Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 248 posts

Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts

#11

Post by ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 »

somenameforme wrote: post #10
geuis wrote: post #2

It's refreshing that given everything else happening, Congress is still at least functional at this level. Should be noted that many of NASA's programs are situated in predominantly conservative areas of the country. Brings lots of jobs and resources to the local economies.

Except SLS/Orion should be cancelled. The SLS is pejoratively called the Senate Launch System, because it has no real place in the market yet is continuing to consume tens of billions of dollars. It was mostly obsoleted by Falcon Heavy years ago (SLS has been a black hole of funding since 2011), and its costs are completely ridiculous. You're looking at billions of dollars per launch if it ever is confidently flight…

Need some competition to commercial near-monopolization (in the pre-to-mid 2010s when it was funded), some other program, they already funded SLS (which was funded to carry way more payload than FH), let it play out, IMO.

Also, not to say it isn't a time to start acting, if we are another decade out still adding funding to SLS with the current balance sheet, we have major issues.

But $30B over 10Y isn't that crazy when we spend ~$900B a year (with much more in 2026) on defense.

Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts

#12

Post by mousethatroared »

mindslight wrote: post #8
Iwan-Zotow wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is not With level of debt and borrowing, cannot afford more spending

If the debt is a problem worth addressing, then why did the big ugly spending bill raise the debt by trillions of dollars?

Presumably the OP believes the BBB is stupid too?

Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts

#16

Post by lumost »

Iwan-Zotow wrote: post #6
geuis wrote: post #2

It's refreshing that given everything else happening, Congress is still at least functional at this level. Should be noted that many of NASA's programs are situated in predominantly conservative areas of the country. Brings lots of jobs and resources to the local economies.

No, it is not With level of debt and borrowing, cannot afford more spending

The US can easily afford its obligations. The problem is that the tax base has shifted into alternative forms of income such as dividends and cap gains which are taxed at lower rates.

It’s a policy choice that these returns are not taxed at comparable rates to income. The trend of nation-wide capital returns vs income is telling.

Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts

#17

Post by clipsy »

mousethatroared wrote: post #12
mindslight wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the debt is a problem worth addressing, then why did the big ugly spending bill raise the debt by trillions of dollars?

Presumably the OP believes the BBB is stupid too?

Why are you speaking for him? Surely he's capable of denouncing the BBB himself if he chooses to.

Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts

#18

Post by readthenotes1 »

mousethatroared wrote: post #12
mindslight wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the debt is a problem worth addressing, then why did the big ugly spending bill raise the debt by trillions of dollars?

Presumably the OP believes the BBB is stupid too?

Warren Buffett had this line that we would have no budget deficits if it we're required that every Congress person who voted for such would be ineligible for re-election.

Pushing the cost burden on subsequent generations is a cowardly way to deal with our financial problems. When Reagan entered office, the debt was less than $1T (about $3.5T in today's dollars).

The #4 cost currently is paying off interest (not principle) on old debt.

Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts

#19

Post by georgeburdell »

somenameforme wrote: post #10
geuis wrote: post #2

It's refreshing that given everything else happening, Congress is still at least functional at this level. Should be noted that many of NASA's programs are situated in predominantly conservative areas of the country. Brings lots of jobs and resources to the local economies.

Except SLS/Orion should be cancelled. The SLS is pejoratively called the Senate Launch System, because it has no real place in the market yet is continuing to consume tens of billions of dollars. It was mostly obsoleted by Falcon Heavy years ago (SLS has been a black hole of funding since 2011), and its costs are completely ridiculous. You're looking at billions of dollars per launch if it ever is confidently flight…

Your point was stronger 6 months ago before SpaceX started regressing on their Starship test flights. The U.S. needs to have multiple horses in the race

Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts

#20

Post by mindslight »

mousethatroared wrote: post #12
mindslight wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the debt is a problem worth addressing, then why did the big ugly spending bill raise the debt by trillions of dollars?

Presumably the OP believes the BBB is stupid too?

If that were the case, they wouldn't have contributed a narrative being used to support the fascist movement that gave us the big ugly spending bill. Sorry to anyone who was legitimately interested in actual fiscal conservatism (which includes myself), this is now just another lofty ideal Trump has burnt the credibility of in service of enriching himself. Maybe we can try again in 20 years, if we still have a country.
Post reply on HN