Re: [OT] Columbia

On Tue, 4 Feb 2003 08:30:57 +0000 (GMT), Phillip Atcliffe
<Phillip.Atcliffe@uwe.ac.uk> wrote:

>What I have always thought is the best argument for the space program
is
>that it's one of the few human endeavours that truly looks to the
_long_
>term. That makes it unpopular with politicians, very few of whom can 
>see beyond the next election, but doesn't change the facts.

It's also unpopular with the working poor who can't afford medical
insurance,
or the unemployed who can't find work because of a poor economy. It's
kind of
hard to justify spending billions on a space programme in these
situations.

One of the strongest reasons for the space programme is that it is a
pure
science endeavour by the US government. As such, it results in a lot of
spin
off technologies that either wouldn't be done, or would be done at a
slower
pace. I heard the other day that MRIs are a spin off from the shuttle
programme.

My fiancee works for the State of Louisiana as a Medicaid analyst. It's
hard
to justify billions of dollars on the space programme when the state has
just
dropped the number of prescriptions it will cover for its poor, elderly
citizens, and when it's cutting back in its education programmes (while
handing out tax cuts). We both believe it's important to continue the
space
programme, but it's not just politicians who are wondering if the
country's
priorities are correct.

Allan Goodall		       agoodall@hyperbear.com
http://www.hyperbear.com

"We come into the world and take our chances
 Fate is just the weight of circumstances
 That's the way that Lady Luck dances
 Roll the bones." - N. Peart