NASA Funding: what percentage of the federal budget?

I think funding for NASA should be one of the top priorities for this nation along with campaign finance reform, public education, infrastructure, and the environment/climate change. Had a healthy discussion at work today while we watched the Orion launch. It's NASA's way to get the public's interest rekindled for Mars and beyond.

Currently, NASA's annual budget is 0.5% of our Federal budget. Here's roughly what it used to be over the years:

1960 0.5%
1965 4.3% ~$38.5 billion today
1970 1.9%
1975 1.0%
1980 0.8%
1985 0.75%
1990 1.0%
1995 0.9%
2000 0.75%
2005 0.63%
2010 0.50%
2015 0.50% [predicted] ~$17 billion

I think the 1960s should be a baseline and not the zenith as it is now. The percentage should go up from there (if we can reduce costs from other areas). I vote 5.0% at the very least, which would be $170 billion.

 

This question should've been, if all other Federal budget sectors with overspending were tackled, and there were money left over which NASA could use, how much of a percent of that pie should be for NASA?

To get there, as in within 10 years, I would eliminate:

The federal crop insurance program. $90B saved.
Subsidies to oil & gas. $100B saved.
Eliminate the F-35 JSF program. $37B saved.

That's $227B right there and I haven't started on SS/Healthcare/Pensions/Defense/Taxes overall.

See above. Also blindly spend on aeronautics/space (defense I'll agree with)? Bet on economic gain to cover the costs? Do you have any familiarity with the benefits that NASA has brought since its inception i.e. GPS? I believe you work in the energy industry so I'll assume your pat-on-the-head attitude towards space funding as "enhancing curiosity on a an individual topic" is why you wrote that. Spending on NASA is R&D which helps our economy, enables our understanding of existence and our universe, and potentially the survival of our species.

 

NASA needs that kind of money if we want people on Mars, rovers to places like Enceladus/Titan/Europa, advanced propulsion systems, fusion power, and so on.

I'm noticing a disheartening problem. This is a Space City forum. Yet, this topic doesn't click as do threads on race and Islam. How are so many of you ignorant of the benefits that NASA has brought to our world economy, and that it has programs ready-to-go which simply lack funding?

 

If we make the right cuts as I mentioned above, there's plenty of money. As far as cherry-picking, I'd rather waste some money on NASA contractors rather than the status quo. Anecdotally, the programs which defense contractors specifically have for space have less waste than conventional defense programs.

More importantly, I believe you and I are on fundamentally different sides as far as space funding priorities. We'll just have to disagree. The hurdles needed for things like better jet propulsion systems or building better space-based-telescopes ($200B at least) cannot be touched by the private sector and universities. I believe there are some thing which only governments can afford. I believe that somethings are so significant to society, indeed the entire human race, that leaving it the private sector/universities is irresponsible.

 

I will get back to you. Those were the low hanging fruit which immediately came to my mind. I will look at my old posts from the debt ceiling thread on where to trim the fat. I remember there was plenty of fat to trim from healthcare alone.

 

To quote one of my favorite shows on this very topic:

Super cool has less to do with it as it our destiny. I'm an astronomy junkie. Our Earth is just a stepping stone to the Cosmos. Practically speaking if you don't like this Interstellar rhetoric, then inhabiting two planets roughly 130 million miles apart.

 

* then inhabiting two planets roughly 130 million miles apart is better for the survival our species. That inter-planetary travel gives us a warm up to exploring further out in the Solar System, then interstellar/intergalactic travel.