Funding Cut for Two NASA Mars Probes

[FlyTiger77]

From this evening's New York Times: Life on Mars? Funds to Find Answer Fade http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/science/space/life-on-mars-funds-for-nasa-to-find-the-answer-fade.html

Two probes to look for life on Mars, one in scheduled to launch in 2016 and the other scheduled for 2018, are to be cut as part of a 20% cut in NASA's robotic exploration budget.

I wonder if Paul Allen would be interested in funding them?

[manfredvonrichthofen]

I can understand times are tough and money is tight all over the world but this is needed research, that could be beneficial to us, not just the US, but the world as a whole. Were it not for research, lots and lots of research that cost money, copious amounts of money humanity wouldn't be where it is today.

Who knows what could be found that could be of use, could be nothing but it's worth the time and money to me to find out... If I had the money yea I would fund it... Alas I do not... But I still think it is worth it.

[Spartan]

Maybe NASA can slap a walmart logo or a microsoft logo on the program and get sponsors like NASCAR.

[4fhoward]

Take a look at what Neil deGrasse Tyson had to say to congress.
Priorities, Plans, and Progress of the Nation's Space Program
Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC
March 7th 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ndhxdDgSgI

Funding for NASA is so small it's laughable.  The benefits of funding NASA is more than the spinoffs.

http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/

It's economic.

[Thrashed]

If I have a choice to pay for it or not, I'll choose "no pay". I'm done funding this government. Let research and space exploration go private.

[arajca]

Given the current economic climate, research for the sake of research (which is what the Mars probes are) is a luxury we cannot afford at this time.

[4fhoward]

If I have a choice to pay for it or not, I'll choose "no pay". I'm done funding this government. Let research and space exploration go private.

Given the current economic climate, research for the sake of research (which is what the Mars probes are) is a luxury we cannot afford at this time.

To what part of the US budget would you guys have NASA's budget go if you didn't want to spend money on NASA?

[arajca]

It's a matter of priorities. Research to solve current problems is fine under the current economic climate. At this time, the Mars probes are a luxury we cannot afford. I haven't studied the budget, but how about reducing the amount we are borrowing.

[davidsinn]

If I have a choice to pay for it or not, I'll choose "no pay". I'm done funding this government. Let research and space exploration go private.

Given the current economic climate, research for the sake of research (which is what the Mars probes are) is a luxury we cannot afford at this time.

To what part of the US budget would you guys have NASA's budget go if you didn't want to spend money on NASA?

Paying down the debt.

[bflynn]

Paying down the debt.

Except it isn't.

[arajca]

Paying down the debt.

Except it isn't.

You asked where WE would put it, not where the feds are putting it. WE would use it to pay down the debt. I understand the feds may not understand that concept.

[4fhoward]

As of March 1, 2012 the gross debt was $15.501 trillion.
NASA requested  $18.7 billion  for fiscal year 2012.

The dept is still there with NASA gone with no benefits from it's research.

[jeders]

Given the current economic climate, research for the sake of research (which is what the Mars probes are) is a luxury we cannot afford at this time.

I always love it when people say things like this 

If I have a choice to pay for it or not, I'll choose "no pay". I'm done funding this government. Let research and space exploration go private.

This actually is fine. So many people don't realize that if Bell Labs didn't do research for the sole purpose of doing research, we wouldn't have anything that we have today. Pure research without any goal in mind is what led to the discovery of the cathode ray (electron). Without that, we would not have our electronics today. So I would say that, given the current economic environment, we absolutely need research for the sake of research, though it should probably be done by the private sector.

[bflynn]

From the business side, jeders is absolutely correct.  Innovation during sluggish time promotes better business a few years later.  Pulling back on innovation research during down times is a response by people who haven't studied it.

In any case, spending on probes is good as long as they keep doing different things in better ways.  The technology advances from space and aerospace development has always provided future benefits to society.

[Thrashed]

Given the current economic climate, research for the sake of research (which is what the Mars probes are) is a luxury we cannot afford at this time.

I always love it when people say things like this 

If I have a choice to pay for it or not, I'll choose "no pay". I'm done funding this government. Let research and space exploration go private.

This actually is fine. So many people don't realize that if Bell Labs didn't do research for the sole purpose of doing research, we wouldn't have anything that we have today. Pure research without any goal in mind is what led to the discovery of the cathode ray (electron). Without that, we would not have our electronics today. So I would say that, given the current economic environment, we absolutely need research for the sake of research, though it should probably be done by the private sector.

No one is arguing about research or NASA, just that "we" taxpayers can't afford it. The government can't spend money it doesn't have (yet it does). Research will go on. Most of the stuff we have today was created by guys in their garage, not the government.

[Thrashed]

As of March 1, 2012 the gross debt was $15.501 trillion.
NASA requested  $18.7 billion  for fiscal year 2012.

The dept is still there with NASA gone with no benefits from it's research.

No one said cutting the NASA budget will solve our national debt. We ARE saying, it can be cut and not missed. Mankind survived a long time without NASA. I'd also cut ALL social programs. I'd cut the military deep too. I'd also eliminate CAP.  If we want to solve our debt program, the cuts will have to go deep and it will hurt. It's simple economics. We could always keep spending and learn to speak Chinese. 

[SarDragon]

This is a couple of years olde, but the principles still apply.

Obama Budget Cuts Visualization

The things most people are talking about cutting, except the defense budget, are not what is killing the budget.

[davidsinn]

This is a couple of years olde, but the principles still apply.

Obama Budget Cuts Visualization

The things most people are talking about cutting, except the defense budget, are not what is killing the budget.

Most of us know that but you still need to cut all wasted spending.

If your mortgage and insurance combined exceed your income you don't continue to eat out every night. The principle is the same but the worms in DC can't seem to grasp even high school level econ.

[Майор Хаткевич]

No one is arguing about research or NASA, just that "we" taxpayers can't afford it. The government can't spend money it doesn't have (yet it does). Research will go on. Most of the stuff we have today was created by guys in their garage, not the government.

It depends what and how far back, but a lot of what we have TODAY came out of military/NASA research TO the private sector, not the other way around. Academia (with government funds) also contributed significantly. At best private sector improves upon the immense research done before.

If we want to solve our debt program, the cuts will have to go deep and it will hurt. It's simple economics. We could always keep spending and learn to speak Chinese. 

A common misconception. China isn't anywhere near a majority stake holder in our debt. On top of that, "simple" economics call for a better economy in general ALONG with cuts. You can cut all you want, but if the incoming cash is lower than it was, AND we continue to give out tax cuts on top of refusing tax increases...well...it won't matter what you cut.