1456
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
1456 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
69346 readers
2722 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
We can afford to do both. We choose not to.
Probably true to some extent. Though, at what point do you decide it's better to just directly give the money to people?
There's no situation where it isn't better to just give the money directly to the people who need it.
Considering it is such a small percentage of the budget and they have developed so much useful technology (https://www.howtogeek.com/831363/these-nasa-innovations-are-all-around-us-everyday/)
I would say, take the money from other things that suck, like handouts to the rich and wasteful military overspending which would easily cover the things we need to cover. Defunding NASA would contribute to the dummification of the country and is a terrible idea.
Currently, but during many of the innovations it was a much higher percentage. And why do you assume there wouldn't be other, maybe more impactful innovations, if NASA money and NASA researchers weren't working on something else?