Slashdot Mirror
US Astronomy Facing Severe Budget Cuts and Facility Closures
Nancy_A writes "The U.S. astronomy budget is facing unprecedented cuts, including the potential closure of several facilities. A new report by the National Science Foundation's Division of Astronomical Sciences says available funding for ground-based astronomy could undershoot projected budgets by as much as 50%. The report recommends the closure – called 'divestment' in the new document — of iconic facilities such as the Very Long Baseline Array and the Green Bank Radio Telescope, as well as shutting down four different telescopes at the Kitt Peak Observatory by 2017."
All the rockets we want, as long as they are ordered by the Pentagon.
Science, it's now for total warfare.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Tell congress we're under attack from space A-rabs and we need surveillance equipment pronto. We also need drones to go up there and find out what's going on. And manned craft as well just for good measure in case the drones miss anything.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
The interest of the general public could help keep funding. If people never heard of it, they will not notice or care.
While that is totally true, we could just try a couple less wars, or raising the retirement age, or any number of sane ideas to pay for something this small.
At this point as the US gov can borrow money at negative rates, we might as well do that.
...and has throughout our history — but it shouldn't be the only thing that drives space science and other human achievement.
If you're interested in a truly insightful and inspiring speech on this topic, I highly encourage you to set aside an hour for Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson's recent talk on just this subject at the University of Wisconsin - Madison:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqJzHHkmJ-8
It's well worth your time to watch, to think about — and to discuss with your elected officials.
Typical. You have no clue how much something takes to do, so naturally you assume your share is tooo much.
Here is a clue: Tax dollars aren't yours. Ever. They are all ours, societies. DO you really want New York, Detroit and Dallas and California to be the effective determination for all tax money?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Yes, but science is stupid to cut. The long term survival of the country is in Science and engineering. If your society doesn't do that, then you are done as a civilized society.
How about we cut 1 bomber instead?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Typical. You have no clue how much something takes to do, so naturally you assume your share is tooo much.
Here is a clue: Tax dollars aren't yours. Ever. They are all ours, societies. DO you really want New York, Detroit and Dallas and California to be the effective determination for all tax money?
Figure this: WW II was funded by the sale of bonds. Bond drives went on everywhere and were widely supported by the entertainment industry to underwrite the massive expense of a massive undertaking. But today we don't buy War Bonds, it's assumed we are all going to pony up $5,000 (on average) for our share of the annual Pentagon Budget, for whatever they decide they need. Let. Me. Tell. You. $5,000 is probably what I could have afforded for war bonds, had I lived in the 1940's in 1940's adjusted dollars. But this has been on-going since after the war ended and is still eating up a high percentage of our GDP, for years on end, even when we are at complete peace.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
While that is totally true, we could just try a couple less wars, or raising the retirement age, or any number of sane ideas to pay for something this small.
Cut military spending, yes. Per the constitution, no military budget can exceed two years, so that should be a quick action.
Raising the retirement age, however, is robbing Peter to pay Paul. With a real unemployment rate in the vicinity of 20%, this will just lead to more people receiving unemployment benefits, a cost that is much higher per individual than medicare is.
Bring down unemployment first (and start being honest about it, not removing long term unemployed from the counts), and then increase the pension age.
Yes, but science is stupid to cut. The long term survival of the country is in Science and engineering. If your society doesn't do that, then you are done as a civilized society.
How about we cut 1 bomber instead?
Pfft. Typical liberal educated elite liberal overanalytical liberal LIBERAL. Can't keep a grasp on the big picture, now, can you, young'un?
Here, let me explain: Back in the 50s and 60s, America was on top of the world. We were clearly the best country that ever was or ever will be. Congress knows this because they all grew up then, and some of them killed a few Nazis, maybe. But now we're falling behind. And why do you think THAT is, huh?
No, you smartass young punk, it's because of SCIENCE. See, back then, we knew everything. Then you liberal science liberal types came by and told us we didn't. You know what happens when you do that? That's right, we get all confused and the country falls off-track and we lose sight of our goals and God.
So the sooner we can get this whole "science" nonsense taken out of the picture, the better. After all, our generation, THE GREATEST GENERATION, won't live forever if you tykes keep changing things! As soon as we get back to what made America great, we can get back to selling eight-ton cars, trench guns, and player pianos. And if we need anything else — which I SERIOUSLY doubt, and you can trust me on that — we can just import them from those foreigners in Asialand. That'll never come back to bite us.
even when we are at complete peace.
We must be bombing a dozen foreign countries on regular basis (now with drones). We are hardly "at peace". Oh, and we are in "War on Terror" which is projected to end approximately never.
Congress needs to man up and demand that the Administration has to get damn permission and issue official war declaration in order to bomb anyone. And de-fund any and all money that goes toward "unofficial" offensive military action.
I agree on both.
The reality is though the retirement age should be in the 70s by now. People should not be spending 20+ years retired.
even when we are at complete peace.
We must be bombing a dozen foreign countries on regular basis (now with drones). We are hardly "at peace". Oh, and we are in "War on Terror" which is projected to end approximately never.
Congress needs to man up and demand that the Administration has to get damn permission and issue official war declaration in order to bomb anyone. And de-fund any and all money that goes toward "unofficial" offensive military action.
Before 2001 we were at peace, with the only event since 1991 (Desert Storm) being a few cruise missles lobbed into Serbia to bring them to heel. Yet our military spending, despite cuts and closures, still ranked high while the Pentagon found all manner of toys in its version of the Sears & Roebucks Catalog that it just couldn't live without. Even when we're not at war, we're preparing for total war.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Yes, we are all slaves to society. You have no right to your labor, only what the government lets you keep.
To bad the current war on two fronts are not only unfunded with bonds earmarked for the war effort, but the republican president that started them gave a huge tax break to the wealthy at the same time. This set up the US government to have a huge spike in debt which has gotten us in this mess in the first place.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
Why should people spend all of their time working?
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
The long term survival of the country is in Science and engineering. If your society doesn't do that, then you are done as a civilized society.
Thank goodness Congress was there to develop electricity, automobiles, radio, and telephones!
Oh, wait, those all happened before general income taxes when people still had money to spend on preposterous ideas.
It sure was a good thing those private companies built a massive national highway infrastructure for automobiles to run on, or standardized, built and maintained the telephone and electricity grids.
That very wonderful to say, but relatively speaking each and every one of those are incomparable to technologies coming out of government sponsored research. It really is quite amazing how quickly people forget the ancestry of things such as the Internet, passenger jets, computers, and nuclear power.
Government is an invaluable and very necessary patron of the sciences. No sane business would invest in anything that doesn't have a near term payout let alone things such as basic physics. If private finance were the answer to funding science we would have had the first computers in the 1830's not the 1930's. Babbage could never find a patron willing to pony up the dough. Who they hell would finance things such as the Tevatron, the LHC, Hubble telescope, Curiosity, etc.? What kind of prosthetic limbs do you think our returning soldiers, athletes (yes athletes!), etc. would have? What kind of trauma care do you think you'd receive?
The very foundation of the incomparable yet regrettably eroding science and engineering prowess of the United States private sector would not exist with out the patronage of the U.S. government by way of tax payer dollars.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
We piss away hundreds of millions of dollars each year on useless trash, and then complain we can't afford Science. What a surprise right? I mean, just 2 weeks ago President Obama gave 25million dollars to the Rebels in Syria. That is just the most recent example of hundreds possible that does not include the Wars we are currently waging.
Let us face facts. The majority of people in Politics right now that care about 1 thing, and here is a clue: It sure as hell is not bettering our society. Keep defending the actions of the R and D people, it's helping us so much as a society.
By the way, the fix is to clean house. As a start go vote and push a button without a D or an R for everything possible in November. If they lie and cheat to stay in, we have bigger issues but at least we tried to clean house. If it works, we may have a bit of a chaotic start to 2013, but at least we have a chance to stop racing to the bottom.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
No, this has nothing to do with JWST being over budget. The review concerns the astronomy funding through the National Science Foundation, whose budget is independent of NASA's funding. NASA funds all of space based astronomy (including data analysis), while NSF funds ground based astronomy. NSF mainly funds the national optical astronomy observatory on Kitt Peak in Arizona and the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Charlottesville, VA, with facilities in West Virginia and in New Mexico (plus some other states). In addition, NSF funds data analysis/theory grants. Overall, NSF's budget is much smaller than NASA's, but then, ground based hardware is much cheaper than space based. To put things in perspective: for about 50% of all university astronomers, NSF facilities are the only way to get optical observing time (the remainder of astronomers have access via privately funded telescopes, such as the Keck). The closures of the instruments proposed in the report to NSF essentially mean the US giving up its current leadership in large areas of radio astronomy, and significantly reducing access to medium sized facilities for optical astronomers, if the (realistic) flat budget for the astronomy program is realized.
The number of people on food stamps has more than doubled since 1990. I guess people on food stamps are more likely to keep incumbents in office than scientist so the money goes to them. http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/images/pubs-images/43xxx/SNAP_Infographic_4_18_2012.png Note we went from spending under 20 billion in 1995 to 70 billion in 2010. The shortfall mentioned in the article that is forcing the shutdowns is 75 million.