Hello, Pluto

Discussion in 'The GSD Archives' started by It's Damn Real!, Jul 14, 2015.

  1. Reflection

    Reflection is a happier and wiser man

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Messages:
    855
    Likes Received:
    371
    No, I believe that the thread is related to NASA's exploration of Pluto, not about USA's defence spendings. If they do something pointless like sending a squadron to Antarctica, and someone makes a thread on that accomplishment, then I'll raise the issue of mal-expenditure there as well. I commented in relevance with the topic.

    I'm not a military expert, so I cannot explain with confidence exactly why America spends the highest amount on defence, but there are some facts that we know, like America being the sole superpower in the planet for the last 25 years or so, and some of the factors which I mentioned above (which are facts as well), came about as a result of that, others spontaneously... all these compel America to have a very high defence budget. I'm not saying that America cannot take some money away from that and put it towards the welfare of the world's poor; I'm saying that the money that is spent on defence has much bigger necessity than the money spent on space exploration, especially so for planets other than Mars, which wouldn't help us in any way.
     
    #26
  2. It's Damn Real!

    It's Damn Real! The undisputed, undefeated TNA &

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    4,962
    Likes Received:
    1,838
    Define "help us in any way", because as the last fifty years of NASA science has proven, even when they don't directly work to achieve certain tasks, the technological advances they make specifically for space exploration, for example, have massive beneficial effects here on earth.
     
    #27
  3. Reflection

    Reflection is a happier and wiser man

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Messages:
    855
    Likes Received:
    371
    I'm not saying that poverty would be eliminated altogether by the contributions from space research organizations, you stupid ****. I clearly stated that they could help in the cause behind solving these problems as much as possible. But if you don't think that money is the chief ingredient behind obtaining and constructing the basic necessities that can be provided to the needy, then you are an even bigger ******. Do you think that all the charities and donations amount to nothing because they won't help the concerned for an entire lifetime? And like I said about half a dozen times already, I feel that the money spent behind space exploration and taking photos of pluto could have been spent better, I did not say that the money has to be cut from making inventions that helps mankind. Having the greater minds of the planet in one place would certainly help a lot, but one has to watch out that they don't pick a pseudo great-mind like yourself that doesn't even read or understand the context, but makes a random insulting comment just to make his presence known.

    This is exactly why they say that if you get into an argument with the sheep, you will have lost before you could even begin. They come in hordes and will trample you down. I'm out of here.
     
    #28
  4. It's Damn Real!

    It's Damn Real! The undisputed, undefeated TNA &

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    4,962
    Likes Received:
    1,838
    I believe you are correct in this assumption. I don't believe you are correct in the one that presumes the defense budget needs to be as massive as it is, where you suggest or believe that cutting funding from an already massively slashed NASA budget as an alternative is a better place to generate that cash flow.

    Specifically because you can't prove to me that the ends justify the means regarding military spending. You assume the relative safety of the U.S. is directly attributed to the size of the actual defense budget. What's to say the same safety can't be achieved with another 100 billion (or even less) taken off the top?

    The Pentagon already told the U.S. government to stop buying equipment it doesn't need. Clearly there is a case of over-spending going on. Take from there. The U.S. military clearly does not need more jets or tanks or equipment that costs a substantial amount to produce. In fact, I'd be willing to bet you could take at least the entire NASA budget from the military budget and not see a negative impact with regard to safety anywhere — foreign or domestic.
     
    #29

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"