all 4 comments

[–]x0x7 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

What would be the military utility, or utility of any form for that matter? Why not spend $35 billion on feeding people, or $35 billion on cancer research? That would have more scientific value than rebuilding rockets we already know how to build.

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The moon landing had profound effects beyond walking around. It led to massive, beneficial tech advances in unexpected fields.

We already have enough food for everyone. Our problem is fat people, not starving people.

[–]x0x7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, did. Because it was exploratory science. Because there is no commercial benefit that means you don't do it again. That's the difference between Columbus sailing to America and then others deciding to do the same, and explorers crossing Antarctica by foot and that not being a recurring practice that needs government funding.

[–]RuckFeddit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

$35 billion is ludicrously expensive still. How is it so much?