Nasa

[MMI]

I don't believe the US is hated because it gives more foreign aid than any other country. No-one is that churlish. Maybe the aid you give is diverted by corrupt officials in the recipient country, and its effectiveness correspondingly diminished. I don't know if it's true, as steelish has insinuated, that the President of Haiti has used the aid America gave to refurbish the Presidential Palace, but if that's true, why the f^ck did you give it to him ... ????

I can understand resentment building up if, instead of granting aid that actually relieves poverty, the US only enriches the ruling elite, with whom, no doubt, lucrative land-grabs can be arranged, but I can't and don't believe the US is hated by people who benefit from its largesse.

I agree completely with your comment about private enterprise, competition and some overarching regulator to control it all, but I am disappointed in your isolationist approach to questions of trade. If you become entirely self-sufficient, you will not grow economically beyond a certain point, but if you allow yourself to benefit from other nations' productive capacities in exchange for some of yours, then all nations benefit and all will experience far greater growth and prosperity than with trade barriers up. I'm amazed a capitalist society would even countenance closed borders when it comes to making money.

[steelish]

I don't believe the US is hated because it gives more foreign aid than any other country. No-one is that churlish. Maybe the aid you give is diverted by corrupt officials in the recipient country, and its effectiveness correspondingly diminished. I don't know if it's true, as steelish has insinuated, that the President of Haiti has used the aid America gave to refurbish the Presidential Palace, but if that's true, why the f^ck did you give it to him ... ????

I can understand resentment building up if, instead of granting aid that actually relieves poverty, the US only enriches the ruling elite, with whom, no doubt, lucrative land-grabs can be arranged, but I can't and don't believe the US is hated by people who benefit from its largesse.

It has to do with foreign relations. A country cannot simply bypass another country's government and hand out money to the people. Private charities can do that, but not governments.

I agree completely with your comment about private enterprise, competition and some overarching regulator to control it all, but I am disappointed in your isolationist approach to questions of trade. If you become entirely self-sufficient, you will not grow economically beyond a certain point, but if you allow yourself to benefit from other nations' productive capacities in exchange for some of yours, then all nations benefit and all will experience far greater growth and prosperity than with trade barriers up. I'm amazed a capitalist society would even countenance closed borders when it comes to making money.

I just don't agree with the idea of the U.S. becoming completely reliant upon another nation. Subsidize yes - completely rely, no. And simply being self sufficient in energy does not mean that there won't be import/export and trade relations going on.

[oww-that-hurt]

To NOT spend money on science that could potentially benefit all mankind is a sin.
To spend money on some of the crap this administration spends it on is also a sin.
Maybe the administration can take my fine of $325/month for not having health insurance to fund NASA? At least I would feel good about where this bogus 'fine' would go.
And what the heck is this agnostic talking about 'sin' for? Gotta poke fun at myself once in awhile.

[Thorne]

I don't know if it's true, as steelish has insinuated, that the President of Haiti has used the aid America gave to refurbish the Presidential Palace, but if that's true, why the f^ck did you give it to him ... ????

I saw a news report last night which claimed that those bringing relief materials into Haiti are being required by government officials to donate that material to the government, I presume so that the government can get the credit for distributing it. This is a situation which is ripe for governmental abuse, allowing officials to confiscate needed supplies, then sell them through black markets.

In short, I agree. Why the f^ck are we sending any aid at all? Let the Haitian government handle it themselves.

And it's my opinion that the US government should re-evaluate it's foreign aid policy. In those countries where it has become obvious that any aid we try to give is being diverted to wealthy politicians, the aid should be cut off. Contrary to popular belief, we do not need to feel responsible for everyone else in the world. There is far more need for that money in this country.

I am disappointed in your isolationist approach to questions of trade. If you become entirely self-sufficient, you will not grow economically beyond a certain point, but if you allow yourself to benefit from other nations' productive capacities in exchange for some of yours, then all nations benefit and all will experience far greater growth and prosperity than with trade barriers up. I'm amazed a capitalist society would even countenance closed borders when it comes to making money.

I'm not advocating closed borders, at least in so far as trade is concerned. Only that there are some areas where a country should be as self-sufficient as possible. Energy is a key item there.

California is a small example of that. State regulations made power generation within the state impossible, or at least prohibitively expensive. When outside energy companies refused to pay the fees, California ran short on power. If they had their own generating facilities they wouldn't have had that problem. (I realize this is an oversimplification, but it's a fair example of my argument.)

We see problems occurring over energy stores all the time. Entire nations held to ransom because they must import their oil from radical nations. The same can happen with food, or clean water. If you can't produce your own, you have to rely on possibly unstable suppliers. Eventually someone either pays too much or is forced to do without. Self-sufficiency, in critical areas, is far better.

But trade can, and should, still occur with non-critical items. I'm not against trade, just dependency.

[SadisticNature]

At some point the government of the nation stopped caring about the exploration of space and started caring about massive scale projects that would support the space industry.

The entire program has become a cancer of political and industrial interests, and scrapping it to start over is not a terrible idea. It's the lack of starting over that has me concerned.

The exploration of space is without a doubt the future of humanity, and it seems to me the US no longer sees itself as leaders of humanity, at least in this regard.