Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [CNet] NASA science satellite lost in $424 million launch failure
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[CNet] NASA science satellite lost in $424 million launch failure - Page 10

post #91 of 119
How convenient for the global warming community. Fishy failure is fishy.
post #92 of 119
Ok, I gotta jump in here. Remember guys, a HUGE portion of DoD spending ISN'T bombs and bullets, it's MANPOWER. The DoD is one of the largest employers in the country. An enourmas portion of their budget is payroll both for military members, retirees (these two categories make nothin compared to civilians who do their jobs), civilian employees and contractors, and so on, all the way down to the janitors that clean the bathrooms in the Pentagon. If you have anyone in your family who is military, do NOT bash the DoD budget unless you want them laid off. Bash the social security budget all you want though, nowhere near enough of that goes to where it's supposed to, a huge portion of SS is used by people not entitled to it or people who don't contribute to it.
post #93 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabis;12630849 
Ok, I gotta jump in here. Remember guys, a HUGE portion of DoD spending ISN'T bombs and bullets, it's MANPOWER. The DoD is one of the largest employers in the country. An enourmas portion of their budget is payroll both for military members, retirees (these two categories make nothin compared to civilians who do their jobs), civilian employees and contractors, and so on, all the way down to the janitors that clean the bathrooms in the Pentagon. If you have anyone in your family who is military, do NOT bash the DoD budget unless you want them laid off. Bash the social security budget all you want though, nowhere near enough of that goes to where it's supposed to, a huge portion of SS is used by people not entitled to it or people who don't contribute to it.

You do realize the defense budget has more than doubled since 2001 right? And you do realize that even counting every troop that we have had in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001 and if we payed them 100,000 dollars a year(which is far far more more than they get payed) That equals out to only 150 billion dollars since 2001, So wanna explain that extra 500 billion we are spending every year compared to prior to 2001, cause it ain't man power. You can't explain away 500 billion dollars like that. And yes I realize there are more than just the troops on the payroll but even if you say we have an extra MILLION contractors and every single one of them makes 100,000 dollars a year that's still only 100 billion a year. As I said, you can't explain away that kinda money with man power. Even the tiniest bit of math will show how it's a crock.
Edited by scyy - 3/6/11 at 8:47am
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
post #94 of 119
pfft, pocket change when it comes to nasa's alloted budget
post #95 of 119
Actually Scyy, most government contractors get 100k+. And I don't mean JUST troops on the ground in the desert when I talk manpower. Gotta remember support personnel, Air Force, Navy, so on. Yeah, alot of growth too, but ALOT of the DoD growth spending IS equipment, research, and development. Plus replacing alot of AGING equipment, especially planes. I think the budget IS too much, but most of that is in wasted projects and failed research just like alot of other government waste. Again, if you really wanna look at overspending, hit the entitlement programs where we give away money to people who aren't even US citizens.
post #96 of 119
^^^
It seems to me that the US does not get much bang for the buck when it comes to defense spending, seeing that they get shoved around by any number of penny ante dictators, and rogue gangs. But then, the US throws tons of money at the War On Drugs, and has failed there as well.

NASA, on the other hand, has been the launching pad for real innovations, from advanced materials that we use on a daily basis, advanced servo control systems that make robotics and advanced machining possible, lots of development when it comes to computing, processing and imaging, remote sensing and detecting methods, aeronautics and safety analysis methods, and so on. All of this, on what amounts to a cent for every hundred dollars wasted on an effete and weak military that can't get any job done unless they have ten thousand men for every opponent in the field.

Rocketry is a tough deal, because once you launch it, you are stuck with any consequences. And really, it wasn't the rocket or the satellite that failed, it was the fairing that failed to eject itself. In the early days, lots of missions failed, but each failure lead to improvements in equipment and materials. And really, the cost is insignificant to the return on the investment. Like think of weather satellites that we take for granted - and how many thousands of lives are saved each and every year because we can track storms and hurricanes in advance. I think it is worth the dollars - unlike the billions that were fraudulently shoveled into the pockets of various criminals and warlords, or in payola to lobbyists and useless pork barrel projects.
post #97 of 119
wow...my posts here were deleted why??? i said nothing political. freaking mods are being overly quick to delete **** and are becoming jackasses. this site is really sucking worse and worse each damn day.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Sempron 140 2.7@ 3.7 MSI K9N6PGM2-V2 Intergrated 6150 CORSAIR 2GB DDR2 1333 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Hitachi 250GB LG CD/DVD-RW Windows 7 Ultimate 42" Phillips HDTV/17" Gateway CRT 
PowerCaseMouse
hec HP585D 585watt Rosewill Black Kingwin Optical 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Sempron 140 2.7@ 3.7 MSI K9N6PGM2-V2 Intergrated 6150 CORSAIR 2GB DDR2 1333 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Hitachi 250GB LG CD/DVD-RW Windows 7 Ultimate 42" Phillips HDTV/17" Gateway CRT 
PowerCaseMouse
hec HP585D 585watt Rosewill Black Kingwin Optical 
  hide details  
Reply
post #98 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabis;12632443 
Actually Scyy, most government contractors get 100k+. And I don't mean JUST troops on the ground in the desert when I talk manpower. Gotta remember support personnel, Air Force, Navy, so on. Yeah, alot of growth too, but ALOT of the DoD growth spending IS equipment, research, and development. Plus replacing alot of AGING equipment, especially planes. I think the budget IS too much, but most of that is in wasted projects and failed research just like alot of other government waste. Again, if you really wanna look at overspending, hit the entitlement programs where we give away money to people who aren't even US citizens.

Oh, I completely agree. It's not just the defense budget that needs a hard look, thing is the defense budget is easiest to look at because of the ridiculous growth its budget has seen the last decade. Most other areas have more or less stayed the same as far as the annual budget goes, whereas the DoD has seen as I already said ridiculous increases and it doesn't look like it has stopped increasing either.

I also realize that contractors do make that much, I just used $100,000 as it is an easy number to calculate with and is in the ball park of many of the jobs pay. Thing is you could even make it $200,000 a year and you still have 300-400 billion of money a year put towards mostly(not always) unneeded crap. On top of that a million new contractors is a very, very inflated number that is likely nowhere near the actual amount, I simply used that to show that even with that many new workers it still is nowhere near covering the money allocated.

I also would say the $100,000 figure I used for the troops more or less evens out when you take into account people not on the ground but still in the military and would get their pay from the DoD. Obviously these are all rough estimates but the fact of the matter is there could be large cuts and not effect military families and others like you had implied in your first post. If that were the case there would have been massive layoffs prior to 2001 as it was only allocated 500 billion a year(that is including money that wasn't allocated directly to the DoD but would still be spent in defense)
Edited by scyy - 3/6/11 at 3:40pm
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
post #99 of 119
Thread Starter 
I see the other side of the fence about NASA & the Gov., though I can't say the Gov. is right spending what they do where they do, NASA on the other hand is a bunch of highly trained professionals, this is rocket science, and they really should hold accountability for failure...

Someone besides the American People should have to pay for gross errors in judgment. (Unless of course NASA is paid for by someone else?)

My point is as follows....

When will the wasteful spending stop?

When will the STILL failing program(s) end?

When will we stop hearing about all the failures we have to pay for? (w/ tax money)

When will we stop having to pay for irresponsible & unaccountable foolishness?

Is it OK to just say "Whoops I guess I accidentally burned up 700 Million Dollars." ??

I mean come on....

This ____ has got to stop people, some time soon too, or am I just the only person who sees the problems at hand here?
Edited by _GTech - 3/6/11 at 10:19pm
The Rock
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
The Rock
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
post #100 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by _GTech;12639591 
I see the other side of the fence about NASA & the Gov., though I can't say the Gov. is right spending what they do where they do, NASA on the other hand is a bunch of highly trained professionals, this is rocket science, and they really should hold accountability for failure...

Someone besides the American People should have to pay for gross errors in judgment. (Unless of course NASA is paid for by someone else?)

My point is as follows....

When will the wasteful spending stop?

When will the STILL failing program(s) end?

When will we stop hearing about all the failures we have to pay for? (w/ tax money)

When will we stop having to pay for irresponsible & unaccountable foolishness?

Is it OK to just say "Whoops I guess I accidentally burned up 700 Million Dollars." ??

I mean come on....

This ____ has got to stop people, some time soon too, or am I just the only person who sees the problems at hand here?

NASA is working in an area that we still haven't advanced very far in. It is to be expected that some issues like this will arise. As I said obviously the loss of 700 million isn't a good thing by any stretch but it really is a miniscule amount when looking at the big picture. That being said I 100% agree with you on the wasteful spending our government has been doing and that it needs to be stopped but NASA hardly fits in that category.
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Technology and Science News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [CNet] NASA science satellite lost in $424 million launch failure