In the 2017 fiscal year (Oct. 2016-Sept. 2017), the budget for NASA was 19 billion US dollars [1]. However, the total budget for the United States in 2017 is 3,650 billion US dollars [2] making the NASA budget only .52% of the United States budget for the 2017 fiscal year. Even though 19 billion US dollars seem like a large amount of money, in comparison to 1966, the height of the Apollo mission, the budget for NASA was 5.9 billion United States dollars [3] which was .83% of the National budget of 708 billion dollars [4]. Also, with the 122 million citizens [5] reported to pay federal taxes in the United States, each taxpayer only contributes about $12.98 a month to NASA, so if NASA were to disappear, the average taxpayer could afford …show more content…
Only 10% of the budget is going to go to space technology because even though there is still a need to continue developing technologies for space, it does not need the same funds as other sections, and without any large space missions in the near future it is not as pressing as other categories like science, exploration, and space operations.
The third category is exploration which will receive 27% of the budget. The exploration budget will go to projects like space transportation systems and human missions to the moon and mars. Projects such as these require a large portion of the budget due to their expensive nature, but despite the cost, these missions gain public support. Without such missions, the public would not have supported the United States spending billions of dollars on scientific research. Additionally, these missions help gain an understanding of the universe. The fourth category is Aeronautics which will receive 7% of the budget. Aeronautic projects would include new aircraft and new air traffic control systems. This category is similar to space technology where there still needs to be research in the field but it does not require as much money as other parts of NASA. Also, there are more companies in the private sector of aeronautic that will be researching similar topics. Therefore to save money for different products aeronautics received the lowest part of the budget. Lastly, space operations will receive 26% of the budget. Space
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is perhaps the most well known space agency in the world. Since its formation in 19581, it has pioneered in space science, yet is also renowned for its large budget. NASA has the highest budget of any space agency, $18.6 billion2 in 2015, the equivalent of every American paying $54 towards the agency3, meaning 0.14% of total GDP is spent on NASA3 . This money is spent on the ISS, sending astronauts, probes and satellites into space, astrophysics and planetary science research, maintaining and developing NASA’s space telescopes (the Wide Field Infrared Survey telescope searching for dark energy and exoplanets, the James Webb Space Telescope and the Hubble Space Telescope) and developing spacecraft2. Space exploration is an incredibly expensive process with one shuttle launch costing $450 million4 however NASA’s colossal budget benefits the USA greatly; the agency employs 18,000 people5 as astronauts, engineers, scientists and teachers and G. Scott Hubbard, former director of the NASA Ames Research Center estimates that every dollar spent on NASA returns $8 to the economy6.While this figure is an estimate, it demonstrates NASA’s worth and capacity for money making. NASA works on pioneering research and as its patents and licenses return to the US treasury, it
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.
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
According to a pie chart called, “Federal Spending for United States - FY 2015” from the NASA Data Charts, the budget for space in 2015 is not a percentage significant enough to have its own section. Instead, it is a subsection of the heading Other Spendings, which is given 2% of the federal budget. Also, in the Neil deGrasse Tyson article, it is said that the American government only gives a 7/10 cent of a tax dollar to space exploration (Tyson 2). He gives a brilliant resolution by saying, “ I’d prefer that it were more, perhaps 2 cents on the dollar.” even though we used to “. . . peak NASA spending amounted to no more than 4 cents on the tax dollar”. One of the most important technological advance was the invention of the Hubble Space
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.
“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.
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.
In July of 1958, President Eisenhower passed the National Aeronautics and Space Act, which established the National Aeronautics and Space Administration as a response to the Soviet Union's launch of Sputnik nine months earlier. That administration, now known worldwide as NASA, has become an icon of space exploration and mankind's accomplishments. Who would have thought that fifty years later, NASA's future would be so uncertain? Congress has recently proposed a bill that would significantly cut funding from the NASA's Constellation program. These budget cuts are unnecessary and are counterproductive to the original idea of the space program.
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.
Similar to the first source from NASA, Ernst Stuhlinger, then the Associate Director of Science at NASA, responded to this question personally by writing a long detailed letter in 1970. In his letter, Stuhlinger speaks of how he believes that space exploration “in the long run, will contribute more to the solution of these grave problems we are facing here on earth” today. In addition, Stuhlinger uses logistical data by explaining how the United States use around “200 billion dollars a year” and how only “1.6% of this national budget was allocated to space exploration this year.” If this was to be put in the current time period, then space exploration would only be using “0.52 % of the national budget”3. Overall, Stuhlinger focuses on answering
CJ Moizzi, argues that the biggest misconception Americans have is the amount of funding that NASA receives. Within his article he states various organizations that receives double or even up to six times the amount of funding such as the Department of Treasury. Moizzi says that the NASA budget currently has accounted for roughly .5% of the total U.S federal Budget. He argues some may be apprehensive about this, but he says that only $10 dollars of an average Americans income is given annually to the program. He even brings the question why even fund NASA? He makes a point by naming various technologies that have resulted from NASA experimentation for their space voyages. From insoles
space agencies from around the world to research the effects of outer space on microorganisms
However, NASA does not use as much money as you might think. According to the article NASA’s 2013 Budget Puts Brake On Planet Probes, NASA has a “17.7 billion” budget out of the total “3.7 trillion” federal budget spendings. 17.7 billion is very small compared to the total federal budget. This shows that the asteroid studies and other studies NASA is doing really do not cost that much.
While NASA may have once been the leading space organization in the world, the cuts and budget changes are not giving NASA what it needs to succeed. Today, NASA makes up around .5%, or $17 billion, of the national budget. This number is much smaller than the 4.5% in 1966. The United States government is cutting many different organizations and administrations in an attempt to balance the budget. The launching of a NASA space shuttle alone costs around half a billions dollars. Along with research and other things being made by NASA, it is extremely hard for the administration to launch shuttles. The government is being forced to turn its money from NASA, due to the high cost of building and launching rockets, and pay the private companies to take materials and government equipment to the International Space Station. Because of the cuts, various NASA projects are being shut down and abandoned. In 2005, the funding cuts threatened the longest running mission that NASA was running at the time; the Voyager probes. The Voyager probes are two probes that are headed into