ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Science in Society

Should the US Return to the Moon in 2020?

Updated on February 2, 2010

 Should America place men on the moon again in 2020? The first time was historic, 1969. Anyone alive at that time and of age 10 yrs or more, new about this and watching it live on TV was also historic. Then, there really was a reason, to beat the Russians, which started the whole space race in the late 50s. The scientists behind the rockets almost all came from Hitler's post WW2--Hitler had the first real rockets- the V1, V2 with payloads. Werner Von Braun was its creator and the US upon the collapse of the Nazi regime, took him into custody. NASA was born later. It was his designs that allowed the US to make rockets that took men to the moon.

Why was getting to the moon so important then? National pride and fear of the Red menace called Communism that the USSR ruled by. The competition created many industries and the technology discovered and created benefited everyone in small ways and even today, the space industry continues to do this. It is a by-product of the business.

Obama plans to cut the NASA Constellation program, which wanted to send astronauts back on the moon to start a "moon colony". About $250 million in federal stimulus money has paid for investments in the Constellation Program, according to a CNN report. NASA's current budget gives Constellation $3.47 billion in funding, according to the White House Budget Office.

While it seems like NASA is getting cut, the reality is that only the Constellation program is, its remaining money for it will be diverted to other NASA projects, like going to Mars. In reality, Obama is increasing the funding for NASA from $18 billion this year to $19 billion in 2011.

Going to the moon again should be cut. It is a waste of money. Obama should take that $3.47 billion from the Constellation program and use it to help the US out of its economic slump, not allow NASA to simply use it for other programs. I think NASA could survive on only $15 billion, don't you?


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • swordsbane profile image

      William Grant 7 years ago from Wisconsin

      I think NASA could survive on $15 billion, and when everyone is trying to cut their bottom line to save money, getting even $15 billion will be an accomplishment.

      I don't believe going back to the Moon is a waste of money, but I don't think that NASA should be the one to do it. I think it would be wise (and I believe at least NASA administrator Bolden has the same idea) to turn LEO and the Moon over to the private sector. We're going to need the infrastructure that only private industry can create if we're going to go to Mars within the lifetime of anyone who may be reading this.

      There are some things that government control is good for. NASA is a great trailblazer, but it should be on the cutting edge of space, it's astronauts should be explorers, not truck drivers and repairmen. That's Mars and the asteroid belt, not the Moon and more cargo-hauling jobs to orbit. The government doesn't do routine very well. That's a job for the private sector, and I think they're ready.