NASA Spending Hugely Overestimated
Page 1 of 1 [ 7 posts ]
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1000/1
One part in particular leapt out at me:
Quote:
Americans in general have no idea what NASA’s “cost” is. In fact, most members of the public have no idea how much any government agency’s budget is. What we do know—and have recently documented—is that the public perception of NASA’s budget is grossly inflated relative to actual dollars. In a just-completed study, we asked respondents what percentage of the national budget is allocated to NASA and to the Department of Defense, the Department of Education, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Health and Human Services, among other agencies. NASA’s allocation, on average, was estimated to be approximately 24% of the national budget (the NASA allocation in 2007 was approximately 0.58% of the budget.) The next highest over-estimate was for the Department of Defense, which received approximately 21% of the budget in 2007 and was estimated on average to receive approximately 33%.
In other words, respondents believed NASA’s budget approaches that of the Department of Defense, which receives almost 38 times more money (see “Putting NASA’s budget in perspective”, The Space Review, July 2, 2007). Once people were informed of the actual allocations, they were almost uniformly surprised. Our favorite response came from one of the more vocal participants, who exclaimed, “No wonder we haven’t gone anywhere!”
In other words, respondents believed NASA’s budget approaches that of the Department of Defense, which receives almost 38 times more money (see “Putting NASA’s budget in perspective”, The Space Review, July 2, 2007). Once people were informed of the actual allocations, they were almost uniformly surprised. Our favorite response came from one of the more vocal participants, who exclaimed, “No wonder we haven’t gone anywhere!”
I suppose people see that a certain mission or piece of research recieved so many "million" dollars, and fixate on that as a huge number, when it's chickenfeed on the scales that the US budget operates on, and certainly comes nowhere near the amounts funnelled into wars.
Stevopedia
Velociraptor
Joined: 2 Nov 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 405
Location: Tigertown, South Carolina, United States
Elemental wrote:
...and certainly comes nowhere near the amounts funnelled into wars.
Or even the ability to fight them.
Wars, and the massive expenditure of lives and money they entail, are singularly pointless and rather illogical. The world would be much better off if people just got along. But it seems that some people must either get what they want, or make everyone believe the same things they do, and are prepared to go to extreme lengths to get it. It would seem that people are entirely unwilling to accept differences, or to ask for what they want.
All this fighting, and the preparation to do it, detracts from areas that the effort and money could be better spent, such as NASA (and research in general) or health care or education.
Zara wrote:
NASA has been underfunded for a long time. It hasn't been a budget priority for a long time now.
Gotta use that money for killing folk we don't like and helping big businesses. Debt be damned in those cases.
Gotta use that money for killing folk we don't like and helping big businesses. Debt be damned in those cases.
Correct. Do you think that the usa needs that money just soooo bad (Iraqi oil) that it could be THEM that is running the death squads and blaming it on the Iraqis?
_________________
Make mine a super frapalapi with double cream lots of Aspartame choc chip cookies a lump of lard and make it a big one