Going to the moon in 2024

[Richard K]

I can think of a number of better ways to spend 20 billion dollars!

[Justin]

I can think of a number of better ways to spend 20 billion dollars!

Yeah, Walter Mondale felt the same way about Apollo.

[Aloha_Shooter]

I can think of a number of better ways to spend 20 billion dollars!

Seeing that the space program has had a better than 7:1 return ratio (i.e., every dollar spent on space science and technology, including Mercury/Gemini/Apollo, has returned at least $7), I'd like to hear your ideas if they can result in more than $140B return -- and that's not including the fact that ROI in federal revenues is necessarily a fraction of what it means for the private economy.

Going to the Moon up through Apollo 17 meant developing whole new technologies in computing, battery technology, remote operations, survival gear, fire suppression, etc. Going to the Moon permanently will require advances in remote medicine, nutrition, agriculture, survival equipment, water reuse, sensing, autonomous operations, etc. Think any of that is going to improve your standard of living or the way you do business?

Yeah, Walter Mondale felt the same way about Apollo.

Yep, he could have wasted all that money on welfare and Medicare for all -- and just increased the demand and wastage. I told Democrats in the run-up to the 1984 elections that if Mondale had his way, the Challenger astronauts would still be alive and probably the Apollo 1 astronauts as well because Mondale would have shut down the space program in order to fund more urban decay and welfare fraud. I hope Mondale is having to argue daily with Grissom, Chaffee, White, Shepard, Glenn, Onizuka, Scobee, Kennedy, etc. over the worth of the space program and that Nixon is getting blowback for having shut Apollo down just when we were getting good at it.

We should have been at this a long time ago:

[Bailey Guns]

Going to the Moon up through Apollo 17 meant developing whole new technologies in computing, battery technology, remote operations, survival gear, fire suppression, etc. Going to the Moon permanently will require advances in remote medicine, nutrition, agriculture, survival equipment, water reuse, sensing, autonomous operations, etc.

And Tang. I learned about Tang thanks to the space program.

[crays]

And Tang. I learned about Tang thanks to the space program.

What about Space Food Sticks?

[JohnnyDrama]

Seeing that the space program has had a better than 7:1 return ratio (i.e., every dollar spent on space science and technology, including Mercury/Gemini/Apollo, has returned at least $7), I'd like to hear your ideas if they can result in more than $140B return -- and that's not including the fact that ROI in federal revenues is necessarily a fraction of what it means for the private economy.

Going to the Moon up through Apollo 17 meant developing whole new technologies in computing, battery technology, remote operations, survival gear, fire suppression, etc. Going to the Moon permanently will require advances in remote medicine, nutrition, agriculture, survival equipment, water reuse, sensing, autonomous operations, etc. Think any of that is going to improve your standard of living or the way you do business?



Yep, he could have wasted all that money on welfare and Medicare for all -- and just increased the demand and wastage. I told Democrats in the run-up to the 1984 elections that if Mondale had his way, the Challenger astronauts would still be alive and probably the Apollo 1 astronauts as well because Mondale would have shut down the space program in order to fund more urban decay and welfare fraud. I hope Mondale is having to argue daily with Grissom, Chaffee, White, Shepard, Glenn, Onizuka, Scobee, Kennedy, etc. over the worth of the space program and that Nixon is getting blowback for having shut Apollo down just when we were getting good at it.

We should have been at this a long time ago:

+1

WTF happened. When I was a kid, that was a sure deal.