In the 1960’s the United States was on a race to the moon, and with the help of the technology the used, they were able to win the race and achieve their goal. Some people argue that space exploration costs too much money and the funding of NASA’s programs should be cut (DeGroot). Some believe that little is actually spent on NASA’s programs, and taxpayer money is being spent on unnecessary projects (Levinger). In the past twenty years there have been many arguments about whether or not the government should cut the funding of NASA’s programs however, it would be more beneficial if the budget was increased, and therefore, more money should be spent on space exploration and be funded by private sectors and the government. Although more money
For the social science lens, we will be looking at the shift in the economics for space exploration in the recent years.
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.
How would you like to explore a never-ending frontier filled with endless potential and possible benefits for humankind? When put this way, space exploration sounds like an enticing adventure. However, is it all that it’s chalked up to be? We’re here to answer that question. There’s a specific issue that we need to consider when referring to space exploration; should we continue to fund NASA? We acknowledge that some people may already have strong opinions on this, and we ask you to keep an open mind and try to avoid bias. After all, we’re discussing our future.
Although it is true that there is no concrete outcome “for using taxpayer money” to fund space programs, it does not mean in any way that the money is not being used to help our society grow (Source H). The bulk of the money funded to space exploration goes towards the incomes of thousands of skilled employees who create such successful space missions. It can be assumed that less than one percent is being used from the federal dollar on manned space programs, as space exploration falls under the “All others” category which spends six percent of every federal tax dollar (Source C). Space exploration programs have the potential to discover new technologies and expand on what we have here on Earth, but in order to succeed, there needs to be slight altercations with how each federal tax dollar is spent. National defense gets nineteen percent of each federal tax dollar – a proportion that is too extraordinary considering the United States has access to a nuclear arsenal which is far less expensive and just as effective as maintaining conventional forces (Source C). The United States is pretty much the military for half the world, so instead of collecting all the money from our tax payers here in America, we should collect from other counties that we protect as
While many people support funding NASA and agree with the organization’s goals, there a good number of people who do not. A common reason for this is that they believe that the space program should focus on discovering things that can benefit us immediately, not in the future. This is a valid argument because there
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.
Neil Armstrong 's 1969 lunar landing was one of humanity 's greatest accomplishments. Since then, we have found that an infinite supply of knowledge and resources await us just outside our atmosphere. Today, however, critics are beginning to argue more and more that the cost of space exploration is too high, and therefore new technological developments should be left to the private sector. Whether funded privately or by the government, funding of space exploration is imperative because NASA is essentially the only agency with the technological capabilities to support aircraft manufacturing, air safety and air transportation. Space exploration has also resulted in remarkable innovations that has played a key role in aeronautics research, preventative medicine, and allows scientists to study asteroids, along with other space debris and their impacts on Earth.
By using extensive internet based research, I plan to investigate the decrease in NASA’s funding. My primary question is; why is the U.S. government reducing the funds? and why are they saying they can't afford it?. When in reason I think they chose not to. I think NASA should be viewed as an investment, because it does not drain nearly enough money as it contributes. NASA pays for itself, they give us inventions that can apply to our daily lives, and with enough research we may be mining asteroids or pure limitless solar energy in the future, but most of all they give our species itself a way forward.
America’s funding for NASA during the space race in 1966 was 4.41% of the federal budget yet in modern times this expenditure has fallen to only 0.5% of the federal budget. One might ask why, but the greater question is why isn’t anything being done about this dearth of funding for NASA. America should once again fund the exploration of space with a renewed ferocity because of the various educational, economical, and technological benefits of having well-funded space agencies.
“One small step for man, one giant step for mankind” - Neil Armstrong. Humans have been fascinated by stars and planets from the beginning of time.The human race has made some amazing discoveries; from drawings on cave walls, to putting somebody in space. Discoveries in space include finding new planets, technology, and theories. In recent years, there have been less discoveries due to a cut in NASA’s budget. This is because instead of the money going to NASA, the money goes to other organizations. The U.S should increase NASA’s budget because it helps find planets that could support life, creates more everyday objects, and gives ideas of how the earth might end.
The concept of space exploration was first introduced to the American public in 1961 when President John F. Kennedy famously stood before congress and vowed that America would put a man on the moon “within the decade.” With hopes of defeating the Soviet Union in the “Space Race” and gaining a leg-up in the Cold War, NASA funding reached its all-time high in 1965-1966 when about four percent of the federal budget was devoted to exploring space. Since then however, funding dedicated to exploring space has nose-dived to about one-half of a percent of the federal budget (Tyson), with plans to cut that figure by an additional $260 million in 2017 (cite NASA funding cuts). Experts in the space-sciences field argue that increased funding in space exploration would re-ignite the American economy and return America to the scientific prominence it was once known for, while, on the other end of the spectrum, naysayers suggest that exploring space is an economic sink-hole that the United States can no longer afford to deposit to given its own earth-bound troubles.
The impossible was reached on July 20th 1969 when we sent the first man on the moon. The Apollo missions are the largest and most well known explorations that NASA has conducted. Ever since we reached this new high, our curiosity of space has grown even bigger. Funding NASA’s space program even further will continue to help us amplify our available resources and discover new information to benefit humanity. Not only that, but it could provide many ways for us to find a new home and expand our species farther into our solar system, potentially saving future generations. The expansion of this space program would be able to answer more of our questions than from what we can find here on Earth. Although there
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), is one of the programs that the government has decided it cannot continue to finance at its current rates, and the money being put into NASA has been cut back. This is definitely not a smart place to make spending cuts and, at least for the near future, this trend of lessened government support needs to be reversed. By using budget cuts as a possible solution to
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
In the early 60s, President John F. Kennedy led America into a space race against the Soviet Union. American men and women across the nation backed this goal, allowing NASA to take great leaps in advancing its space exploration programs. This unified nation fulfilled its goal, and Neil Armstrong became the first man to walk on the moon. However, since then, America’s space exploration has only declined. Funding for NASA has been drastically cut, thus greatly limiting the opportunities for exploring the cosmos. Understanding and exploring the universe is detrimental to the advancement of the United States and opens the door for vast possibilities. If the government chooses to limits its own advancement, then that responsibility must fall