Slashdot Mirror
President Bush To Call For Return To Moon?
Brian Stretch writes " According to the National Review: 'When President Bush delivers a speech recognizing the centenary of heavier-than-air-powered flight December 17, it is expected that he will proffer a bold vision of renewed space flight, with at its center a return to the moon, perhaps even establishment of a permanent presence there. If he does, it will mean that he has decided the United States should once again become a space-faring nation.' Here's hoping. The article also includes talk of nuclear engines and using the moon as a testbed for going to Mars."
Where does that figure come from? US government programs are horribly inefficient. Like Corn ethanol that midwestern farmers insist is the next big thing... most of the money goes to ADM. For every $1 in revenue ADM has related to corn ethanol, the US gov't spends $30. It would be far cheaper to just pay the corn farmers to pick their pud than to pretend corn ethanol will ever be useful.
Anyhow, tax cuts are just as good for an economy as gov't spending. That tax cut money goes somewhere, maybe it goes into a bank account and the bank can lend the money out for someone to buy a house. Maybe it buys a yacht. Maybe it buys something else. That's better than being in the gov't coffers and ending up paying for a study on some senator's pet project with little or no redeemingvalue.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Um, I think you'll find the debt (current account deficit) is $7 trillion. $500 billion is the amount the most recent Budget is in deficit -- i.e. spending more than it brings in.
deus does not exist but if he does
Umm, the Fed is most certainly NOT owned by private banks. See, thats why private banks BORROW from the fed, and the interest rate the fed charges these banks is the basis for the intrest rates charged to consumers.
And reading the rest of your comment, it is clear that you have no idea how the Federal Reserve System works.....or really anything financial. I'm glad to see your ignorance has led to an unhealthy fear of monetary systems and of, well, logic.
Please take a basic Econ course at your local college.....for your own benefit and for that of people around you.
Kiss my shiny metal ass
Trillions ...
The Outstanding Public Debt as of 04 Dec 2003 at 05:40:09 AM GMT is: $6,920,018,770,791.33
Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
Empty space isn't made of lunar regolith.
Lunar regolith isn't weathered like the surface debris on Earth. Consequently, it's got sharp edges. It's less like play-sand and more like crushed glass.
The astronauts reported that the stuff got into their suits between the hermetic joints, grinding into their skin. It also chewed up the lunar rovers.
"You mean your one-time "benefit" of somewhere in the vicinity of $300?"
In 2000 my tax rate was 28%. This year it is 25%. Next year it will be 25%. The year after it will be 25%. When did one time mean more than once?
Or are you suggesting my federal tax rate in 2004 be the same as in 2000? Because (unless congress decides to pass a few laws) it won't.
"Well, by my calculations, assuming the reason for your tax rate reduction was soley due to the 'rebate' of $300, your income is only $10,000 dollars a year."
Well, by my calculations you're an idiot. The "rebate" was a one-time deal to get SOME of the tax cut into people's pockets before the next April when they filed their returns. The tax cuts were not $300 for everyone, but percentage cuts (and yes, the cuts effected all income levels).
So, the guy who said it changed his rate from 28% to 25% is not making $10k as you calculate...and will definately recieve more than $300/year from these tax cuts. He was also correct at the rates, where you were way off. The previous tax rates of 15, 28, 31, 36, and 39.6 percent were replaced by a simplified rate structure of 10, 15, 25, and 33 percent.
Instead of mocking people who are happy about the much-needed reduction in tax rates who might have voted for Bush, and using your own ignorance to back it up...you might want to actually educate yourself on the matter.
It's amazing what information and simple logic can produce (understanding maybe?). You should try it sometime.
Bill Bryson is good for a laugh, but according to this Space FAQ:
Lunar regolith isn't weathered like the surface debris on Earth. Consequently, it's got sharp edges. It's less like play-sand and more like crushed glass.
The astronauts reported that the stuff got into their suits between the hermetic joints, grinding into their skin. It also chewed up the lunar rovers.
Of course, what's on the surface of the moon is much less interesting than what's underneath, since thats where humans will spend 95%+ of their time. It will take at least a few meters of lunar surface to protect them from radiation. Also, thermal issues are much easier a ways underground.
I'm pretty sure "regolith resistant" spacesuits aren't a big problem, regardless.
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait