$604 billion

[All Seeing Eye]

$604 billion is how much the US war in Iraq and Afghanistan cost.

If the wars never happened and Nasa was given that $604 billion, what do you think Nasa would do with that money? and what do you think they'd build and research with that much money?

 

[Zachary Smith]

I bet fusion would be viable now if we'd poured that much into the research.

 

[DaleC76]

Gosh, I bet we'd have people living on Mars and maybe FTL .

Seriously, we'd probably just have some rich rocket scientists.

 

[jgdst]

^ Yup, I wouldn't mind a piece of that action.

If NASA did have the extra $604bn, I'm sure we would've had the obligatory "how can you when there's starving and AIDS and reality TV in the world?!".

Assuming that isn't an issue, I think the ISS would be fully operational as intended, Hubble may have had its upgrade thingy with the primary hard drive, and I suppose most importantly, there would've been more research into either refitting the shuttle fleet and extending their life, building new shuttles, or designing a whole new re-usable craft. And maybe come up with a system where astronauts don't have to drink their own wee

Then again, maybe not... maybe the money would be squandered and tied up, and they'd be at exactly the same point regardless.

 

[K'riq Sa]

better toilet seats.....







k'riq the uninspaceable

 

[SG-17]

No, the war was necessary, however I do not want to get into that debate right now.

But if the government decided not to bail out Wall Street and used that money for NASA...

 

[All Seeing Eye]

No, the war was necessary, however I do not want to get into that debate right now.

1) What was that in response to exactly?

2) The question of whether the war was necessary or not is not under question or under debate in this thread whatsoever and this is the Science & Technology forum where such discussions or debates are not allowed.

and 3) Care to elaborate on what NASA could achieve with $604 Billion?

 

[SG-17]

1) Just a statement
2) Thats why I said I don't want to get into that debate.
3) Not much, the money would not do much, maybe buy them a new rover or probe, but not alot in R&D.

I believe that private corporations will lead us into the stars, just look at what they have achieved so far. Just look at Ansari X and the Google Lunar X Prize.
Those kind of things will get us out their faster.

 

[Vance]

If the wars never happened and Nasa was given that $604 billion, what do you think Nasa would do with that money? and what do you think they'd build and research with that much money?

Sadly, and I mean this in all seirousness, NASA would have spent it all by now, and no one would be able to spot any differences in how NASA was operating - aside from the money somehow being spent.

 

[Dayton3]

I bet fusion would be viable now if we'd poured that much into the research.

You are making a false assumption.

Assuming that simple levels of investment into R & D are what determines technological development.

Just because one woman can produce a baby in nine months doesn't mean that you can produce a baby in one month by putting nine women on the job.

 

[TerriO]

1) Just a statement
2) Thats why I said I don't want to get into that debate.

And this is neither the time nor the place for that debate, thanks.

3) Not much, the money would not do much, maybe buy them a new rover or probe, but not alot in R&D.

Are you aware that from development to launch, MER (a.k.a. Spirit and Opportunity) only came to a cost of $800 million? The fact that they've lasted so much longer than expected has driven that cost up, yes, but no way on this planet they expected those two to have this many mission extensions.

And Phoenix, while the exact cost is open to debate, came to the ballpark of $500 million.

NASA has already proven that kind of money would do a lot more than you're giving them credit for.

 

[MicahBrack]

$604 billion is how much the US war in Iraq and Afghanistan cost.

What's most disturbing about that number is that it's less than the $700 billion bailout.

 

[c0rnedfr0g]

$604 billion is how much the US war in Iraq and Afghanistan cost.

What's most disturbing about that number is that it's less than the $700 billion bailout.

i agree, that is more disturbing.

NASA hasn't always been known for their wise investments. I remember hearing that they spent (some grossly large amount of money) on developing an ink pen that could write in Zero Gravity before learning (from the Russians) that is was easier to just use a pencil!

 

[MIB]

I'd imagine that if 600 billion were suddenly dumped on NASAs lap, we'd finally start gearing up for manned Luna and Mars missions. No more bullshit. No more goal dates that keep getting pushed back if not scrapped altogether. I'd actually stop gleaming copious amounts of sadness from the fact that I was born 50 years too early to take part in the first space age and god only knows how many decades too early to take part in the second.

Hell, back when NASA (stupidly) gave the government their "wish-list" rather than a conservative budget for a proposed Mars Mission back when the Bush Sr. administration expressed interest- even THAT came out to be only 150 billion or so if I recall correctly.

 

[MIB]

NASA hasn't always been known for their wise investments. I remember hearing that they spent (some grossly large amount of money) on developing an ink pen that could write in Zero Gravity before learning (from the Russians) that is was easier to just use a pencil!

That's actually an urban legend, my friend. It never happened. While I agree that NASA hasn't been the wisest people on Earth as far as expeditures are concerned (I still maintain that both the shuttle and the ISS have been little more than boondoggles) NASA hasn't been quite THAT idiotic with its budget.

 

[c0rnedfr0g]

NASA hasn't always been known for their wise investments. I remember hearing that they spent (some grossly large amount of money) on developing an ink pen that could write in Zero Gravity before learning (from the Russians) that is was easier to just use a pencil!

That's actually an urban legend, my friend. It never happened. While I agree that NASA hasn't been the wisest people on Earth as far as expeditures are concerned (I still maintain that both the shuttle and the ISS have been little more than boondoggles) NASA hasn't been quite THAT idiotic with its budget.

really? that's too bad. it was one of my favorite real-life examples of "too much money to know what to do with." got any replacements?

 

[Zachary Smith]

I bet fusion would be viable now if we'd poured that much into the research.

You are making a false assumption.

Assuming that simple levels of investment into R & D are what determines technological development.

Just because one woman can produce a baby in nine months doesn't mean that you can produce a baby in one month by putting nine women on the job.

Ever heard the phrase "two heads are better than one?" The more people you have working on IDEAS, the more ideas you're gonna have. While it's true most of those ideas are going to be repetitive and redundant, a couple will be inspired and ground-breaking. Those are the ones you need to encourage.

You talk as if a single person sitting in one room should be able to solve all of life's problems. To borrow a phrase, "It takes a village".

 

[Neopeius]

Just because one woman can produce a baby in nine months doesn't mean that you can produce a baby in one month by putting nine women on the job.

Of course you can, provided you're willing to give the project an eight month lead time.