Obama's education plan

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Who cares if they were democratic or not? The point is, if you go with the idea that social problems need to be solved first, then we will never explore anywhere else.

The point is that the majority of citizens are going to care about their own social state more than luxury programs. If you want to live in a world where leaders are accountable to the populace, then you have to realize that social needs will outweigh luxury programs such as space exploration. Immediate human needs have to take priority. Democracy requires some sacrifice unfortunately.

And delaying ONE program within NASA for 5 years is not the same as giving up on exploration.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Agreed.

We would have a colony on the moon by now if the world wasn't so preoccupied with starting wars with everyone.

What would be the point of a Moon colony? As I've said before, there's a huge difference between exploring this world and moving to other ones.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by peter12

What would be the point of a Moon colony? As I've said before, there's a huge difference between exploring this world and moving to other ones.

He's not saying we need one. Just that we've spent so much time, money and effort fighting eachother, that a moon colony would be old news had we put that same effort toward science.
At least I think that's what he's saying. It's what I'm agreeing withl.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

The point is that the majority of people are going to care about their own social state more than luxury programs. If you want to live in a world where leaders are accountable to the populace, then you have to realize that social needs will outweigh luxury programs such as space exploration. Immediate human needs have to take priority. Democracy requires some sacrifice unfortunately.

And delaying ONE program within NASA for 5 years is not the same as giving up on exploration.

As has been mentioned before, this is not the only time cut backs have been made, it is a continued thing and there will be more and more cut backs so to make it appear that it is only 1 program is a little misleading.

Further more, it may appear to be a luxury at this point and time, but there will be a time when we would need the space program on many levels. How long down the road, don;t know. Could be tomorrow could be 500 years.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by peter12

What would be the point of a Moon colony? As I've said before, there's a huge difference between exploring this world and moving to other ones.

Human civilization will be required to leave the earth in order for it to survive at some point in time. Not to mention, a moon colony would be ajumping point to Mars. One of humanities purposes in life as far as I am concerned is to grow, expand and learn. Space travel will be required for that.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Human civilization will be required to leave the earth in order for it to survive at some point in time. Not to mention, a moon colony would be ajumping point to Mars. One of humanities purposes in life as far as I am concerned is to grow, expand and learn. Space travel will be required for that.

Why give up before we have to give up? There is no statistical evidence that the problems we have on Earth are incapable of being solved in order to insure the long-term survival and sustainability of humanity here on this planet.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

As has been mentioned before, this is not the only time cut backs have been made, it is a continued thing and there will be more and more cut backs so to make it appear that it is only 1 program is a little misleading.

Further more, it may appear to be a luxury at this point and time, but there will be a time when we would need the space program on many levels. How long down the road, don;t know. Could be tomorrow could be 500 years.

You could say the same thing about any program. Government programs are in a constant state of flux. Things get trimmed during hard times and then get beefed up in the fat years. Delaying a program for 5 years does not mean the sky is falling.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by peter12

Why give up before we have to give up? There is no statistical evidence that the problems we have on Earth are incapable of being solved in order to insure the long-term survival and sustainability of humanity here on this planet.

It is inevitable that this planet will die one way or another. It is best to be prepared for when that time comes.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

It is inevitable that this planet will die one way or another. It is best to be prepared for when that time comes.

Its probably best to work on postponing that day for as long as possible

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

Its probably best to work on postponing that day for as long as possible

The end of the world doesn't have to be man made. IE: comet or astroid hitting the earth.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

As has been mentioned before, this is not the only time cut backs have been made, it is a continued thing and there will be more and more cut backs so to make it appear that it is only 1 program is a little misleading.

Further more, it may appear to be a luxury at this point and time, but there will be a time when we would need the space program on many levels. How long down the road, don;t know. Could be tomorrow could be 500 years.

Just one consideration is the potentially vast wealth to be accumlated from the Moon's minerals. Add in space tourism, the spinoffs from the technology to achieve these goals etc.

Not unlike sports you need a top league where the best are to encourage those starting out and in the process to become top notch. When they have so much other money going to rubbish this sure isn't where I would start cutting back. In an ever more tech world they should be attempting to be at the very top of this field --not cutting back.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Just a few comments...

* Education spending is a state matter, and that actually is passed down to the districts in many regards. Funding is a completely different matter, and is a multi-level effort, where the Feds get to hold the majority of the purse strings. Has been that way for a very long time and will continue o be that way. Bush's "No Child Left Behind" (a massive failure) is the latest interation of fderal funding programs. For any program to be effective it has to be well designed, administered with as little overhead as possible, and provide equitable access. I will have to see more of Obama's plan to see if it fits those criteria. The fact that he's already thinking of where the money is coming from shows the guy is thinking two steps a head. Beats the hell out of Bush's implementation of his solution without having any idea of where the money is going to come from.

* NASA should be a very important facet in our society and be looked to for the development of new technologies. The best and the brightest should find their way into the agency and help advance our collective knowledge. NASA's budget should be increased, not decreased.

* The contradiction displayed by certain posters here in regards to NASA is somewhat confusing. In this argument, NASA is now an incredible agency that is leading the way in everything we do. In the climate change debate, NASA's view is marginalized and considered biased and unimportant. Interesting that such an incredible agency that has lead to so many of our technologies we take for granted today is marginalized, or completely discounted, so easily in certain arguments.

* NASA should be leading us back to the moon. The answer to our global energy needs may exist in the rocks laying on the surface of the moon. If helium3 fusion energy can provide the amount of energy that scientists report, the future energy needs of our planet are sitting on the surface of the moon. Colonization and mining operations may save our atmposhere and lead us to a new age of global energy self-sufficiency.

* A new launch vehicle likely does not have to be developed by NASA, and likely should NOT be developed by NASA. NASA should instead develop a contest to design and develop the new vehicle. Put that into the hands of private industry and see what they can do. Private industry turns out new plans and products quicker and more efficiently because they don't have the bureaucratic strata to deal with. This is where the new vehicles and launch systems should be coming from.

* Education is probably the most important thing the United States could invest its money in. The once massive intellectual divide that existed between the United States and the rest of the world has disappeared and even swung the other way. The United States produces fewer and fewer scientists each and every year. The majority of those produced in American universities are foreign students who return home once they attain their education. The brain gain that the United States used to achieve when they kept these foreign students has disappeared completely, and the opposite is taking place. American scientists are moving abroad where they can get research grants and not have to deal with the anti-scientific views becoming ore evident in America. The intellectual advantage that the United States once had is completely gone, and it is because the education systems in America do not encourage the study of sciences and the encourage bright students to pursue advanced degrees in sciences.

Final point about funding of government programs... if the United States withdraws from Iraq all the money required to fun anything imaginable will become available. $18 million (updated this past week) is being spent every hour in Iraq. Cut that, and you can fund education, healthcare, NASA, revitalizing the nation's infrastructure, etc.

[Displaced Flames fan]

My problems with our education system....and they are, frankly, unsolvable.

1. Teachers who are unqualified, stupid, idiots, morons, child molestors and/or indifferent.

2. Curriculum that is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to easy.

I've been saying for a while now that teaching should be a professional degree. The reason we have problem #1 is that when you offer the kind of coin that is paid to teachers you lose 95% of the potential good ones because they don't want to live in a trailer park the rest of their life. The pay for these people is a travesty. That said, many of the teachers we have today don't deserver a red cent more. It's a huge issue that would take years to change and this country doesn't change those kinds of problems.

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by Azure

Ugh.

Read my post. There is 'other' pork to cut from the budget in order to fund the education plan.

Luxury program? You think the most brilliant minds in the world working together for the greater good of humanity is a luxury? Give me a break.

I don't think any of these things. I do not agree that NASA is a luxury program, I just think Obama views the American people as being largely indifferent to cutting funds from NASA because it is such an abstract program. The benefits are not immediate, but the costs are. So the Obama campaign targeted it as something they can cut with little to no political backlash. The other 'pork' you refer to is a product of the American political system. Senior senators getting a million here and a million there back to their states often for ridiculously unnecessary things. No way you get can every senator to agree to get rid of their unnecessary 'pork' because the political backlash they'd each incur would be HUGE. Targeting a program like NASA, where only a couple senators (Texas and Florida? I'm guessing?) would be hurt politically is a more effective way to go about finding funds.

My personal opinion is that, NASA is an important program in need of funding. I agree with Lanny that the US can find funds by deserting its occupation of Iraq.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

My personal opinion is that, NASA is an important program in need of funding. I agree with Lanny that the US can find funds by deserting its occupation of Iraq.

I agree in theory, cause well its pretty obvious.

But you know as well as I do that the US government is going to find other ways to waste that 18 million/minute.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

* The contradiction displayed by certain posters here in regards to NASA is somewhat confusing. In this argument, NASA is now an incredible agency that is leading the way in everything we do. In the climate change debate, NASA's view is marginalized and considered biased and unimportant. Interesting that such an incredible agency that has lead to so many of our technologies we take for granted today is marginalized, or completely discounted, so easily in certain arguments.
.

So I take it that NASA's research into global warming tends to lead legitimacy to the science that the problem anthroprogenic?

[JimmytheT]

Haven't read the whole thread, but doesn't anyone find it ironic, that in order to improve education, he wants to cut off a major source of modern education in the sciences?

Try shaving some of that ridiculous military spending

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

To me, it's not that crazy to suggest that education receive funding at the expense of just one NASA program. The reason Obama put this in the plan is probably that he knows the first GOP objection to any education reform plan is "how are you going to pay for it." Now he can say "well here's just one way we can pay for it if we make this program a priority.

As for "pork"--it really is harder than you think to eliminate pork--though you'd think military spending would be an easy target. (how many 100,000 dollar ashtrays would it take to pay for this program? ) One area's pork is another region's "economic incentive program"--and I think Obama wisely does not want to get into a nationwide debate on which region's third rails and sacred cows should be cut.

But on that topic, Obama has also called for an end to earmarks. If he's successful (and that's far from certain, since it's really not up to the President), that would in and of itself eliminate the lion's share of so-called "pork." After that, the U.S. needs to get its fiscal house in order (a staged withdrawal from Iraq might start to help with that) and then they can consider re-investing in money-starved programs like NASA.

So... it may partly reflect taking a politically easy road, but as a plan it's really not all that crazy.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

So I take it that NASA's research into global warming tends to lead legitimacy to the science that the problem anthroprogenic?

Yes. They have held that position since the 80's. They have tried to add their voice to the debate during the past 5-6 years, but the Bush Administration has censored their reports and placed a gag order on the agency. Only whistleblowers (a law that Bush and co. are trying to take off the books) have made this public. Pretty sad when the issue could be the most important we face in the next century.