Here's something you Yanks should understand

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Rude
If you compare two nationally underwritten programs, the Concorde vs. the Shuttle, the shuttle yielded a much higher return back to that nation, be it spin offs or intangibles.

I would say that while the launching of satellites could be a profit making enterprise, most of the other things in space don't pencil out.  Pure science rarely does.  And there is much pure science in the space program.  The rest has far too much risk for no short term foreseeable financial reward.  Rewards are generally more insulated from investments than accountants like.

Commercial air travel, on the other hand, has been shown to be profitable, the last few years notwithstanding.

[Airhead]

Nah, don't lock it, Rude. This one's relatively civil. Anyway Skuzzy gets a ten dollar bonus for every thread he locks. Let him do it.

[Curval]

Rude,

I recognise the benefits that came later.  Let's face it, the Concorde probably used technology derived from the space program.

BUT...these benefits resulted from MASSIVE spending of tax payer funds (trillions) and the benefits to which you refer were not what were considered prior to the first launch...it was a race with the Soviets to control space.  It was that simple.  Hindsight is 20/20.  To say "We had lots of benefits from spinoff and intangibles" is easy to say now.  In the 1950s' it would have been impossible to know that these benefits would be the result.  Furthurmore, if you throw enough money at something there are "bound" to be some benefits..and the US threw ALOT of it at the space program.  

Using your argument one could then say that without Hitler and World War 2 there would not have been a space race.  (In reference to the development of the V-2 rocket etc)  So, we should all be very grateful that those millions of lives were "spent" so that we could have the benefits that such a conflagration provided to humanity.

I am in complete agreement with Holden...both programs were commenced without a profit motive in mind.

[Rude]

Well, if you can show me where I stated that the intention of the US space program was initially to make money, then I will apologize. I never went there.

I just stated a fact in regards to the intended and unintended innovations which have over time, saved lives, created new industries and jobs, saved monies, increased profits, etc. I also believe that there will continue to be new technologies born from this effort which will again yield profitable returns on monies spent.

I still believe, insignificant as the thought might have been, that someone in those early years saw opportunity for financial gain by going into space...might not have been the impetus for the first launch, but still....we're capitalists:)

Your Hitler analogy is silly....human life cannot be appraised on a monetary basis...at least to me.

My company has made investments, which at the time looked like losses to CPA's....they only saw what was on paper....we knew that those intangibles you spoke of would evolve into real dollars over time....risk when calculated, is necessary to prosper. I just see our space program as that kind of venture....didn't start that way due to the nature of the venture, however, I cannot be convinced that overall, it was not worth the investment and that mankind has not realized profit from the very same.

[GrimCO]

C'mon guys, something generating a profit doesn't always have a bearing on it usefulness.

The United States is building a device called LIGO that is going to end up costing upwards of a billion dollars, and generate not a single cent of profit. It's sole purpose is to detect the presence of gravitional waves, and prove yet another aspect of Einstein's Theory of Relativity to be true. If these waves are detected, it will shake the foundations of modern science.

Is the United States wasting money?

Apparently the governments of Germany, France, Japan, and the UK don't think so because they have plans of building similar devices themselves. Eventually, each of these devices will work together and provide a much higher level of sensitivity than a single unit in a single country could.

LIGO

[Rude]

Originally posted by GrimCO
C'mon guys, something generating a profit doesn't always have a bearing on it usefulness.

The United States is building a device called LIGO that is going to end up costing upwards of a billion dollars, and generate not a single cent of profit. It's sole purpose is to detect the presence of gravitional waves, and prove yet another aspect of Einstein's Theory of Relativity to be true. If these waves are detected, it will shake the foundations of modern science.

Is the United States wasting money?

Apparently the governments of Germany, France, Japan, and the UK don't think so because they have plans of building similar devices themselves. Eventually, each of these devices will work together and provide a much higher level of sensitivity than a single unit in a single country could.

LIGO

That would depend on who's money was invested....I've always found profit to be quite useful:)

I do catch your drift:)

[Curval]

A very quick look into NASA's finances revealed this by the way...looks like you might want to sell out on some of those investments in intangibles there Rude....the gravy train is running low.

Can you say...Enron?

NASA

[Curval]

Originally posted by Rude
I just stated a fact in regards to the intended and unintended innovations which have over time, saved lives, created new industries and jobs, saved monies, increased profits, etc. I also believe that there will continue to be new technologies born from this effort which will again yield profitable returns on monies spent.

Your Hitler analogy is silly....human life cannot be appraised on a monetary basis...at least to me.

All that you said in your first paragraph can be said about the World War 2....THAT is my point.

[Dowding]

It seems to me that this Dowding / Rude discussion can be ended peacefully if both would agree that neither the Shuttle nor Concord were intended to be profitable.

That's what I've been arguing all along! It was about national prestige/pride. I've never argued that Concorde was a commercial success.

Someday I'll learn not to have discussions with those of higher education....reality rarely lives in a book.

The snide remarks get you nowhere rude. Born out of some weird jealousy, they make you look foolish - especially since you've supposedly benefitted from your aged wisdom. But I've only got your testament to that.

[GrimCO]

Originally posted by Rude
That would depend on who's money was invested....I've always found profit to be quite useful:)

I do catch your drift:)

Hey there Rude,

I'm not anti-profit either, believe me...  I love making the green stuff... LOL  But I also don't mind chipping in a few tax dollars in the name of science. Who knows what will come in the future from the discoveries made by this project.

It's the same old argument of "How large a price can be put on knowledge?".

[Rude]

Agreed!

[SmackDabb]

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Nifty
oh yeah, our girls are gonna spank your girls' tulips this weekend...   mmm, if only that was the literal case!  

Now that is a game I would watch !

[Twist]

NASA has contributed so much to the world, but there is still one little thing that bugs me.

Why is there only one flavor of Tang?

[Dago]

Oh and for the record it's "an" SST....
or it would be if you built one, which you wont.

Maybe its "an SST" where you live, but I believe we would say "a super sonic transport", not "an super sonic transport".

And by the way, we built alot of them, we just call them B1 Bombers, and use them to transport precison guided bombs.

We Americans bow to your great British developments, lets see, you have to brag about:
bad food,
bad dentistry,
punk rock,
unreliable cars, etc.

hahahaha


dago