How Can America Keep NASA`s Program Alive? [Pic]

Submitted by: SaintPatty 5 years ago in Science

Simple--this. NASA will be in gold-plated diapers if they were to take private money.
There are 32 comments:
Male 675
@BrimstoneOne Nah, it`s easier to go to other countries, kill people steal oil and grow opium.
0
Reply
Female 1,329
Well, it does give you wings...
0
Reply
Male 1,511

Oops $17 Billion, not Trillion. I deleted that comment right after I posted it to fix that. I must have deleted the wrong one. haha
0
Reply
Male 2,229
There IS money in mining He3 on the moon. Mad,Mad money! For that element (which is rare on Earth) is in abundance on the Moon, AND it is REQUIRED for a clean burn in a fusion reactor. And the thing is that stuff is like hundreds of thousands of dollars an ounce!

Anyone who can get to the moon and mine He3, and bring it back, is going to be Cha-Ching, at every hand shake.

Necessity is the Mother of invention, and the person/people that get the moon and mine it, are going to be crazy rich. And would put oil companies (who are in a slow decline) into obsolescence.

THAT is why the Moon isn`t being mined right now, But when oil goes scary, homicidal high because availability is crazy low. You a rush on the moon like nothing ever seen since the Gold Rushes of Centuries past.
0
Reply
Male 5,824
@ smaus,
Should read "Rabbit Vibrators"!
0
Reply
Male 1,197
time to start mining mars

$$$$$$$$$$
0
Reply
Male 715
shouldn`t that read "Virgin Mobil"
0
Reply
Male 1,526
I`m ashamed to live in this reality.
0
Reply
Male 7,123
This isn`t oo far out. The spadework on space travel has been done by governments,i.e the taxpayer (I think that`s a good thing). The research has been done, the really mad risks have been taken, the technology has been proven. Why wouldn`t corporations move in on tht, as long as thre was a short or medium term profit.

But they won`t take it any further. There is money in being orbital, maybe there might be a profit in lunar. Bu don`t expect significant private investment in the next generation of space travel. If we want that to happen we are going to have to invest serious amounts.
0
Reply
Male 2,440
NASA gets less than HALF A F#CKING PENNY on every tax dollar. Give them the whole goddamn cent already!
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Or you can wait for the successor
0
Reply
Male 1,558
Works in Europe
0
Reply
Male 3,612
lame
0
Reply
Male 808
You know, any investment in space technology is always beneficial....and a drop in the bucket compared to military expenditures
0
Reply
Male 594
"I dont understand why nasa cant be funded by private corporations. They have the funds and knowledge to advance mankind infinitley."

Once they can figure out how to mass advertise from space, I`m sure they will be all over it.. Small satellites beaming high powered lasers at each other to form a giant ad in the night sky.. That would suck :/
0
Reply
Male 3,285
Private industry wouldn`t go for a space shuttle. It`s just not cost effective.

-------------

Except for the long term benefits of course.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Surprised they didn`t do that tbh.
0
Reply
Male 49
The whole world is going comercial. All ball parks and feilds have been renamed after car brands, cell phone companies, ext. even most of the music is comercial the studios tell rappers and others what to sing to to shape society to make them money (I Hate Rap HaHa) it would be no suprize to see golden arches throu a teliscope
0
Reply
Male 10,440
NASA gets 17 billion. Which really is a drop in the bucket.
0
Reply
Male 302
@DingDingDong

NASA`s budget is only $17 Billion. With a B.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
[quote] I don`t think RedBull can afford $17 Trillion (NASA`s yearly budget) [/quote]
Hahahahahahaha!!
0
Reply
Male 835
NASA does not get 17 Trillion.
0
Reply
Male 5,413
AMUUURICA! Have some dignity please.
0
Reply
Male 3,285
See. I dont understand why nasa cant be funded by private corporations. They have the funds and knowledge to advance mankind infinitley.
0
Reply
Male 67
Pfizer could afford it, and now that we are going back to traditional rockets I could see a future where Viagra 1 rockets carry people to the Gingrich moon base.
0
Reply
Male 1,399
NASA of old, maybe.

Red Bull wouldn`t back the modern NASA. Red Bull picks winners.
0
Reply
Male 1,511

Um, I don`t think RedBull can afford $17 Trillion (NASA`s yearly budget).
0
Reply
Male 2,670
They`ve done lots of interesting things, drawman. You wouldn`t have cell phones or medical telemetry or satellite TV or a thousand other things if NASA hadn`t pioneered the technology. Mars Rovers? Lunar landings? The ISS? You`re either ignorant or you have zero imagination.
0
Reply
Male 37,887
I`m sure they`d have paid millions for the advert, but doesn`t it cost a LOT more to shoot a shuttle into space?
Only a drop in the bucket, for selling out? Not worth it.
0
Reply
Male 7,775
They could always do something interesting for once instead of seeing if seeds grow or chicks fly or ants dig.
0
Reply
Male 4
Some already wear silver lined underwear :)
0
Reply
Male 970
Link: How Can America Keep NASA`s Program Alive? [Pic] [Rate Link] - Simple--this. NASA will be in gold-plated diapers if they were to take private money.
0
Reply