Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossoverManiac
About 2:36 into the video, we can hear Barney Frank talking out of his rear end about cutting NASA's budget yet again for universal health care. For someone who runs a business (and when I mean business, I meant a prostitution ring out of his apartment), 'Einstein' here can't seem to do math. Even if NASA was abolished and all of the money giving to social welfare, it wouldn't even pay the paperwork to run the bureaucracy let alone the whole program. |
Has anyone else actually viewed the video? Frank's statement was to the point that there were areas of spending that could be cut to finance a public health care system in the U.S. One of these areas would be a manned mission to Mars which he posited would cost hundreds of billions of dollars. This isn't about cutting funding to NASA at all - in fact, Frank even iterated that he was in favor of instrumental space missions. While the merits of his points might be debatable, this OP is terribly misleading - this item is barely newsworthy and it certainly doesn't merit its own thread. If someone wants to argue about the costs and merits of NASA, then please start up a new thread on it. Discussion of the American health care system can go to the
The Future of US Healthcare thread.