No, we need to put 100 Rovers on Mars so we can learn how to do it with better then a 50% success rate (And FASTER as you mentioned we lack a high speed space vehicle), and all the while (As a side bonus) we we learn plenty about the Red Planet wich is actually fairly facinating. Not to mention it gives people who might be going to school for something like ROCKET SCIENCE or any of the Aerospace fields something to DO when they graduate.
And we don't. The platform got old, but we had to make sure all these fucking illegals had free healthcare and thus lack a replacement.Did we need to go into low earth orbit on a shuttle 135 times at a cost of 1.5 billion dollars per flight?
But here's a thought, how about we work on alternative fuel sources, ways to turn actual desert into farmland and make it cheap enough to pay...maybe we could lower the cost of basic food so people could buy their own.
Yeah, I don't see the problem with people getting food here.
But they are not even discussing a mission. Unless you count making a speacial place for beaner vegitable pickers to live "a better life" a "mission".There is more than one kind of scientific exploring, we could send out the occasional craft on a clear mission to a new place and spend a lot of the money we basically wasted trying to solve some of the big problems here.
Bookmarks