What does /pol/ think of MASA. Should it remain taxpayer funded.
>>78763430
NASA is a drop in the bucket in the federal budget. The govt pays 30x more just in interest payments on debt.
>>78766131
Ideally it should be, there's so many billionaires with nothing better to do than compete with each other for dominance in the aerospace industry and flex their financial nuts with spaceflight just like nations did in the beginning. Unfortunately the second you even hint at the notion of ending nasa, liberals start screaming in your face how you must be a conservative and anti science bible thumper despite the fact of it being a drain on taxpayer dollars.
I say auction nasa off and give the profits back to the taxpayers next April.
>>78763430
Anything that runs on taxpayer dollars should be subject to public oversight.
Since NASA doesn't submit to this oversight, their funding should be cut off.
>>78768518
totally agree. Especially if they're hiding shit.
>>78763430
>MASA
make america space again?
It needs more funding. A lot more.
>>78768389
>598.5 M spent on military
>29.7 M on science
Damn, those fellers at NASA sure are drainin' our tax money alright
>>78768790
oh yeah, inb4 "spic doesn't even science"
Let's be honest here, most countries invest way too much money on military.
>>78768518
>>78768640
>Anything that runs on taxpayer dollars should be subject to public oversight.
>Since NASA doesn't submit to this oversight, their funding should be cut off.
All federally funded research programs are already subject to strict oversight and transparency laws. By federal law - all data and results generated by taxpayer-funded research must be made publicly accessible by request once the principle investigators are finished with it, so long as it doesn't meet guidelines for national security classification.
To this end - NASA, along with all the major research programs in the US, go to absurd lengths to make their projects as transparent and accessible as possible. NASA has massive public archives both online and physical. NOAA has services that will let you request satellite and temperature data from precise times and locations. When HAARP was still up and running it had live instrument feeds. Etc.
NASA is the governments Hollywood.
>>78763430
NASA should recieve massive boosts in funding. Space is the future of the human race, this should be common sense even though it isn't. The universe is mind blowingly massive and to not give into humanities purest form of evolution is a tragedy (the desire for knowledge).
>>78763430
NASA is another remnant from the cold war.
They dont build or manage their own launches anyway, it's all done through private contractors.
We should replace NASA with subsidies to corporations willing to attempt space mining, and research organizations willing to perform research expeditions to the moon and beyond
>>78763430
>>78768389
>>78768790
>>78769156
i dont remember the exact figure, but the NASA investments have yielded approximately 7 dollars returned in scientific advancements for every dollar spent researching them.
NASA is THE MOST PROFITABLE government sector, and probably the ONLY PROFITABLE one at that.
>>78768707
>>78768783
>>78769156
Honestly, the level of funding is fine... what it needs is less meddling from Congress.
NASA has basically zero autonomy over its own affairs. Congress decides which projects get priority, which contractors NASA has to use, they've even gone as far as to specify technical details for projects.
Obviously Congress should have some say in how the taxpayers' money is being spent on the space program, but NASA would be able to solve a lot of its problems and overcome a lot of its hurdles if it just had a little less meddling.
Establish an internal board to decide how to distribute funds and delegate projects.
>>78763430
All their funding should be redirected to breakthrough technologies (like the EM Drive being studied by NASA's Eagleworks laboratory - but redesigning the whole apparatus to study and test future-generation technologies.) We don't need to waste tax money on things like sending satellites to orbit or getting to Mars when there is profound public sentiment for those things AND private sector competition pushing for it. What we need is the technology to get to another star system - be it a warp drive or a cryogenic pod or the ability to turn asteroids into colony ships to large there's no chance they would ever be launched piecemeal from Earth. Even the relatively inane-sounding stuff like life support (yes, fucking life support) needs serious study (the current method being to split water, use the Oxygen and dump the waste overboard or to use scrubbers which work by undergoing chemical reactions which leave them unusable after a fixed usage time - not exactly any better than carrying a bigger [still finite] tank of Oxygen with you.) Growing food and recycling (non-air) wastes would be another big thing, though realistically the breakthrough propulsion stuff is the most important thing they should be focused on. The private sector is both motivated and competent enough to take care of air/food/logistics with current technologies. NASA needs to be focused on the stuff the private sector doesn't believe is possible at the moment (and therefore won't invest in themselves) like warp drives.
>>78769470
Loans given exclusively with the intent to achieve return from space material.
>>78763430
NASA spews nothing but complete bullshit. Freemason Satan worshipping lying pieces of shit
>>78763430
NASA's return on investment is really good compared to other government agencies. They're the last people we should be running down.
