NASA never ceases to amaze me.
Within the span of the last few years, they've managed some of the most incredible feats, made especially incredible considering they're a taxpayer-funded government agency. One of their latest feats includes losing a laptop.
I know, you're probably thinking that stuff probably happens to about one out of every ten laptop owners. Probably happens to businesses and organizations all the time.
But this situation is a little bit different.
See, this particular laptop includes a few little codes NASA may find useful someday. Codes to the International Space Station (see previous post regarding Space Stations and Swimming Pools). No biggie.
But seriously! This wouldn't be so bad, except they'd already begun the pattern in 2009, losing equipment and devices and gadgets (none of which are exactly cheap, to put it mildly), wrapping up their streak with Loss #48, the laptop containing the ISS codes. You would think someone would say, "Gee, we've been losing a ton of crap. Maybe we should start cracking down."
If they were a business, somebody would have lost a job a long time ago. Someone would have established a Loss Prevention department. Somebody would have done something so another multi-million-dollar item wouldn't suddenly drop out of inventory.
But NASA apparently just shrugs, and Congress keeps handing out the dough. After all, the taxpayers can handle it.
Oh, and this doesn't include the fact that their $58 million-per-year IT security has been breached approximately 54,000 times since 2010. Hey, guys! Yeah, you! The ones who send probes to the outer reaches of the solar system and calculate distances between stars! Ever hear of FIREWALLS AND ANTIVIRUS PROGRAMS? One trip to Best Buy could save you a lot of headaches. Where the heck is that $54 million a year going?
No wonder we haven't put anyone on the moon since 1972. We've had Laurel and Hardy running the show.
I hope after all this investment with my own hard-earned dollars I'll at least get the secret to the Rubik's Cube out of the deal. It seems they've got enough guys at NASA working on that.
Showing posts with label International Space Station. Show all posts
Showing posts with label International Space Station. Show all posts
Friday, March 2, 2012
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
The International Space Swimming Pool
Okay, so say you and several neighbors decide you all want to chip in together on a community swimming pool.
The pool will cost $160,000, and let’s say there are sixteen neighbors, including yourself, in on this plan.
That means a cost of $10,000 for each person.
But you’re already in debt. You owe over a million dollars.
Wouldn’t you agree that investing in a swimming pool would not be a smart financial decision?
More bluntly, it would be stupid.
Sixteen nations chipped in on ISS, the International Space Station. This project’s total cost was $100 billion.
Let’s assume those 16 nations divided the cost evenly (that isn’t likely, but let’s say that was the case). Breaking out the calculator . . .
$625 million per country.
This isn’t even figuring in the cost of sending people up there to man the station, the supplies, the administration, the maintenance, and the repairs.
Currently, international crews are scrambling to fix some major issues on the Space Station. How much will these repairs cost?
God knows.
The United States is in debt like never before. People are losing jobs, losing homes. We’ve seen a rise in people standing on street corners with cardboard signs.
Never mind that. We have important stuff to do. We have to fix the Space Station.
Going back to the swimming pool analogy, what would you do if you had to choose between pulling yourself out of debt or building a recreational spot? Opt out of the swimming pool project, or go ahead with it?
I don’t think you have to be an economics whiz to figure this out.
But hey, what do I know? I don’t think like a bureaucrat.
I’m sure whoever appropriates NASA funding knows what’s best for our struggling populace. If they decide fixing an orbiting chunk of metal is more important than fixing the economy, that must be the case.
After all, to question the bureaucrats would mean questioning our own intelligence in voting these yahoos into office.
And nobody wants to go there . . .
The pool will cost $160,000, and let’s say there are sixteen neighbors, including yourself, in on this plan.
That means a cost of $10,000 for each person.
But you’re already in debt. You owe over a million dollars.
Wouldn’t you agree that investing in a swimming pool would not be a smart financial decision?
More bluntly, it would be stupid.
Sixteen nations chipped in on ISS, the International Space Station. This project’s total cost was $100 billion.
Let’s assume those 16 nations divided the cost evenly (that isn’t likely, but let’s say that was the case). Breaking out the calculator . . .
$625 million per country.
This isn’t even figuring in the cost of sending people up there to man the station, the supplies, the administration, the maintenance, and the repairs.
Currently, international crews are scrambling to fix some major issues on the Space Station. How much will these repairs cost?
God knows.
The United States is in debt like never before. People are losing jobs, losing homes. We’ve seen a rise in people standing on street corners with cardboard signs.
Never mind that. We have important stuff to do. We have to fix the Space Station.
Going back to the swimming pool analogy, what would you do if you had to choose between pulling yourself out of debt or building a recreational spot? Opt out of the swimming pool project, or go ahead with it?
I don’t think you have to be an economics whiz to figure this out.
But hey, what do I know? I don’t think like a bureaucrat.
I’m sure whoever appropriates NASA funding knows what’s best for our struggling populace. If they decide fixing an orbiting chunk of metal is more important than fixing the economy, that must be the case.
After all, to question the bureaucrats would mean questioning our own intelligence in voting these yahoos into office.
And nobody wants to go there . . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
