What's Getting Cut From Science Part of the Federal Budget

Kristina at Science News writes "As part of the announcement of its proposed fiscal year 2010 budget, the Obama administration released a summary (called 'Terminations, Reductions, and Savings: Budget of the US Government, Fiscal Year 2010') that includes which science-related programs are getting cut. Two big programs are the nuclear waste storage project at Yucca Mountain in Nevada and a second prototype airborne laser missile-defense weapon." Update: 05/07 23:03 GMT by T : On the other hand, reader Dusty writes, "The NASA budget for 2010 has been announced, up 5% on 2009. Human space flight plans to be reviewed."

Comments

I highly disagree with General Eisenhower

[Crazy Taco]

Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.

I highly disagree with this statement from General Eisenhower. While it may or may not have been debatable back then, I don't think there is any way you can claim this is true now, at least in the modern United States. According to IRS statistics, the bottom 40% of Americans have no income tax liability. They pay no federal taxes. Zip, zero, nada. Yet the warships, guns, missiles, etc, are paid for with federal tax dollars.

So if Americans in the bottom 40% income-wise do not pay any taxes, then how is it robbing them of their food or clothing when guns are purchased? How is it robbery when the other 60% spend their own money that they earned on missiles?

Now, one could argue that the bottom 40% commit robbery, because they often vote for missiles and don't have to foot the bill (while some in the top 60% don't want to spend any money on missiles), and those in the bottom 40% often vote for social and welfare programs that they don't have to pay for, but I digress. The point is that, if anyone in America is starving or without clothes today, they are certainly in the bottom 40% of income earners, and they don't pay a dime for missiles, so clearly they aren't the ones being robbed. And if their argument is that that money could have been spent on social programs for them instead, well, sorry, but someone else choosing not to give their money to you (via a social program) is not robbing you. It is only robbery if they take what you rightfully earned and is rightfully yours.