Mars: Is the price tag really worth it?

Here's a dumbass article from CNN asking whether the $2.6-billion cost for Curiosity was worth it. In typical CNN fashion, they don't even give an answer.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/07/us/mars-unmanned-versus-manned-exploration/index.html

In an era where private companies like JP Morgan Chase can flush $8-billion down the toilet with nothing to show, and the federal government can dump hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out banks... are we seriously going to ask whether it was worth it to actually explore another planet?

Are people that fucking stupid and short-sighted?

I weep for humanity.

If it's not an entitlement, then it's worthless to some people.

Oh, and in deference to my Texan friend Storm, $2.6-billion seems like a small price to add another state to the blessed Union.

And if it doesn't involve cutting spending, then it's worthless to some other people.

As to the initial question: yes, Mars and every other space mission are worth it.

What boggles my mind is why these missions should be tasked to only the United States. a truly unified, international effort to explore space would work faster and cheaper, and benefit all of humanity.

So we can obviously never do it.

Considering the long-term time scale, we can't afford not to do it.

Malthusian corrections can be avoided indefinitely provided we find more elbow room and resources to exploit as a species, to say nothing of the frontier-effect (leading to innovation and technological explosion) a permanent human presence on Mars would offer.

Without those new resources and room to expand, this old rock is going to get mighty sick and tired of us, and end up shrugging us off like fleas.

In fairness, Canada and a few other countries did provide some robotic and sampling equipment for Curiosity. But it was merely a fraction of the overall $2.6-billion cost.

I absolutely agree with your statement but the fact is, at the present time, no other country has the expertise that the United States has when it comes to these type of missions. That doesn't mean other nations shouldn't be willing to step up to the plate.

Yes, it was worth it.

Yes, some people are that shortsighted.

No, I am not surprised.

Worth every penny and then some.

I'll broaden that. If it's not [special interest] than it's more than we can afford.

This is what drives me crazy in discussions about the budget. People piss and moan about things that make up about 1% of the federal budget and think some how this is what causes the deficit. We could land a Prius on every planet in the solar system if we cut defense spending by 2%. But that's not acceptable, so instead we have to cut a $billion from NASA, like that will make any damn difference.

I'm sure if the US would allow it, there are a lot of other nations that would love to play a larger role in the exploration of space. But they don't, and I don't blame them at all.

But yes, it is worth it. It is one government program that shouldn't be cut.

You could land 2 Prius' on every planet if you cut entitlement spending by 2%.

How about military?

Do we really need all those bases in countries that are ostensibly our allies?

International effort? Why? NASA is currently shopping for bids to transport astronauts to and from space, may the best company win. It wasn't an international effort that put men on the moon was it? I can only imagine the horrors of a truly international effort, governed by some large international bureaucracy. Or am I to believe that the UN, or the IOC are known for their streamlined efficiency? Please.

Competition breaks stagnation, and stagnation breeds, well, the Space Shuttle program. That got lethargic didn't it?

America put a Prius on Mars, game on bitches, let's see what ya got.

Why is that everytime someone mentions cutting entitlement spending someone else says, "yeah, what about the military?"

Fuck the banks, fuck GM, fuck the other countries, and fuck the "poor".

America remains the only nation on Earth that has ever landed a man on the Moon or explored the outer Solar System. That's "American exceptionalism".

We were and are capable of doing great things, but we decided it was more important to create a Nanny State, police the world, save corporations from their own poor decisions, and pay people to sit on their lazy asses and watch Oprah and Maury while munching on Cheetohs or fuck and make babies at the public's expense. That's American stupidity.

We decided to be stupid rather than exceptional.

So space shouldn't be explored for the betterment and sustainability of humanity, but so it can be included as a line item on a company's annual report?

How noble.

Because they are the only things that can make a significant difference by cutting. If you mention one, you ought to mention the other.

Cuz sawk eet, that's why.

...also, what Gul said.

To be honest, I don't know why we have military bases in Central America. It shouldn't be our problem if some worthless countries that aren't even our neighbors decide to shit themselves all over and die.

Your assumptions are based on ignorance, your ignorance is a choice.

Read this and get back to us, hat in hand.

Sounds pretty damned noble to me.

$2.6 billion is worth it. The $1 trillion or so it would take to put a man there, I balk at.

Nope. But there are a lot of other things we spend taxpayer money on that are far less worth it than this, and they're a lot bigger (albeit at least Constitutional (some of them)), so I'll complain about them first.

No shit Sherlock. I know the military has to be cut. But as much as the right-wing retards don't want to cut military spending, the left-wing retards don't want to cut social spending.

"Us?" Since when did you jump on the Slowkar, "I speak for the whole board" train?

I know SpaceX. I actually applied for a job there, because I believe in what they're doing. I think there's a place for private enterprise in space exploration. It's too expensive and risky not to involve the private sector. But what you're advocating sounds more like the first step into turning space into a giant strip mall.

We went to the Moon because it was there, not to maximize value for our investors.

And I respect Musk, but the comparison between the internet and space exploration is laughable. Expanding the internet didn't carry a price tag into the trillions, with the real possibility of getting people killed.

If you didn't need the answer, then why ask the question?

Yes it's worth it.

How about CNN compare the cost to some other things, like say hosting the Olympics?

I hate to say it, but I doubt any international effort would work all that terribly well simply because every other international effort seems to suffer from a lack of cohesiveness and tends to turn into a bureaucratic boondoggle and international butthurt over things like who pays what, who gets to do what, who gets to be in charge, etc. I like the idea, but I can't see the execution going all that well.

The fact is that there is MASSIVE amounts of fat that could be cut from the military budget with NO degradation in readiness.

My old unit 9th Battalion has their own Motor Pool. Hundreds and hundreds of 1151s (the latest and greatest HMMWV before they got phased out in favor of MRAPs). All these vehicles that are NEVER USED. Seriously, out of the 20 or 25 vehicles per company, maybe four get a few miles a month going out to a training site or a range. But we never deploy with them. It's not how we operate these days. We work in 2 man teams now, and it takes a minimum of two people just to SIT in an vehicle (gunner and driver) and three (above two plus a TC [Tank Commander]) to drive it. Considering our job is to be communicators and intelligence collectors, ya kinda got to get out of the vehicle to do it. Better to just catch rides with our partnered force.

Well anyway, I thought the entire Motor Pool was a monument to military waste. But then while I was deployed it got even worse. Command wanted to buy all new vehicles (to replace the ones that never deployed, but were now 3 years old) but were told no, b/c we didn't use them enough to justify it.

Commands solution. Everyone must put 20 miles on their vehicle a week. Now of course it wasn't phrased like that it was put as a command to 'incorporate vehicle usage into the training calendar' or something like that, but the jist of it is we all had to drive our vehicles 20 miles a week.

So you've got honest to god HUNDREDS of soldiers out in these HMMWVs doing loops around Fort Bragg, wasting OUR TIME and God knows how much in fuel, so that command can spend A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS to get a fleet of shiny NEW vehicles to sit in the Motor Pool... and never get used.

And that is just one little Battalion.

The military should easily be able to operate with a $500 billion dollar budget. And I'm being generous. But spending on social programs is still a problem, and nobody wants to even begin cutting it.