senior Member
 
bigmoney890's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Boone, NC
Posts: 1,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
BTW, saying NASA was responsible for much of that stuff isn't really honest. Most of it was developed by private companies FOR NASA.
But NASA holds the patents. Just like the military didnt develop certain firearms, companies designed them FOR the military.
bigmoney890 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 22:15   #6
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 42,009


Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmoney890 View Post
But NASA holds the patents. Just like the military didnt develop certain firearms, companies designed them FOR the military.
So why can't the patent royalties fund the program?

If its such a good investment, isn't that a reasonable question to ask?

And if it can't, was it really a good investment?
__________________
I’m for law and order, the way that it should be. This song’s about the night they spent protecting you from me.” - Waylon Jennings

Last edited by certifiedfunds; 04-24-2012 at 22:16..
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 22:25   #7
bigmoney890
Senior Member
 
bigmoney890's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Boone, NC
Posts: 1,453
That's a very good question, and I do not have the answer. But I can say that almost 50% of NASA's budget is allocated just to satellites, leaving the other 50% for research, training, development, and everything else. So basically half of NASA's money is gone before it's spent by just maintaining satellites. I'm guessing there just isnt enough royalties to make up the other half of the expenditures.

But to me, it seems like the government could find another way to squeeze some extra money to NASA than leaving it up to their own patents. After all, the Department of energy gets $21 Billion for "defense-related" expenses
bigmoney890 is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:34.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 813
204 Members
609 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31