The Controversy of the Government’s Money Spending in the United States and the NASA’s Poor Handling

One of the most prominent controversies of government spending in recent years has been the funding of space exploration. Space exploration requires substantial costs. And commitments, which are certainly enough to put a country in serious debt if budgets are handled poorly. With other domestic issues becoming more prominent. And requiring more funding, NASA has become something of an afterthought. At first glance, space exploration funding seems like a waste of time and money that would be better off invested elsewhere. However, the importance of space travel and its many advantages surpass. The costs of funding NASA, which really is not overly expensive when put in perspective. NASA has created an improved understanding of the world and has changed society in ways previously unperceived. The knowledge, innovation, and economical benefits gained through space travel have and will continue to outweigh the expenses incurred, as long as NASA continues to be federally funded.

The peak of NASA funding occurred in 1966 when it was around 4.41 percent of the federal budget (Huffington Post). Today the NASA budget is only about half of a percent of the federal budget, meaning that space exploration has rapidly diminished as a national priority. The central argument concerning NASA spending is that the required research, technology, and education are far too expensive to be considered a beneficial use of the federal budget. This argument is flawed considering that the percent of the national budget spent on NASA has not eclipsed one percent since 1974, which was only sixteen years after the creation of NASA. Besides a slight increase in spending in the late 1980s and early 1990s, NASA's budget has steadily decreased to its miniscule present day budget and has garnered heavy consideration to shut down the program entirely.

If space exploration had not already proven to be highly beneficial, it would make sense to not fund the program. However, NASA has proven to not only expand science and technology, but also to be beneficial economically. Through the research of the University of Texas at Austin aerospace engineering program, it has become apparent that "the total economic benefit of each dollar spent on the space program has been between $8 and $10" (Fowler, Wallace). Satellite television, satellite radio stations, and GPS systems, each of which are used daily by the majority of the United States population, would not exist without satellite technology. All three of these inventions have been impactful not only for their consumers, but for the overall economy as new businesses and jobs were subsequently created. This confirms that the severe expenses of NASA funding have been blown out of proportion and instead should be viewed as worthy investments. The multi billion dollar NASA program is only a small portion of the nation's 3.8 trillion dollar federal budget (National Priorities Project), and additionally generates substantial profit and economical value.

Order custom essay The Controversy of the Government’s Money Spending in the United States and the NASA’s Poor Handling with free plagiarism report

450+ experts on 30 subjects Starting from 3 hours delivery

Get Essay Help

Further arguments opposing the funding of NASA include the safety of space explorers.. Manned missions are an extreme risk to astronauts because of the harsh conditions of space and the slight room for error. A simple mistake could prove fatal to an astronaut. Although risking human lives is certainly not ideal, most astronauts have spent their lives aspiring to explore space. Astronauts are well aware of the risks but are willing to fulfill their lifelong dreams. Manned missions are not completely necessary because advances in technology have led to the construction of robots which are able to complete the tasks of astronauts. Advancing technology and improving knowledge of space also means that accidents occurred during space missions will be more preventable than previously.

Another argument against space exploration is "space junk" pollution. Space junk is Earth-orbiting debris that is left behind by satellites and space travel. Although space programs have caused the space junk, the problem can not be fixed without the funding of space programs. Realizing that space junk must be eliminated, NASA and, according to theverge.com a news website specializing in technology used for science, space programs from other countries have begun to test ways in which current space junk can be eliminated.

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

Check my essay Hire Writer