On October 9th, 2009 the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) crashed into the moon in a search to find water. The plan was to shoot particles into space from the force of the impact to be analyzed by another satellite that would determine if there was any water in the sample. The total cost of the mission was 79 million dollars. While the mission was successful, was it really necessary?
According the US Office of Management and Budget, the 2007 NASA budget was 15.9 billion dollars. Under Barack Obama’s approval the budget was raised in 2009 for 17.2 billion dollars. The proposed budget for 2010 is 18.7 billion dollars. And NASA is asking for even more in order to fund a manned mission to the moon by the year 2020.
This money is going to a program that is completely wasteful. Our tax dollars are being spent to blow craters in the moon and fund projects that are irrelevant to the American people. How can the government justify spending billions of dollars on such a useless program? Our money should not be spent on exploring space when our national debt is over 12 trillion dollars, and our budget deficit for 2009 is 1.4 trillion dollars. We could be using that money for much more important things, like our own planet.
Our government could possibly put some of that money into education, transportation, health care, and defense; or something that actually benefits Americans. Pretty much anything would be a better cause than NASA.
However, the government does not have the right to take our tax-money and smash holes into the moon with it. If NASA receives a budget cut (assuming the money is not put into another government program), that would mean more money where it belongs, in the pockets of the Americans who earned it.
You can read about the LCROSS here. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LCROSS/main/prelim_water_results.html
Sorry, I know it’s been awhile. I’ve been amazingly busy with work and such. And I just got back from vacation on Wednesday.
Anyways, something interesting happened yesterday. I was going into work from the rear entrance, and somebody who was sitting his car called me over and asked if Jason was working. I said that I would check. Jason was working, so I sent him out to the parking lot.
I asked Jason what that guy had wanted and he said that it was his friend and that he had broken his toe. The friend wanted to know if he could get a ride to the hospital. I asked Jason why his friend had driven up to come find him instead of driving himself to the hospital. He said the guy didn’t have enough gas and that he was always looking for an excuse for someone to drive him around. The friend doesn’t have a job and he frequently asks Jason for gas money.
I said, “Sounds like he’s a good guy to have around,” and Jason just mumbled something like “Yeah, I know.” Jason’s not the hardest worker around, but he doesn’t try to bum gas money off his friends. He works for his own money. Jason’s friend doesn’t understand that in order to consume, he needs to produce. This is what happens when people are placed in an environment where they can get by without doing anything. They learn to “borrow” money and live off other people’s wealth.
Jason’s friend should remind you of what’s going on in politics every day. Government officials believe that they need to redistribute wealth from people who earn their own money to people who either cannot or will not support themselves; to people like Jason’s friend. One of the arguments that I keep hearing is that the rich can afford to be taxed more. Therefore, they should be taxed more. Or in the (paraphrased) words of Joe Biden, it is their patriotic duty to sacrifice their earnings to the greater good.
I can’t find any logic in this idea. Just because you think someone can afford to part with a few dollars doesn’t mean that it is right or moral for you to take money from them. They earned it and they should spend it however they wish. Now, hopefully they will choose to help a few people out with that money. However, they should not be judged if they want to keep all the money for themselves. It is within their rights to do so.
This is so horrible that it’s almost laughable. The National Institutes of Health are funding a $423,500 project to study why men don’t like to wear condoms during sex.
I’m curious as to which government officials decided this was a necessary expenditure of taxpayers’ money. I’m appalled. Half a million dollars to go to something that Americans can figure out for themselves. This is yet another example of a poor government decision. How can they even think that they are representing the American people with this sort of waste.
It’s not that I’m against studies on condoms. I think that whatever you want to spend your money on is up to you. It shouldn’t be decided by the government. I guess I’m laughing to prevent myself from crying.
If anyone has such a great curiosity to know why men don’t like wearing condoms, just go ask someone! It’s not that hard to figure out. You certainly don’t need to spend $423,000 to find out peoples’ opinions.
And this isn’t the only time the NIH has spent taxpayers’ money on something questionable:
They have studied why gay men have risky sex while drunk, why prostitutes on drugs in Thailand have a greater risk for HIV infection, and they spent $2.6 million to teach prostitutes in China to drink less while having sex.
Does this make you laugh, or cry?
The recently passed federal tax on cigarettes is entirely unconstitutional and immoral. The tax on one pack of cigarettes increased from 39 cents to $1.01. The government must see smokers as intrinsically stupid and harmful to society. Many people that smoke want to quit and cannot. Smoking is not just a relaxing ritual, it’s addictive and overpowering. So why are taxes increasing?
Well, it is true that when when the cost of smoking goes up, the consumption drops. But it is not the government’s job to control peoples’ personal lives. The government is supposed to be of the people, for the people. All this tax does is polarize America. Those who smoke, and those who stand up for individual rights, are pitted against those who think government needs to stop people from harming themselves.
Another reason people agree with this tax is that the money will go towards the federally funded State Children’s Health Insurance Program. Nobody is going to disagree with helping kids, that’s not the issue. The problem here is that money is being taken from the consumers and put to whatever cause the government sees fit. We TAX PAYERS ARE NOT STUPID! We can decide what to do with our own money! In fact, I’d like to support children in need of Health Insurance. Big government is exerting its control over our daily lives and it must be stopped.
This isn’t the only limit on the rights of smokers. 23 states have bans against smoking in most public places. This number includes Virginia, North Carolina, Kansas, South Dakota, and Wyoming recently added to the list. The law in Virginia bans smoking in private bars and restaurants if they do not have a separate room and a separate ventilation system for smoking sections. This is a private issue! Patrons of restaurants understand the risks of secondhand smoke, and they choose to eat food where they want to. If someone doesn’t like a restaurants policy, they are not forced to eat there.
Both of these policies will cost businesses and individuals millions of dollars. The Government somehow believes that it is helping the people, but this perverse view should not be tolerated.
