Trump wants to put an end to weather satellites

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MacNut, Mar 4, 2017.

  1. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #76
    When was science not a left right issue? Obama diverted tons of funding to earth science, now the next president has different priorities, that's the way it goes.
     
  2. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #77
    I guess they are going to have to better manage their budgets. You know like every American struggling wth tightening funds.
     
  3. Solomani macrumors 68040

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #78
    Did you tell that to the defense contractors and the Pentagon? :rolleyes:
     
  4. HEK macrumors 68040

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Location:
    US Eastern time zone
    #79
    A couple less aircraft carriers would do just fine. Our new boogy man, ISIS does not have combat carrier groups. See i just saved billions of dollars.
     
  5. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #80
    Probably afraid those satellites are spying on him. Also they provide weather stations with FAKE NEWS that might determine whether or not they play golf that day!
     
  6. Solomani macrumors 68040

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #81
    Better vetting/scrutiny of fighter jets would be nice too. Especially when those fighter jets are FLAWED on arrival. They spent hundreds of billions to develop them, and then they are touted as junk on arrival. And then get grounded for an extra 1-2 years to "rectify design flaws". F-35 is a costly joke.
     
  7. HEK macrumors 68040

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Location:
    US Eastern time zone
    #82
    Look at past history. Design a plane to do a mission well, and it is successful. A-10 best close air support ground attack aircraft. SR-71 best strategic long range recon platform. F-15 air superiority fighter. F-16 inexpensive therefore large quantity fighter with excellent dog fight capabilities.

    On other hand try to make one plane do everything, and it becomes flying pig, that mostly sits, F-35, stealth, air superiority, ground attack, marine VTOL, Navy carrier variation with longer landing gear, arrestor hook and re-enforced airframe. What could possibly be difficult to acheive all this in one aircraft and be best in all areas.
     
  8. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #83
    Strongly reminds me of the Spanish Inquisition.
     
  9. HEK macrumors 68040

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Location:
    US Eastern time zone
    #84
    Stop with facts will you. Boogy man ISIS bad, hurracanes and tornados are just the best, really great.
     
  10. BarracksSi Suspended

    BarracksSi

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2015
    #85
    As long as his greatest weapon is poking us with soft cushions, I think we'll survive.
     
  11. kobalap, Mar 20, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2017

    kobalap macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    #86
    What you and others are confused about is the difference between cutting back and giving the appearance of cutting back.

    Cutting back $50 billion here and then spending $50 billion there is not cutting back. Simple 'rithmetic tells as that this approach saves the country exactly zero dollars.

    I wholeheartedly agree that cutting back $50 billion, particularly in programs that spend money in welfare states is good. I wholeheartedly disagree in spending any of that money in the bloated welfare areas such as social security, medicare or defense. If anything, I bet we could "do more with less" and saves 10s of billions of dollars more if people really got serious about saving money and went after these other bloated welfare areas.
    --- Post Merged, Mar 20, 2017 ---
    Bah.

    I propose we spend double of what China does in defense. Double. That approach alone should ensure the US military supremacy, should it not?

    And that approach would save the U.S. over $100 billion.
    --- Post Merged, Mar 20, 2017 ---
    Funding NOAA doesn't prevent the $50 billion in damages that Sandy left behind. Or droughts. Or water levels rising.

    The fact of the matter is, the anti-science, anti-intellectual crowd is going to disregard NOAA, NASA and science anyway. Why bother funding these areas? It's a waste of money.

    The world is flat and Jesus rode on a dinosaur. What else is there to know?
     
  12. Crichton333 macrumors 6502

    Crichton333

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    #87
    "Saturday's launch will be the first of four spacecraft in NOAA's GOES-R series, which is estimated to cost about $11 billion through 2035."

    Well they did shoot one up a few months ago. I guess thats that.
     

Share This Page