Go Boldly

Beware any site that claims as NASA's first contribution to the economy as:

"NASA employs approximately 63,700 people through its civil service and contractors, including nearly 38,700 scientists and engineers."

That's not a contribution, that's a drain.

I do not think they prioritized the claims. That just looks like one claim. I think the fact that the middle class is always getting the taxes is a drain, but looking at the spinoffs on NASA...You probably are effected by their technologies. If you have a hot breakfast with a microwave or use power tools...NASA made those spinoffs so I would watch what you say!

__________
Beware any site that claims as NASA's first contribution to the economy as:

"NASA employs approximately 63,700 people through its civil service and contractors, including nearly 38,700 scientists and engineers."

That's not a contribution, that's a drain.
Posted by: A Taxpayer at September 24, 2009 12:41 PM

Microwave ovens? The concept of cooking food with low frequency radiation was discovered by a Raytheon employee 18 years before NASA existed, and the patent for microwave ovens was out in 1945, and they were commercially available in the 50s (albeit larger and requiring more power, as well as a couple thousand)

I assume you also believe NASA invented velcro? Supporting NASA is all good and well, but even better is supporting it with truthful arguments, not urban legends.

NASA "spinoffs" are myths. Most are pure fiction and ignore the real effort in commercializing lab technologies. Most could have been created at vastly less cost, and all suffer from a fundamental misunderstanding of value.

http://www.fas.org/spp/eprint/jp_950525.htm

Oh, and I can safely have my microwaved breakfast without thanking NASA: http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0220/p18s05-hfgn.html

There would be no $100 billion dollar a year global telecommunications satellite industry if it wasn't for NASA! And America and the world would be much poorer today without satellites-- especially professional athletes:-)

I was happy to sign the petition.

What a bunch of sour grapes from A Taxpayer.

We're all taxpayers.

I support this effort to send something positive to Congress about NASA. There are good points made as well.

Ignore the sour grapes -- nothing gets done with all the time spent griping, complaining, criticizing.

Not with its current goals. Exploraton will never be vuable until we have a Shuttle whick lives up to the promise of getting into space and back safer and cheaper.
The first try never works out 100%. Returning to the same way into space as we did back in 1969 is not the answer.
You want to explore?

1) 2nd generation shuttle
2) Either add, conver, or build a new space station as an orbital shipyard

3) Build an exploration craft like the Discovery on 2001.
This craft will go from LEO to the Moon, Mars, or anywhere you want and be serviced by a Shuttle.

This is the way to explore, not returning to the 60's.

I'm a taxpayer too, and would happily gut the budget of every other agency except NOAA if it meant more cash for NASA.

"NASA employs approximately 63,700 people through its civil service and contractors, including nearly 38,700 scientists and engineers."

That's not a contribution, that's a drain.

It's true that this is not a net positive to our economy. Such ideas should never be used as arguments for any federal programs. The government can only create jobs at the same rate that other jobs in other sectors or industries are removed. There can never be a net gain as a result of a federal program paid for through tax dollars [1]. However, that doesn't mean that the programs should not exist. It is just economic fallacy to claim that the tax funded program "creates jobs".

References
[1] Claude Frédéric Bastiat

"Beware any site that claims as NASA's first contribution to the economy as:

"NASA employs approximately 63,700 people through its civil service and contractors, including nearly 38,700 scientists and engineers."

That's not a contribution, that's a drain.
Posted by: A Taxpayer at September 24, 2009 12:41 PM"

I suspect your portion of the annual tax liability is smaller than most, but if you'll publish your address I'll send you your $58 for FY10 and that should relieve you from the need to post any further derogatory comments for the next year.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0220/p18s05-hfgn.html

I don't think Christian Science Monitor is a really valid site my friend...for some reason I would need an education or governement website.

_______
Oh, and I can safely have my microwaved breakfast without thanking NASA: http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0220/p18s05-hfgn.html

Posted by: A Taxpayer at September 24, 2009 4:22 PM

I would think emplying 63,700 is a drain, but in this economy where people are losing jobs left and right and most of us are looking for jobs...this is impressive to me!

I am off to sign a petition letter!

NASA does cool stuff then the banks or car companies! If the government can bail the financial institutes out with billions of dollars, I think they can increase the budget for our space program!

If it wasn't for NASA I would not have satelites to protect my son in the Army and watch satelite TV ;)!

Calif,

I agree, it is so much easier to cry and whine about this and that than too actually offer up a solution or even jsut an alternative that is well thought out.

I happily signed it!

Potato: thank the Army and your son himself for keeping your son safe.

The first satellite came from the USSR. The first American satellite was launched before NASA even existed -- by the Army itself. The satellites your son/the Army uses today have nothing to do with NASA.

To an uninformed taxpayer:
The first operational US satellite was the Explorer I. The team who developed the satellite and launch vehicle did work for the Army BMA at the time. JPL developed the satellite, James Van Allen developed the instruments, and Wernher Von Braun headed the team who developed the Jupiter C launch vehicle.

This vehicle was developed by the U.S. Army Ballistic Missile Agency. The Army Ballistic Missile Agency (ABMA) was the agency formed to develop the US Army's first intermediate range ballistic missile. It was established at Redstone Arsenal on February 1, 1956 and commanded by Major General John B. Medaris with Doctor Wernher von Braun.

In 1958 AMBA's scientific and engineering staff, including Von Braun and Arthur Rudolph, were transferred to the newly created NASA, and the facilities on the southern half of Redstone Arsenal became Marshall Space Flight Center.

Its true that the Soviets launched the first operational satellite. The AMBA successfully launched a dummy satellite aboard a Jupiter C about 1 year before Sputnik was launched.

What exactly was factually inaccurate about my post? How was NASA in any way associated with Explorer I? The best you can claim is that some of the same Germans worked there?

For the comment "The satellites you’re son/the Army uses today have nothing to do with NASA."

Satellites have to be launched into space, do they not? What agency operates our launch facilities? NASA and supporting contractors. Investing in NASA's launch facilities ensures our independence on operational satellites for global positioning systems, telecommunications, metrological and terrestrial observation applications. The U.S. will always be in conflict with some nation in this world and though we may try to prelude the hostile use of space by diplomatic or other non-lethal means, it should not exclude the systems that provide our way into space.

Obtaining land coverage through remote sensing satellites is also used by many agencies, including NASA, National Security Agency (NSA), National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), and commercial industries, such as GeoEye, DigitalGlobe, and Google Earth. National Security agencies consider satellite reconnaissance important for protecting our territory, troops and citizens from harm. In 1992 Congress passed the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act that returned Landsat operations to government control and today it is managed by NASA, NOAA and U.S. Geological Survey.

So now we've gone from inventing satellites, to inventing American satellites, to employing people who invented American satellites, to employing people who invented American satellites 50 years ago, to operating launch facilities where said satellites are launched (which isn't even true!).

The bottom line is that to claim that NASA "invented" satellites is pure hogwash. Even those technologies that NASA did have a hand in creating were done at highly inflated costs and typically didn't include the actual implementation or widespread use of the technology.

Satellites have to be launched into space, do they not? What agency operates our launch facilities? NASA and supporting contractors. (Quote)

Not true. NASA is a tennant on a base known as "Cape Canaveral Air Force station." NASA has nothing to do with miltary payloads. Likewise, commercial sattelites also have nothing to do with NASA. In fact, during Mercury and Gemini, NASA had to hitch a ride on Army and Air Force Rockets. Shepherd and Grissom's rockets were erected and operated by Von Brauns crew who at the time was working for the Army. John Glenn, the rest of the Mercury Astronauts along with all of the Gemini Astronauts rode atop rockets operated by the Air Force.

"What exactly was factually inaccurate about my post? How was NASA in any way associated with Explorer I? The best you can claim is that some of the same Germans worked there?
Posted by: A Taxpayer at September 26, 2009 1:00 PM "

Same people, same contractors, same real estate, different name. The worst thing the US government ever did was create a civilian space agency. It should have been left under the military.

"The worst thing the US government ever did was create a civilian space agency."

On this we can agree. In fact, most of what NASA supporters would like to see could be completely justified as in support of national defense -- and therefore a clear responsibility of the federal government. It would probably be run better too.