Depending on your economic, political, and scientific viewpoints, this answer may vary.
From a purely economic, standpoint, sending humans to space is costly, and isn't economically viable, because out of the billions of dollars it takes to send someone to space, very little money is returned from what the humans actually do in space.
To check that it would be safe to send humans at a later stage.
yes then they came back down to earth and then they sent humans to space because they knew that humans could breath i space if monkeys could
Because they're most disposable than humans.
No, all remaining Space Shuttles have been retired and are now in museums across the country.
India is not expected to send humans into space until 2015. For more information, see the related link below.
The Soviet Union (Russia), the USA, China.
Yes, to further the exploration of space, and medical research.
NASA occasionally sends out space probes instead of humans because astronauts could not survive on some of the places that space probes are sent to.
China sent its first astronaut, Yang Liwei, into space in 2003, becoming the third country to independently send humans into space after the Soviet Union and the United States.
They sent a Russian dog to space, they sent a chimpanzee to space and they sent/send humans to space.Neil Armstrong, Buzz Lightyear (whatever his last name is)All those people. XD
They didn't send humans up into space first, as they needed to find out the effects it had on the body, so they sent a dog, and a chimp into space, to conduct research, and make sure it was possible, or feasible.
President John F. Kennedy allocated approximately $25 billion to the space program during his presidency, as part of the Apollo program to send humans to the Moon.