Mars Exploration

This is for Jebus and the others who are uninformed about the ACTUAL US budget, here are the figures: US 2004 Budget: 2,378.2 Billion, now let's break down the numbers.

Highlights of the total government outlays from President Bush’s proposed 2005 budget, in billions of dollars, with year-to-year change

Function 2004 2005 Chng
Defense 453.7 440.3 -13.4
International Affairs 34.2 36.6 2.4
Science, space 22.3 23.8 1.5
Energy 1.0 1.2 0.2
Natural Resources, Environment 31.7 32.5 0.8
Agriculture 20.1 22.4 2.3
Commerce, Housing credit 7.7 3.8 -3.9
Transportation 68.2 69.5 1.3
Community development 18.8 17.3 -1.5
Education, social services 87.2 89.5 2.3
Health 243.3 254.2 10.9
Medicare 270.5 295.2 24.7
Income security 339.5 348.8 9.3
Social Security 496.2 514.8 18.6
Veterans benefits 60.5 68.3 7.8
Admin of Justice 41.6 42.7 1.1
General government 25.4 19.9 -5.5
Net interest 156.3 178.0 21.7

now lets add up the relevant parts that most uninformed people rant about, Defense 453.7 billion, social spending, 1463.2 billion, science-space, 22.3 billion. Now lets add up the total that the uninformed people do not wish to see Defense + Veteran's Benefits, 514.2 billion, i included the Vet's benefits because some fool is going to say that it should be included in the defense budget, even though it is mainly hospitalization and retirement payments. Science-space, 22.3 billion, together it equals 536.5 billion. Social spending, Social Security 496.2 billion, Income Security 339.5 billion, Medicare, 270.5 billion, Health, 243.3 billion, Education, 87.2 billion, Community Development, 18.8 billion, Housing 7.7 billion, which comes to 1463.2 billion.


Final numbers Defense spending 514.2 billion + Space 22.3 billion = 536.5 billion

Social Spending = 1463.2 billion.

So how on god's green earth can you claim with a straight face that the US spends as much or more on defense and space than social items? The only way i think is you listen to too much propaganda and do not wish to think for yourself.

One very irritated Centrist Thorgrimm
 
Human nature to destroy each other?
Last time I checked, we were more prone to a little something called CIVILISATION. In my opinion, the closest we’ve ever come to destroying each other is the Cuban Missile Crisis.

I know you were probably referring to the constant fighting that people always take part in all over the world (Wars, ect), but I think that our capacity for creation is much higher than our capacity for destruction.

A lot of war has resulted from revenge cycles and religious fanaticism. I see Mars as a chance to "start over", free of prejudice and ancient feuds. Unrealistic? Maybe, but I'm an optimist.
 
Thorgrimm said:
This is for Jebus and the others who are uninformed about the ACTUAL US budget, here are the figures: US 2004 Budget: 2,378.2 Billion, now let's break down the numbers.

......

Final numbers Defense spending 514.2 billion + Space 22.3 billion = 536.5 billion

Social Spending = 1463.2 billion.

So how on god's green earth can you claim with a straight face that the US spends as much or more on defense and space than social items? The only way i think is you listen to too much propaganda and do not wish to think for yourself.

One very irritated Centrist Thorgrimm
Click to expand...

Actually Thorgrimm, I did a similar piece about a year and a half ago looking at some old figures for Ozrat when he was going off on how we spend more on defense than social issues.

However, one thing I didn't see clearly was how much of the money being spent was being put to paying down the deficit, paying off debts, etc. That might be included in the social services that you are mentioning.
 
Welsh if you look at the numbers breakdown it is the last entry, and no it is not included in the social services total.


Cheers Thorgrimm
 
Still, about 25% of the budget spent on defense isn't cheap. ANy idea what that is as percent of GDP?
 
The reports i have read put the defense budget at about 7 to 12 percent, depending on who you read, and since i try to split the difference between socialists and capitalists, i would say about 9.5 percent. They rate the social spending at about 20 to 37 percent, again depending on who you read, and again i like to split the difference between the socialists and the capitolists, i figure about 28.5 percent of the GDP is spent on social services. So you can see we spend a hell of a lot more on our citizens than most socialists harp about. I do not care about their personal ideologies, i just wish if they have a compliant, check their figures before they go on a rant. As most people assume that the person ranting knows what they are talking about. Yes the numbers are high, but remember the US GDP is a hell of a lot higher than most of the countries on the planet. A better gauge is what of the Percentage of the GDP is spent on defense budgets.

Cheers Thorgrimm
 
Mars

Opportunity strikes twice

Mar 25th 2004
From The Economist print edition


Yet more evidence of Martian water

Get article background

THE X43A (see article) represents the first “A” of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. But it is the “S” that NASA is best known for, and which its publicity machine likes to keep in the public eye. Water-on-Mars stories, which celebrate the success of the agency's two rovers on the planet, are a good way of doing so. Another one has just been released.

Evidence for, at the least, a salty pond, and possibly for a sea having covered the area where the rover Opportunity is operating comes in two parts. The first is that one of the rocks Opportunity has been examining has bromide salts distributed throughout it in a manner characteristic of what would happen if sea water were to evaporate on Earth. The second is a detailed photograph of a geological feature known as a “crossbed”. When grains of sediment start to move in a current, they tend to form little mounds that migrate downstream and then avalanche over the grains in front of them. This produces sedimentary layering at an angle to the surface the grains are moving on—in other words, crossbedding.

Crossbedding in the local rocks was first reported three weeks ago. But, at that point it was not clear whether water or wind was the cause. Close-up photography strongly suggests it was water.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top