Obama Would Redirect NASA Funding to Education 357
QuantumG writes "In a recent article on The Space Review, Greg Zsidisin reveals that Barack Obama plans to delay Project Constellation for at least five years, using the redirected funds to nationalize early-education for children under five years old to prepare them for the rigors of kindergarten and beyond, if he is elected president. It is feared that if this happens the Vision for Space Exploration will flounder and that may be the end of human spaceflight altogether."
Re:Err. Can we mod summaries? (Score:0, Interesting)
I call shenanigans (Score:2, Interesting)
"Article" (Score:2, Interesting)
Calling blog posts articles sets a pretty dangerous precedent. It puts someone's personal viewpoint on the same level as say, an article from a respected published like Reuters and can create lots of FUD and unnecessary debate.
Now I know this is Slashdot and there's many of you itching for an argument, waiting to pounce and say "Well the media is stupid and has bias too". That is correct. However, when we read an article from a respected news source, as opposed to someone's personal blog, we are assuming that they have some kind of qualification, have done certifiable research and the article has passed through some kind of review process. You can't assume any of that with a blog post.
Re:Err. Can we mod summaries? (Score:3, Interesting)
However if this is true or not, I think, it's a good idea and should be at least taken in to consideration! Just ask yourself: What would be more useful for the world and U.S. citizens?
Note: NASA employees themself are recruited from people with the highest education level! So why not better educate our children, so that they have the chance to dream about space exploration, too?
Not a bad idea (Score:3, Interesting)
Honestly I don't think this is a bad idea. NASA has lost its focus. Right now it's major scientific project is a space station to give the retiring space shuttle a place to go.
I think we've all been disappointed that the flying cars and weekend trips to mars envisioned by TV and authors in our childhood have not materialized. But the government was never a good way to go about space exploration. It's too risky, and governments are risk averse. A better way to do it is in the private sector. They're more tolerant of risk. The X-Prize has been phenomenally successful, and should be emulated. But government over-regulation, and subsidized competitors has prevented the private sector from flourishing. For a sad read, go over to Beale Aerospace's [bealaerospace.com] page.
NASA needs to refocus its effort on science by contracting launch services from the private sector. Congress should rearrange the regulatory atmosphere to allow this to happen (particularly with respect to human spaceflight and liability), and to enable a competitive launch industry rather than the the fat-cat subsidized government contractors we have now.
I want to go to the Moon and Mars too, but no more "flags & footprints". It's long past time we got serious about human spaceflight and did what it takes to make it an everyday occurrence. As long as all human spaceflight is in NASA's hands, nothing will change.
Re:That's disappointing (Score:2, Interesting)
All of that with nukes. No thanks. Dealing with the strategic consequences of that in the long run may actually outweight [sic] current investment in the Iraq war."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_states#Undeclared_nuclear_states
Iran is accused of having nukes like Iraq; it isn't confirmed. Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and the Kurds don't have nukes, yet. Even if/when they all do, we can handle them diplomatically. If we don't make new decisions (e.g. weaning off of ME oil, letting Israel protect itself, and employ Iraqis) then we will continue to bear the strategic consequences (i.e. getting ass-fucked without lube). Please stop spreading FUD so we don't continue nation-building the entire middle east.
"Anyone thinking that "we can pullout fast" is delusional."
No, doing the same thing for five years and expecting different results is delusional. The longer the U.S. stays, the more EVERYONE will pay. I mean part of my family was lost because a shrub decided to civilize "The Cradle of Civilization".
Signed,
a token Assyrian American.
The US has no monopoly on human spaceflight! (Score:4, Interesting)
America-centric bollocks. If NASA were razed to the ground and all its employees rounded up and shot, it still would not spell the end of human spaceflight... as John F. Kennedy knew perfectly well when he launched the race to the moon.
Nothing could please the Russians more than to have lost the battle for the moon, but to have won the war for space.
Re:No one needs pre-kindergarten education (Score:1, Interesting)
My uncle is a dentist who makes good money, so she by no means needs to work. She simply enjoys working rather than parenting--which raises the question of why she would undertake an endeavor she has no interest in. I don't apply for jobs I don't want and then pay someone else to do them for me when I get the position.
She sees her kid for maybe an hour in the morning as she rushes to get him ready and out the door. At night she dumps all the work on her husband, another scant hour or so to mostly just bathe the kid and put him to bed. As of yet, I've only seen her put on her "mother" hat at social functions where her son serves as a trinket to be dressed up and shown off, but never paid any attention to. You can bet that weekends and other such free time will be spent similarly rather than in any sort of meaningful interaction with her offspring. In the 18 or so years she bears responsibility for the kid kid she will spent less time loving him than I spend with any one of my cats, and my cats will never have any need of therapy.
Of course, it's not actually a mystery why she had the kid. It was just yet another piece in the yuppie status symbol puzzle. She already had the husband, the house on Long Island, the completely unnecessary SUV ontop of the other two cars (my uncle doesn't even drive), and all the other junk that fills their house simply because it has a high cost and someone put it in her head that she "should" have it.
And now she has the ultimate toy, a son. Something to show off at dinner parties and brag about to all the other yuppie wives, but not worth wasting time on. Because after all, what would she do without the kid? She'd have to actually develop a personality! Surely she can't be expected to have things to say without such a crutch to lean on. Apparently the oh-so-fulfilling job that she can't live without isn't very interesting to talk about, but the motherhood she can't be bothered with is an endless source of entertaining gossip. Doesn't make much sense to me, but what do I know? I don't even have an SUV or other status symbol of note.
In case that came off as sexist, that was not my intention. I am not implying that women should always stay barefoot and pregnant and never have a job. I focused on her rather than her husband simply because it was 100% her sole decision to have the kid in the first place and she is by far the more neglectful of the two. He would be a decent enough parent if it wasn't for the fact that he never wanted kids until she decided he did and he HAS to work full-time.
In conclusion, all yuppies should be put to death and Long Island should be sunk to the bottom of the sea. Nationalizing preschool is a dumb idea and people who don't want to raise kids shouldn't have them. People who can't afford to have kids ought to reconsider also.
Bring on the robots! (Score:5, Interesting)
Human spaceflight may be romantic and inspiring, and a human may be far more flexible and adaptable than any robot, but humans also have outrageous supply and environmental demands. It's simply impossible for manned missions to do more than a tiny fraction of what far cheaper automated probes can do.
And every time NASA shoots a Shuttle into low orbit to feed the ISS so that it can be dropped into the ocean on schedule [umd.edu], they do almost zero to advance human knowledge, and spend enough money to send a whole new robot-rover mission to Mars and then run it for three months.
People who insist that manned spaceflight is worth the price do not, I think, usually comprehend the magnitude of the difference between that price and the price of unmanned probes. They also seem to have a pretty poor grasp of what space science actually entails, and how little of it even theoretically can be done by people.
Re:Err. Can we mod summaries? (Score:3, Interesting)
This idea Obama has here might be stupid, but it pales in comparison with the sheer stupidity of the Clinton campaign.
Re:Err. Can we mod summaries? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Err. Can we mod summaries? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Err. Can we mod summaries? (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps you might want to rethink part of that. Then again, maybe you don't.
Re:Err. Can we mod summaries? (Score:1, Interesting)
First, these countries aren't part of any logical group. Seriously, including China in a political freedom-related trend with the US or France really boggles my mind.
Second, I really don't know how true it is to say that the US has seen a "swing" to authoritarianism. I'd say it's more like a slow creep, with the Federal government gradually gaining more power; the Bush Administration has simply abused this power much more than other recent ones.
---
Also, you seem to forget that what is considered "radical" is in relation to the norm. If these countries are (as you claim) living in an authoritarian environment, then it logically follows that a "return to rationality" will actually be seen as radical. Therefore, to return to rationality you should support someone who is seen as radical. QED.