Thread: NASA Budget

Seems like the right place for it, since it isn't a question.

Anyway, in a thread at BAUT I am now unable to find, someone was talking about how NASA's budget is constantly being slashed. I put together this graph to illustrate this perpetual slashing.

Slashing upward, I see... I knew the mid-70s was a low point for NASA, but I wasn't aware the budget continued to climb since then.

The graph does appear to end around 2007, though. Most of the claimed slashing has occurred since then.

Originally Posted by mugaliens

Slashing upward, I see... I knew the mid-70s was a low point for NASA, but I wasn't aware the budget continued to climb since then.

The graph does appear to end around 2007, though. Most of the claimed slashing has occurred since then.

The graph is mine, but the (secondary) source for the data was a Wikipedia page. It actually goes to 2008. The Wikipedia page has nominal (not adjusted for inflation) figures for 2009 to 2015, with those from 2,012 to 2,105 labelled "est". These figures show an increase of about 2.7% a year, probably keeping ahead of inflation, but they come from a NASA report, so 2009-2011 may reflect what they wanted rather than what they got.

For what it's worth, as a percentage of the federal budget, the numbers are the lowest they have been since 1960. Cobbling together data from a few different sources, as a percentage of GDP, it declined quickly after Apollo, and slowly thereafter, and is at the lowest level since 1959. US GDP has grown slightly more than 30 times from 1958 to 2008 (nominal), slightly more than 5 times after adjusting for inflation.

Originally Posted by Coelacanth

The graph is mine, but the (secondary) source for the data was a Wikipedia page. It actually goes to 2008. The Wikipedia page has nominal (not adjusted for inflation) figures for 2009 to 2015, with those from 2,012 to 2,105 labelled "est". These figures show an increase of about 2.7% a year, probably keeping ahead of inflation, but they come from a NASA report, so 2009-2011 may reflect what they wanted rather than what they got.

The only graph I could find on that page goes up to about 2005.

I'm not impressed with comments such as "NASA Dollars Boosts the Economies of Every State" when such comments are unqualified with respect to how many tax dollars, both personal and business, were gleaned from those states in the first place. What's the state-specific ROI's? Payback period? IRR?

I could take a quarter from a kid today, then return tomorrow and give him a dime. When I returned the dime, I could claim "I just boosted this kid's economics," but that would be disingenuous, as one must consider the entire flow of monies to make any such claim.

For what it's worth, as a percentage of the federal budget, the numbers are the lowest they have been since 1960.

And yet the fed is spending more money than ever before, and ever so much more frivilously than ever before, particularly on "feel-good" programs with ever-increasing overhead, and ever-decreasing percentage of tangible value i.e. ROI (return on investment).

Put simply, I think this is more a function of increasing government waste in other areas than in real decreases in NASA's budget.

Cobbling together data from a few different sources, as a percentage of GDP, it declined quickly after Apollo, and slowly thereafter, and is at the lowest level since 1959. US GDP has grown slightly more than 30 times from 1958 to 2008 (nominal), slightly more than 5 times after adjusting for inflation.

Since GDP has grown more than 5 times, if NASA's budget has decreased only somewhat, the net effect is a positive trend, not a negative one.

Bottom line: Comparing expenditures to GDP, CPI, and other such measures is difficult, as the nature of those measures change over time. For example, the basis behind the CPI has changed significantly over the years, but debates rage on with respect to what's included and the weights which are given. I believe there should be a "Subsistence CPI" which includes only the bare-bones basics, such as generic food, clothing, housing, transportation, and sundries. In other words, those things people absolutely need in order to hold down a job, obtain basic goods and medical care, etc.

The GDP is far more complex. Here's a good chart for comparing the GDP between any number of countries over time, since 1960.

Originally Posted by mugaliens

The only graph I could find on that page goes up to about 2005.

The graphs is my creation, but based on the information in the table. One of the numbers in the table has an obviously misplaced decimal point.

Originally Posted by mugaliens

I'm not impressed with comments such as "NASA Dollars Boosts the Economies of Every State" when such comments are unqualified with respect to how many tax dollars, both personal and business, were gleaned from those states in the first place. What's the state-specific ROI's? Payback period? IRR?

Oh, trumpeting "Our project creates jobs!" while completely ignoring the taxation (or accumulation of debt) needed to pay for the project is pretty much standard fare in politics

Originally Posted by Coelacanth

The graphs is my creation, but based on the information in the table. One of the numbers in the table has an obviously misplaced decimal point.

Gotcha. My clue light came on rather late...

Oh, trumpeting "Our project creates jobs!" while completely ignoring the taxation (or accumulation of debt) needed to pay for the project is pretty much standard fare in politics

So true. Sadly, the masses falling for it is pretty much standard fare in society. We can't uncorrupt the politicians. We can, however, educate the masses, one waterlogged noggin at a time.