To Infinity, and Beyond!

..and the new reasons why all the money couldnt be spent on better things. :-(

Jimi

What would you like to spend it on?

"The world would be a much simpler place if every one could pick and choose their obligations, but we can't and we shouldn't." Major Charles W. Whittlesey

errmm.. social security and health care!

..a transportation system where 50% of the vehicles don't require gasolene, the pollution that result from it and the wars that are fought over it...! Mike IPMS

Headline in today's newspaper: Bush proposes to fund $1.5 billion to promote marriage.

True. I didn't make that up.

Check for yourself in today's New York Times. This is not just some tax incentive. This is to be hard earned taxpayer cash spent on advising poor people on the many benefits of marriage.

It appears Mr. Bush is upset that so may poor people are living in sin.

.../V

Benefits of current and previous space programs:

- the Internet

- MRI techniques

- CAT Scans

- better ways to preserve food

- Virtual Reality

- better fire fighting equipment

- cordless tools

- smoke detectors

- better transistors

- better insulation for your house

- lasers

This brief reminder of the space programs benefits to humankind were brought to you by someone who thinks the new initiative is pretty darn cool. Thanks for reading.

Don't worry, it will not happen, it's just a political stunt. Just his way of showing us dumb citizens that he is capable, with a lot of help, of thinking past next month.

It's one thing to suggest it, it's a whole other thing to actually fund it to the point of completion.

F Marion

Well, let's see...

A friend of mine has a wife who says we should feed, clothe and educate everybody first. I agree with the educating part, because the first class should be in how *NOT* to have any children you can't afford.

Let's get back into space! At the rate people are f#^kin', we're gonna need some more elbow room!

Mike (ODO)

I've always thought the moon would make a good natural "space station" - sort of like like the research stations in Antarctica if only a bit tougher and way more expensive.

Actually, someone had a good point recently about throwing billions of dollars at the Shuttle program and the ISS just to go around in circles. Way past time to move on, IMO. We had recent safety presentation from one of the Admirals that served on the mishap board for the recent Shuttle loss...convinced me even further that it's WAY past time to move on...how about a half-way station in space - half way between the moon and earth to get things started?

As for politics, what better forum for dialog than to open the project internationally. Again, I'd think the south-arctic model should serve as a good starting point for the discussion. If nothing else, it gives nations something to talk about and a path to the table instead of shooting at each other.

And as far as I know, aside from Lockheed-Martin and Boeing, most of the companies that will probably benefit are most likely either in Utah or SoCal...which doesn't bother me a bit. That's what all you city folk get for not wanting factories in your back yards...

"TO THE MOON, ALICE!"...

raising the ship at the bottom of the Pacific that has the 1/32 Raiden mold.

Craig

Wouldn't make much of a dent...

Yes - I heard it too, and it's probably a fallout of the ever increasing encroachment on what "defines marriage". I'd think that politically, this is a great move to insure that under the law (read - tax code; under which the gov gathers billions - can you say "marriage penalty"?) that marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman. Just conjecture, based on what I gather of the man's personal views and the state of...er...affairs.

Although I can think of several arguments based on "separation of church and state" for eliminating any and all laws concerning marriage from the law....

From what I gathered at U of I during the early 80's, the development of the internet had more to do with DoD than Nasa...

So, why try... Don't get me wrong. I'm in favour of doing something in space again. I just always get the feeling when he's at it that there's something he doesn't want us to look at.

Bill Banaszak

America that is, for 56 years and paid taxes for 44 of them. I am not expecting an apolgy from you but I did want to clear the smoke. Mike IPMS

No - I mean that the space budget wouldn't make much of a dent in social security and/or health care. And that the way to solve those problems is certainly NOT to throw more money at them...

Geez, wouldn't it be cheaper just to cut some new ones??? (Not that any one at Revellogram would actually *listen* to such sterling logic...)