And the Return on That Investment – 000,000,000 etc.
The problem with Conservatives who want to cut government spending is that they are never around when the nation needs them. The grossest (in every sense of the word) example of this is the $100 billion and counting that the
United States has spent to support
the Space Station.
But NASA has been struggling for years to square ambitions with budgets. The space station is widely praised as an engineering marvel, but it didn’t come cheap. The
has poured close to $100 billion into the program and is contributing
about $3 billion a year to the station’s operation. Space policy experts
warn that, without a significant boost in budget, NASA will not be able to keep
running the station and simultaneously carry out new, costly deep-space
missions. United States
and its partners need to make a tough call: Keep the station flying? Or bring
it down? United States
How can this be a tough decision. What exactly has been the return on this investment, how is anybody in the
United States except the direct
recipients of the funding been made better off?
Of course, NASA is based in
and Texas is
controlled by Conservatives and Conservatives are unabashedly against
government spending, except of course when they and their constituents are on
the receiving end. So there is a lot of
blame to go around here, but it would be nice if just once the Conservative
obsession with reducing government spending would focus on government spending
that should be reduced.