PDA

View Full Version : And the recommendation for NASA is...


Darkstar
15-06-2004, 00:43:47
...to shut down and go away.

The Moon-To-Mars commision will recommend that NASA go out of business, as there is no way any government can meet the goals of reaching their own ass, let alone the Moon, and Mars is just right out. Commission further recommends that the USA do a pre-emptive all out nuclear strike and kill all mankind, sparing everyone the misery of living, as there is no hope for anyone, ever.

Well, it takes a lot more *words* and pages, but that is what it amounts to.

Gotta love them presidential year politics.

chagarra
15-06-2004, 05:17:40
Looked that way when I read it, the only confusing bit was that NASA would only be responsible for lifting "men" into LEO.
So how in hell will they shift those ten to twenty shuttle loads sitting in SSPF and Highbay....??

Oerdin
15-06-2004, 05:29:03
I doubt even the Republicans want to axe NASA. The space geeks do some great scientific research; expenisve science but still good.

Darkstar
15-06-2004, 21:30:59
NASA has been told to shut down all its centers.
NASA has been told to outsource everything.

Since NASA admin people will obviously want to keep their jobs, that means that they won't shut down HQ. And HQ gets points for being very "stripped" already, according to the commission, because NASA "outsources" various tasks to the various vassal empires that are the other centers.

Since NASA admin will need to justify their keeping their own jobs, they've been recommended to keep the Kennedy center. That's 2 centers spared. Of course, Kennedy will need to be scaled back on NASAsses, and be turned into an amusement park or a Florida Vacation Center or Retirement home (it's really a wilderness park at the moment) to turn an extra profit so they can offset the cost. If NASA ever gets around to launching a monkey (hairless or not) back into orbit, they'll want to do it there to keep their "brand" alive in the public mind. For all other facilities, NASA can just use the Air Force's stuff... seeing as the AF doesn't really do much more then lob spy satellites and land U-2s on theirs.

Laying off 95 to 99% of their staff will permit NASA to maintain some funding level to pay corps to manage other corps to pay others to think about doing NASA stuff. History shows that NASA will never have more money then it has now, and that's the only money they can count on for the rest of their short existence. Congress is guaranteed to flat line or cut their money, not raise it, as outlined by Bush a few months ago. Congress hates the space program, and Congress is in charge of who gets what money. (Congress hates the Space Program because it's money they could better spend on their own personal pork barrel projects.)

There's a bunch more, but that's the gist of the early copy I got to see. (I'll have to check the official, and see if anything changed.) But all that will move NASA from it's old, ancient, useless "Apollo" culture and mindset to something more efficient and modern, like "Enron". Or at least, a fat pig that "Enron" corps can suck dry.

Don't fool yourself Oerdin. They want it dead. That money could be buying them votes elsewhere. Or at least Bangkok child hookers and a 3 day cocaine party.

Darkstar
15-06-2004, 21:37:21
Chagarra... they won't. The ISS is just a money drain and the ONLY reason to fly the shuttles. So just kill it, since it's a waiting death trap NOW, and is expected to have a total structural failure within 2 years, and save all that money for doing something like paying PriceWaterCooperBumFuck to tell them how to better lay off people and swap to a complete "hands off" org that pays other orgs to manage the various unwashed contractor hordes to design trash cans that are lobbed at the moon using timber and rope catapults.

The Mad Monk
13-03-2006, 00:23:07
Any changes / updates?

Darkstar
13-03-2006, 04:56:48
To what?

The majority of NASA's science and explorer programs are getting giant dwarf zombie flying monkey ass raped. They "delay"-"delay"-"delay"-"quietly cancel" everything. There's only been a few programs saved from the axe due to excessive victim screaming. Most just scream and bleed out in the quiet.

It looks like they need to either cancel the Moon program to get to Mars, or cancel the Mars program to get to the Moon. Since China is still dead set on putting a few serious military bases on the Moon, we won't be cancelling the permanent Moon base plans.

The ISS is dead, but it is going to take another couple of years for NASA to issue the death certificate. So it is going to get a complete half-assed rush job. Whee!

It don't look good. Bush himself cut NASA's budget after Congress okayed the full "Moon, Mars, and Beyond" budget, with some bonus money. It's about the only money Bush has actually *cut*. So go figure.

Luckily, NASA is now got a small path going on to outsource everything. So there is still a chance that interesting space stuff will happen.

Gary
13-03-2006, 09:03:28
Well come on then, finger out. Elect a government / president with a bit of vision. :)

mr_G
13-03-2006, 09:10:09
Originally posted by Darkstar
NASA has been told to shut down all its centers.
NASA has been told to outsource everything.

Since NASA admin people will obviously want to keep their jobs, that means that they won't shut down HQ. And HQ gets points for being very "stripped" already, according to the commission, because NASA "outsources" various tasks to the various vassal empires that are the other centers.

Since NASA admin will need to justify their keeping their own jobs, they've been recommended to keep the Kennedy center. That's 2 centers spared. Of course, Kennedy will need to be scaled back on NASAsses, and be turned into an amusement park or a Florida Vacation Center or Retirement home (it's really a wilderness park at the moment) to turn an extra profit so they can offset the cost. If NASA ever gets around to launching a monkey (hairless or not) back into orbit, they'll want to do it there to keep their "brand" alive in the public mind. For all other facilities, NASA can just use the Air Force's stuff... seeing as the AF doesn't really do much more then lob spy satellites and land U-2s on theirs.

Laying off 95 to 99% of their staff will permit NASA to maintain some funding level to pay corps to manage other corps to pay others to think about doing NASA stuff. History shows that NASA will never have more money then it has now, and that's the only money they can count on for the rest of their short existence. Congress is guaranteed to flat line or cut their money, not raise it, as outlined by Bush a few months ago. Congress hates the space program, and Congress is in charge of who gets what money. (Congress hates the Space Program because it's money they could better spend on their own personal pork barrel projects.)

There's a bunch more, but that's the gist of the early copy I got to see. (I'll have to check the official, and see if anything changed.) But all that will move NASA from it's old, ancient, useless "Apollo" culture and mindset to something more efficient and modern, like "Enron". Or at least, a fat pig that "Enron" corps can suck dry.

Don't fool yourself Oerdin. They want it dead. That money could be buying them votes elsewhere. Or at least Bangkok child hookers and a 3 day cocaine party.

and he's back!!!!!!!

Funko
13-03-2006, 09:11:33
:lol:

Darkstar
13-03-2006, 23:07:22
Originally posted by Gary
Well come on then, finger out. Elect a government / president with a bit of vision. :)

Well, if we could ever get a few candidates with a bit of vision on the ticket, I'd vote for them. Problem with a two-party system is that you only get a choice between a giant douche and a shit sandwitch. *sigh*

Our elected officials have done their damned best to make sure it stays that way. And "we" keep gullibly buying their excuses and reforms to make it even harder for an indie or third party to properly "enter the frey" under their "taking the money out of politics" and "making it easier for people to campaign" excuses. Oh well, people always elect exactly what they deserve, right?

Darkstar
13-03-2006, 23:07:53
Mr. G, that was a rant from a long while back. Notice the date on what you quoted. ;) If you are ever missing my rants that much, you can just go back in time and look at them. They are all findable via the user profile under "find all posts by this user" option.

TCO
14-03-2006, 12:14:38
beaurocratic excuse to provide recession-free jobs for aerospace engineers.

Get rid of it. Basic research is fine (NSF). NASA is a monstrosity with middlebrows.

mr_G
14-03-2006, 12:15:50
Originally posted by Darkstar
Mr. G, that was a rant from a long while back. Notice the date on what you quoted. ;) If you are ever missing my rants that much, you can just go back in time and look at them. They are all findable via the user profile under "find all posts by this user" option. ok, so you are not back :cry:

Darkstar
14-03-2006, 17:30:42
I've been back. Hadn't you noticed?

Qaj the Fuzzy Love Worm
14-03-2006, 19:53:20
But with all your one-line replies, it's not the YOU you we know and love and scoll past on our way to posting "Summary?"

Darkstar
14-03-2006, 20:20:11
What? You mean you read my posts now? Oh, the horror! The horror!

Oerdin
14-03-2006, 21:43:25
Originally posted by Darkstar

It don't look good. Bush himself cut NASA's budget after Congress okayed the full "Moon, Mars, and Beyond" budget, with some bonus money. It's about the only money Bush has actually *cut*. So go figure.

No figuring needed; just a standard politician's policy which Rove/Bush has sharpened to a razor's edge. They announce big and grand things to get newpaper headlines, hope it changes public opinion, then delay and finally kill their grand vision. Another sneaky trick is to declare a vast new mission/program which will only take effect long after they left office so they can convinently blame future office holders for not following through.

Bush did the former with New Orleans will likely do the later with his alcohol blended gasoline program. It's all just talk for the cameras which will never happen and it was designed to be that way.

mr_G
14-03-2006, 21:46:38
Originally posted by Qaj the Fuzzy Love Worm
But with all your one-line replies, it's not the YOU you we know and love and scoll past on our way to posting "Summary?" :lol: ........ -FACT!!!

Darkstar
15-03-2006, 03:09:16
Oerdin, most politicians do that.

I'm just surprised at Bush. NASA is busy cutting it's science programs back by what will amount to by 85%. And a lot of national politicians best contributors/business sex-pals are going to make serious bucks off the new program. So why is Bush making a cut there after telling everyone that it won't work without the extra money? It's not like that money is going to fund another black ops space plane that can drop nuclear and iron bombs on any target in the world with zero chance of being intercepted. Or Reagan's "Star Wars Defense" program that made many Repukingtons and Demoncrats multi-millionaires.

Just ticks me off that they are cutting back when the majority of the nation is actually fine with money being spent on NASA for a change. It's not like that goodwill will last, and then NASA will be back on its starvation diet.

Short sighted bastards, the lot of them.

DaShi
15-03-2006, 05:56:02
Bush does what ever the American people don't want. Then he's see if people will still vote for him. Guess what?

Gary
15-03-2006, 09:32:02
I'd guess he can't stand ?

Darkstar
15-03-2006, 22:45:13
Originally posted by DaShi
Bush does what ever the American people don't want. Then he's see if people will still vote for him. Guess what?

:confused: Dashi, you are aware that Bush isn't running for anything in 2006 or 2008, right? He can tell the world to go fuck itself, it won't matter to him. He'll be getting paid $300K+ per speaking engagement starting in 2009 just like Carter and Clinton and Bush 41. And there will be loads of those offered. Plus all the lobbyists gifting him lots of insider info and $$$ for a little bit of back room talking to other Repukers. You know, the standard ex-prez deal (as evidenced by Carter, Bush 41, and Clinton).

Now, the House and 1/3 of the Senate, they have to worry. But not Bush, nor his ass puppeteer, The Dreaded Emperor Rove.

Bush is a big government kind of guy, so spending money on a program that going to flood Texas and Florida with lots of cash (as well as not so much cash to many other places) should be right up his political chocolate alley.

TCO
16-03-2006, 03:27:29
Kill it! fucking welfare for aerospace engineers. Moonshot holdover. Needs to die and the losers there get real jobs.

Darkstar
16-03-2006, 06:37:41
We still need NASA, at least for another 15 years. After that, it should be dead and gone.

NASA is finally putting money up for "X Prizing". And it has been footing a lot of private space industries development cost. And its even been signing over its technology to private industries, letting them patent it, then licensing its own technology back to keep those companies afloat. Of course, it wants the private space industry to grow to a manned spaceflight service provider, but when that happens, is it ever going to be ticked off that they will leave it behind, and not even give them preferential treatment.

TCO
17-03-2006, 01:31:24
It's frigging 30 years overdue for being killed. We don't need to keep it around to keep a place for second-raters.

Darkstar
17-03-2006, 02:57:25
It's the only thing out there doing any actual new research in space technology. So, I guess you want to just stick around here until the sun eats the earth? Sucks to be you.

Now, as soon as NASA finishes up researching how to make mega-profits off of the solar system, patent that, then give it for free to Haliburton or Boeing, I suppose we won't need them anymore. But then, those guys won't be interested in leaving the solar system. So, we are back to needing some DARPA/NASA type agency doing the research on leaving the solar system. I don't mind starting over though, as that gives us a chance to from scratch.

If you want to advance space science or humanity's only future, we still need it. At least until we get the heck off this planet in some form of self-sustainable colonies. After that, shut it down. It won't matter, because the AF will basically subsume most of NASA's functionality by then. Give you something else to hate and bitch about.

Qaj the Fuzzy Love Worm
17-03-2006, 03:26:57
See, now it's starting to look more like the Darkstar we know...





.





.





.

Summary?

Funko
17-03-2006, 08:54:55
Originally posted by Darkstar
It's the only thing out there doing any actual new research in space technology. So, I guess you want to just stick around here until the sun eats the earth? Sucks to be you.

I don't reckon I'm going to live that long.

Gary
17-03-2006, 09:35:14
Yeah, but don't you want mankind to try to reach the stars (well the rest of the solar system at least) in your lifetime ?

Great strides were made in the sixties, then it seems to have just pottered on. Oh all right : there were some nice satellite stuff, a temporary space station of sorts, and a few encounters/landings but the last 3 decades seem to have done little in comparison. Last thing one wants is to put the foot on the brake harder.

Darkstar
17-03-2006, 21:43:25
Originally posted by Funko
I don't reckon I'm going to live that long.

Fair point. Unless the nanotech breakthrough to clinical immortality comes through in the next 20 years as some of the more hopeful visionaries claim.

Japher
17-03-2006, 21:44:38
stop it with the long posts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Darkstar
17-03-2006, 21:49:27
Gary, there's been some really good stuff that has come through--- like the ion drive. A fair bit of interesting science as well.

Could things be done better? Sure. But they could also not be done at all. Better to inch forward then to sit still.