NASA Economic Lens

In the past 50 years, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has sent out many planned space exploration missions which have lead to numerous advantages in society and culture. NASA’s technologies benefit American lives with the innumerable important breakthroughs by creating new markets that have spurred the economy and changed countless lives in many ways. NASA is a federal agency and receives its fundings from the annual federal budget passed by the United States Congress. However, there are conflicting opinions that consider whether or not funding for NASA is a waste of government spending.

There are endless opportunities for jobs and for science altogether. If people stop funding NASA we won't be able to invent new things, have jobs for people who need them, and help the world grow.

The public’s lack of knowledge about NASA’s research explains why many people believe that the organization is receiving too much funding. According to NASA.gov, the organization has received 19.3 billion dollars for the 2016 fiscal year. This equates to about 0.486% of the government budget. While this may seem like a lot, the percentage has drastically decreased over the past few decades by almost 3.5%. NASA is receiving “more money each year, but at the same time a smaller percentage of the federal budget” (Steinburg 240). There are projects that NASA is currently working on that they cannot finish due to lack of funding. If NASA can find a way to receive more funding, then not only can the organization capitalize on these current projects, but it can also open up discussion for future ones as well. The possibilities of what humans can achieve is endless, the only restrictions are time and money, two of the most important factors in society. While time can’t be controlled, money can. Now it’s just a matter of getting more of it, which is going to be hard for NASA to do, especially when people feel as though they are receiving too much funding.

As President Eisenhower once stated, “Every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed” (qtd in DeGroot). According to Jerry DeGroot, a lecturer in the Department of Modern History at the University of St. Andrews and author of the widely acclaimed biography “Douglas Haig”, every year, the United States federal government funds the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) with over $17 billion. When Keith Yost, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), was asked about government funding on NASA, he replied, “NASA is not only spending money, but also the sweat of our laborers, the genius of our scientists, and the hopes of our children.” As a powerhouse in the work industry, NASA is taking away from the remainder of the country. Before venturing off into space, the US needs to realize the importance of tackling the issues that lie before the citizens here on Earth. As Richard Truly, a retired Vice Admiral in the United States Navy, stated in agreement, “...I didn’t go to NASA for the United States to make international commitments that wouldn’t keep, to design space vehicles that will never be built (or will be then fail), or to make promises to the American people that will never be kept.” It would be in the best interest for the citizens of the United States federal government to cut NASA funding.

“The current spending is only 0.4% of the U.S. budget, in 2005 it was 0.7%. This is an important question, not just for me but for the entire concerned human race. Because the NASA program is a key to the defense of not only this country, but the planet and the humans that seclude in it. In addition, NASA has recently discovered signs of water on Mars, and I think this is a valid reason. Also, the NASA funding cuts take a toll by reducing its employment; in which it affects the economy significantly.

Researching the topic of NASA’s budget presented alarming evidence about the shrinking government funding that the agency receives. According to “NASA Budget”, published in 2012, the following monetary amounts show the decrease in the amount of funding the National Government is providing NASA “$553.8 million in fiscal 1995, $155.5 million in fiscal 1996, $131.7 million in fiscal 1997, $61 million in fiscal 1998, $51.3 million in fiscal 2000, $10.8 million in fiscal 2004”. The article shows how the funding drastically decreased over a series of nine years. The source gives a different perspective, not from an individual that works out at

NASA’s Shuttle Program also known as the Space Transportation System, was the first winged manned spacecraft operation to have achieved orbit and land, also the first to use reusable spacecrafts and make multiple flights into various orbits. Although the shuttle program took America to a heighten achievement of orbital transportation, recent closure of the program has baffled many Americans and left questions about the future of the American space missions. The closure of the program by the Obama administration is a short-term allocation of government funds that should be better understood as a strategic move to improve the future stability of the American economy. The budget cuts are part of having a balanced budget that will recuperate

People sometimes wish they could go out so space through tourism, right? Well, with the privatization of space travel, they could. It would be beneficial to privatize it, although some are against it. This is because of NASA’s current funding outline, economical reasons, and the benefits of space tourism. NASA’s funding outline is not exactly what someone would expect. It is more focused on earth science, to the point where they are just barely hanging onto their space travel plans, and if that was not enough, the U.S. government is planning to direct it even more toward earth science, almost eradicating the space exploration side of the budget. NASA plans to try and “rent” spacecraft from privately owned companies to save money on doing this, and would therefore be able to go on with their plans. There are also reasons due to the economy. If space travel is privatized, it will help the flow of the economy because, for one, it creates missing jobs in the employment sector, helping the economy tremendously. There is also one big thing that was missing when the US paid Russia for seats to go to space. Every one of those dollars is going straight back into the US, making it so, as a country, the US loses no money in the trade. Meanwhile, if they pay Russia, they lose money, which is infinitely worse for the economy than this trade. Lastly, there are some nice benefits to space tourism. Space tourism would make it so that the space business would become cheaper over time, and

The first reason why the government should remain the use of its space program is the jobs that come along with the program. From engineers to scientist there are many jobs that correlate with the space program.”It is important to remember that the $2.5 billion investment made in this project was not spent on Mars, but right here on Earth, supporting more than 7,000 jobs in at least 31 states.” (Bolden, Charles.) Even though the unemployment rate is not as high as expected, if this program was cut the rate would grow immensely.

The world today revolves around technology and is in an ever upward spiraling path of new advancements. This path is now at what some people call the “final frontier”, or the space age. The discoveries being made on this front are overwhelming in comparison to the technology that the world had only twenty years ago. Space exploration was once left up to the governments, as they battled to be the first country in space, but with national debts raising and the cuts made in response, space exploration is beginning to become new grounds for private business owners. Private companies are already beginning to send off rockets at a fraction of the cost that government does, but if more money was put into the government space program, then they

There is a lot out in space? There could be anything really, aliens, asteroids, or giant meteors heading towards the earth. Who should be responsible for taking care of all of that? NASA? Or a private company? Because honestly, A private company just wants the big bucks, not caring of the suffering of mankind. Private companies would like a market, not a future for space travel, and that is a fact. Space travel should not be privatized because space will be used as a market, private companies can create equipment used for unethical purposes, and humans will be delayed in the race in space.

Oh, just a little thing where they landed a man on the moon. Space exploration is not a single track venture either, in order to send men into space in space ships lots of research was needed in fields such as biology, technology, and material research. The research done in these fields contributes to society in a big way. Even the simplest thing such as better shock protection in the moon boots was taken and implemented in the soles of running shoes. Funding NASA is more than just funding space exploration, it is funding the advent of invention and the progress of the human race itself. NASA not only gets newer generations interested in space, but also directs them in the path of a STEM career. When I was a young boy, watching the moon landings on the internet piqued my interest in NASA and space and has ever since driven me to be a stargazer and to push myself in school in order to fulfil my dream of being an aerospace engineer (hopefully at

Spaceflight has always been dominated by the public sector, which is controlled by the government. Working for a government owned aerospace company and seeing the amount of capital required to send an object into space, I have always wondered if spaceflight could ever be commercialized in the private sector. The cost associated with spaceflight has always been so expensive and provided little monetary return on investment, that only the government could afford to fund the research & development, building, launching, and monitoring. This was primarily done through NASA (National Aeronautics Space Administration), as they were one of the few who had the capability to achieve spaceflight. In recent years an emerging

American citizens are not the only ones who will benefit from privatized space programs. The United States government would save tremendous amounts of money as well. Funding cuts have already been placed on NASA, limiting its capabilities for advancing. For instance, American astronauts cannot even reach their space stations alone; they require the assistance of the Russian space program. This is not the iconic space program that the United States deserves. If space travel were to become more prevalent through privately owned companies, NASA would not have to pay other countries to accomplish something as simple as reaching Earth’s orbit. With proper regulations in place, astronauts working for NASA would be able to travel to and from the ISS and other stations within their country. Though NASA can never be replaced, private companies would be capable of greater projects. With more being accomplished without government assistance, cuts could effectively be made without limiting the American success.

There has been great debate as of lately, concerning the practicality of continued space exploration funding in this country. Some believe that the costs and waste of resources make space exploration a waste of our country’s economic capacity. Others see this as an opportunity to increase this country’s lead in technology and scientific research, which the United States has been a leader in since the end of War World II. Although at the same time, there are other things to consider when discussing space exploration. There is also the advent of new technologies and companies gauging how space exploration will revolutionize how humans live and work in the future. These companies want to be able to capitalize on this and make money. Then