We Stopped Dreaming

oldpbnoob wrote: choopie911 wrote: This is more like you can't pay rent so you stop sending your kids to school, because of the small cost of field trips, etc. School is more important. I disagree with your analogy. More appropriately, would be you can't pay rent, so you suspend your non-degree seeking night classes that you're taking for fun.

And the entire issue is that you think it is non-essential, which is foolish. Education is essential. This is education for the entire planet, not just 'mericuh.

choopie911 wrote: oldpbnoob wrote: choopie911 wrote: This is more like you can't pay rent so you stop sending your kids to school, because of the small cost of field trips, etc. School is more important. I disagree with your analogy. More appropriately, would be you can't pay rent, so you suspend your non-degree seeking night classes that you're taking for fun. And the entire issue is that you think it is non-essential, which is foolish. Education is essential. This is education for the entire planet, not just 'mericuh.

I wonder what the entire planets' contribution to the program is.

It just seems to me that the international comunity is incredibly critical of the American frame of thought as an automatic reaction rather than giving consideration to the opposing argument.

I may be a broken record here, but if you can't afford you can't afford it. What are the numbers that Canada contributes to its space program? A quick Google search shows that NASA is far and away the most well funded program on the planet. You could cut its number in half and still be almost triple the ESA budget / CSA budget combined.

Even with Obama's budget cuts NASA is still receiving 17 billion if my Google fu serves me correct. It cut the mars program by 30% for now, but again, if the international community is so outraged by our budget cuts, why are their own programs so poorly funded?

I don't pretend to know much about this stuff, but it just seems like the international attitude towards the American way of thought is incredibly biased from the start.

Of course I agree that cutting NASA to cut the deficit would be foolish, but it's part of a bigger picture. How about this analogy-You go to the grocery store on a cut budget. Obviously you'll make concessions. So you buy generic macaroni instead of the name brand. That one concession won't help you at all on its own, but that's clearly not your only concession.

Americans are calling for across the board spending cuts. The trouble is that we're caught in a political battle over the big cuts (welfare, military, etc) so the only clear cuts we can make are causes not politically championed.

stratoaxe wrote: I wonder what the entire planets' contribution to the program is. It just seems to me that the international comunity is incredibly critical of the American frame of thought as an automatic reaction rather than giving consideration to the opposing argument. I may be a broken record here, but if you can't afford you can't afford it. What are the numbers that Canada contributes to its space program? A quick Google search shows that NASA is far and away the most well funded program on the planet. You could cut its number in half and still be almost triple the ESA budget / CSA budget combined. Canada has a much smaller income than the U.S. - therefore our program reflects that. Even with Obama's budget cuts NASA is still receiving 17 billion if my Google fu serves me correct. It cut the mars program by 30% for now, but again, if the international community is so outraged by our budget cuts, why are their own programs so poorly funded? Because the GDP and space infrastructure of the USA is so much larger and readily available. I don't pretend to know much about this stuff, but it just seems like the international attitude towards the American way of thought is incredibly biased from the start. Biased towards what?

Edited by Rofl_Mao - 20 March 2012 at 3:10pm

I'm going to tackle this out of order because my own post was a little convoluted

GroupB wrote: What is "obtuse"?

Lacking quickness of perception or intellect. Characterized by a lack of intelligence or sensitivity:

stratoaxe wrote: I'm not trying to pass off the US as some great behemoth of awesomeness,

Commie.

Man, I can't believe that no one has made that argument yet.

^The prevailing idea in science right now is that dark energy is causing the acceleration of the expansion of the universe, but that's obviously still up for debate.

tallen702 wrote: I'd like to direct everyone's attention to this link: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/03/21/this-is-why-we-invest-in-science-this/ /end debate.

Awesome. So for 17billion/ year we get velcro, Tang and an efficient firehose.  That truly is a sound investment.

Mack wrote: ^^^ Hey . . . it's a REALLY efficient fire hose . . . . . . and I like Velcro.

I bet you still have your OP velcro wallet don't you?