(USAToday)Bush to shoot for moon, then Mars (another boondoggle?)

[papau]

While econ media pick up USATodays use of the word "boondoggle" to describe the space station - will the $1 trillion needed over 20 years be noted and called a "boondoggle" to get an 04 vision thing going?

Nah-

silly question!

:-)


http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20040109/5826327s.htm

(USAToday)Bush to shoot for moon, then Mars (another boondoggle?)
By Traci Watson

WASHINGTON -- President Bush will announce next week a program to return American astronauts to the moon to build a permanent base as preparation for a trip to Mars sometime after 2014, administration officials said Thursday.

One official declined to say when the first moon shot would take place but said it would be soon. The last man to set foot on the moon was American astronaut Eugene Cernan in 1972.

A return to the moon would mean that NASA would have to design a rocket from scratch. Only three of the rockets capable of lifting humans to the moon remain, and the design includes obsolete technology. <snip>

The space shuttle, though useful for experiments, never leaves the Earth's orbit. The International Space Station has drawn criticism from scientists and members of Congress alike as a $100 billion boondoggle. <snip>

[Muddleoftheroad]

1. This whole project is WAY overdue

Space is our future, it's time we went back in strength.

[papau]

2. True - time to go back - but only if rich taxed to pay for it.

It is one of the great investments for a great return in the future.

But the game today is the 04 vision thing -

and to force the no money for SS and Medicare concept - there by "mondernizing" them out of existence as a Fed gov problem.

[eek]

3. My very good DU friend, Norton put it beautifully:

"Our country is going broke.
We can't afford going to the moon or Mars just for the sake of saying we
can. That money is needed desperately elsewhere. This is "George and the
Beanstalk" and the "giant" in this version is bankruptcy.

We can get nice red rocks from Arizona for about 10 cents a pound.
Oh, and the best part?... They're Made In America! "

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/01/09/bush.space/index.html

[kstewart33]

4. More inspirational leadership

The immigration proposal, now a space initiative, what's next in this election year? My prediction--this stuff will backfire on Bush. It is all too obviously political. As today's DU front page suggests, he thinks we're all stupid and falling for this.

Here in Denver, Bush's immigration policy is falling with a big thud. People, at least in the media, seem to see it for what it is. Nothing but a bid for votes.

[ramapo]

5. Yes, About time but....

I think backing away from the space program in the early '70s was a hugh mistake. Then and today (we'll hear this a lot about this proposal) the argument has been, "We shouldn't spend all this money while children go hungry...etc.".

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember the dollars saved from gutting the space program going towards health, education, or anything beneficial.

A robust space program would've and will generate quality jobs throughout the economy from research to manufacturing. Technology will get a big boost.

But coming from Bush, I'm very concerned that this is just window dressing and/or a hidden plan to militarize space.

The additional funds should come off the bloated defense budget. These dollars and resources (especially the scientists) should be put to use on peaceful and productive projects. I'm not too hopeful about this part.

And it is distressing that Bush picks this as his vision. As much as I favor this, I'd much rather he solve the health-care crisis.

Check the NY Times webpage. There's the story of Bush's upcoming space annoucement right next to the story about health care costs at record levels.

Finally this is likely just PR. Daddy Bush also made a Mars proposal that had a lifetime equal that of a Saturn V booster in flight. Hmmm. I wonder if that was announced during the political season?

[asjr]

6. He just won't settle

for ruining Earth. He has to loot Mars and the Moon. He is very ambitious.

[mike_c]

7. while I have little confidence in shrub's ability to do this well...

...I applaud the basic idea of returning to space. People need frontiers. We are outgrowing the Earth's ability to sustain us. Take the long view folks....

[TrogL]

8. Dubya keeps trying for a "Kennedy moment"

He did it earlier announcing plans for a Mars mission (which seems to have sunk without a trace). Now he's trying to recreate the Apollo legacy for himself.

There is nothing to be gained by going to the moon. The Mars mission is just as easily accomplishable from Earth orbit.

[CaptainClark23]

9. Wasted Resources!

And I support renewed manned space missions.

Another example of economic idiocy from this admin, political value aside.

Any resources put into space right now should be for the construction of a manufacturing/launch platform at L5.

THEN we can think about Mars, at a fraction of the cost.

I guess that idea isn't pretty enough, no photo-ops of the stars and stripes being hoisted on another celestial body.

[drell0]

10. long term?

The truth is any real long term economic return to earth citizens will be many many years in the future as a result of mining/temporary colonization possibilities. Within the next 20 years I think the benefit would be purely political and really a waste of resources.

As far as I'm concerned NASA would be much better off spending some of that money on advanced propellant research etc. than a short term rocket project. Technologies like an antimatter energy source, and many times faster space travel will make a mars journey a much safer and more rewarding decision.

In the end this would just lock NASA into another hopelessly expensive shuttle program that would stall real future advancements.

[napkinz]

11. Bush Mars Cartoons

Bush and Blair on Mars

Looking For WMD

Bush in 41

[number6]

12. our debt is just out of this world, eh

:eyes: