Support For NASA Spending Depends On Perception of Size of Space Agency Budget 205
Posted
by
samzenpus
from the paying-the-cost dept.
from the paying-the-cost dept.
MarkWhittington writes "Alan Steinberg, a post doctorate fellow in political science at Sam Houston State University, conducted a study surrounding the vexing problem of how to motivate more people to support increased levels of funding for NASA. In an October 14, 2013 piece in The Space Review, Steinberg announced the results of a study conducted with a group of college students. Steinberg's approach was based on the findings of a study by Roger Launius conducted in the late 1990s that suggested that the American public believe that NASA spending takes up about 20 percent of the federal budget. It has in fact never exceeded four percent, which it enjoyed at the height of the Apollo program, and is currently about .5 percent. Steinberg was testing a notion advanced by Neil deGrasse Tyson that if people knew the true size of NASA's budget they would be more likely to support increasing it."
Re:Blah, blah, blah. (Score:4, Informative)
Poll respondents always favor nonspecific measures like "cutting government spending." Then it reverses when you ask about specific programs, especially the ones that actually cost a lot, like DoD and Social Security.
Getting me started, man! (Score:5, Informative)
The public has no idea about the level of US spending.
Here is a breakdown on where out money goes. [cbpp.org]Defense, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP - where 2/3rds goes to Medicare.
The perception is that our tax money is wasted on Space, Welfare Queen's Pink Cadillacs and other entitlement programs which I take to be code words for giving money to "lazy (Black) poor people" from folks who want to appear to be PC.
When the truth is we are wasting money on wars and transferring wealth to the old.
And I find it laughable and sad that the Teapartiers are mostly old white people and if they REALLY wanted what they think they wanted, they'd have to shoot themselves in the pocketbook and give up this notion the the US of A has to have a superior military and go off fighting "evil".
Cut military spending to post WWII levels. Stop this one man show when containing roque nations - we need more UN involvement; which is a whole other bugaboo with the Teaparty people and most conservatives.
Re:Getting me started, man! (Score:4, Informative)
You don't even need to cut the military that much. Cutting back 1/3 would cover the US debt interest payments.
We actually had a balanced budget when Clinton was president (and Republicans controlled congress). That was thrown out the window in order to fund two wars for which the American populace have been told to not worry about or sacrifice for.
The military however is the largest jobs program we have. Since it's an all volunteer army it seems most recruits may be joining in order to get a job or to get the resulting benefits . If you join you get the job training, you get the job, you get benefits. If there just happens to be a war that occurs while you're enlisted then you can get veteran's benefits as well. It's a pretty sweet deal if your local economy is bad and you have no hope of qualifying for or paying for higher education.