Europe

The U.S spends about $18.7 billion dollars on space exploration (NASA's budget for Fiscal Year 2010). That equates to a little over one half of one percent (0.53%) of the total U.S. federal budget of $3.1 Trillion and a $14 Trillion economy.

This works out to about $60 dollars a year which is $5.00 a month, or $1.25 a week, or $0.18 cents a day out of the $4,000 to $8,000 the average American pays in taxes each year. That's less than what someone would spend for a Cheeseburger or a Double Mocha Latte at your neighborhood coffee shop.

At the height of the Apollo moon landing program in the mid-1960s, nearly four percent (4%) of the total U.S. federal budget went into that endeavor. Even if NASA's budget were to be doubled overnight to $37 billion dollars, it would only amount to 1.2% of today's federal budget.

In comparison, the budget for Social Security will be $655 billion for 2010, which is 35 times larger than NASA's budget during the same year.

Funding bills for Defense ($663 billion), Medicare ($453 billion), Medicaid ($290 billion), Health & Human Services ($78.7 billion), Transportation ($72.5 billion), Education ($61.7 billion), Housing & Urban Development ($47.5 billion), Veteran's Affairs ($52.5 billion), Homeland Security ($42.7 billion), International Assistance to foreign countries ($27.483 billion) and Energy ($26.3 billion) round out the annual laundry list.

The U.S. Congress passed a "stimulus" package of $787 billion in 2009 for the Banking, Mortgage and Automobile industries for one year. That same amount of money could operate NASA for the next 42 years.

According to a November 2003 report by Barna Research Group and the Baptist Press, Americans are spending -- in ONE year -- an average of:

$586.5 billion on gambling;
$80 billion on illegal drugs;
$58 billion on alcohol consumption;
$31 billion on tobacco products, and;
$250 billion on the medical treatment for the above related issues

Additionally, during 2003, Americans also collectively spent:

$224 billion to eat out;
$191 billion on personal water craft;
$67 billion on frozen dinners;
$25 billion on gardening;
$22.1 billion on hunting;
$21.3 billion on extravagant pet products, and;
$15 billion on junk food snacks

All things relative -- even in the financial meltdown and economic retrenching of 2008-2009 -- the cost for space exploration in the United States is neither a significant tap on social programs, nor a drain on the overall $3.1 Trillion Federal Budget or $14 Trillion U.S. economy.

Nevertheless, trying to estimate the economic value of the space program to the U.S. is surprisingly easy. A 1971 NASA study by the Midwest Research Institute concluded:

"The 25 billion in 1958 dollars spent on civilian space R & D during the 1958-1969 period has returned $52 billion through 1971 and will continue to produce pay-off through 1987, at which time the total pay off will have been $181 billion. The discounted rate of return for this investment will have been 33 percent."

This statement is plausible since those were the years when NASA's spending on the Apollo program was at its height, but NASA also invested in other programs and they are included in the mix, so the conclusion is not as definitive as one would like.

Also, a 33 percent return on investment is not really big enough to make the normal venture capitalist go wild -- but for a government program, however, a 33% ROI is quite respectable.

A short article in the prestigious British science journal, "Nature" (January 9, 1992, pgs. 105-106), reported:

"The economic benefits of NASA's programs are greater than generally realized. The main beneficiaries (the American public) may not even realize the source of their good fortune..."

Some other statistics:

Confirmation that "Space pays" may also be found in the 1989 Chapman Research report, which examined just 259 non-space applications of NASA technology during an eight year period from 1976-1984 and found more than:

- $21.6 billion in sales and benefits;
- 352,000 (mostly skilled) jobs created or saved;
- $355 million in federal corporate income taxes

Other benefits, not quantified in the study, include state corporate income taxes, individual personal income taxes (federal and state) paid by those 352,000 workers, and incalculable benefits resulting from lives saved and improved quality of life.

These 259 applications represent only 1% of an estimated 25,000 to 30,000 space program spinoffs. These benefits were in addition to benefits in the space industry itself and in addition to the ordinary multiplier effects of any government spending.

In 2002, the aerospace industry contributed more than $95 billion to U.S. economic activity, which included $23.5 billion in employee earnings, and employed 576,000 people -- a 16% increase in jobs from three years earlier (source: FAA, March 2004).

Our nation can afford whatever it values enough to pay for. All rose-colored glasses wishing aside, social welfare and other desirable programs have to win congressional support on their own merits; they will not necessarily be given NASA's $18.7 billion budget for FY2010 if the agency was completely terminated tomorrow.

For one final comparison, one can look to a report on NBC Nightly News (Saturday, Nov. 24, 2006). Americans collectively spent $8.9 billion in ONE day during the post-Thanksgiving holiday shopping event known as "Black Friday".

That's half of what NASA's budget is . . . for an entire year.

$457.4 billion in retail sales were rung up by shoppers during the 2006 holiday season, buying 42-inch plasma/LCD HDTVs, Sony PS3s, Nitendo Wii's and other extraneous items -- supposedly all in the name of "Brotherhood and Peace on Earth." Another $25 billion in gift cards were also sold in that holiday season alone.

But of course, critics will still insist on saying "we should stop spending on space exploration" because "it's a total waste of finances or resources," or "we can't afford it," or that we're "wasting our money."

The real value of space exploration to our nation's economy will be a subject of debate among experts for many years to come. Like the Apollo program, its impact will be hard to measure, but will be evident in the new industries that will spring up around it.

The politics of a technological project with a clear goal and self-evident success or failure are much simpler to deal with than any plan to conquer poverty, rebuild the cities, or clean up the environment.

Supporters of space exploration have long known intuitively that the investments America has made in space technology have helped maintain the country as the world's number one technological superpower.

The infinitely complex nature of economic decision-making in a free market system may mean that no one will ever be able to show a direct cause and effect relationship -- but that does not mean that it is not there.

Some of the reasons for the establishment of the European Union (EU)

Already in the 1920s some politicians (such as Briand and Stresemann) tried to achieve reconciliation between France and Germany as the basis for establishing a durable peace in Europe. A few intellectuals, such as Fritz von Unruh in Germany, even talked and wrote about a union of sorts between France and Germany. However, the Great Depression and the rise of the Nazis wrecked their efforts.

After WW2 there were fresh efforts, however. Initially, the countries actively involved were France, West Germany, Italy and the Benelux countries. The move also had the support of Churchill. It began in 1951 with European Coal and Steel Community which created a common market for coal and steel amongst 6 member-states (West Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg).

The next step was a customs union - the European Economic Union (1957) - with tax harmonization in some areas. It was also felt that economic interdependence would strengthen peace. The first expansion occurred in 1973 when Britain, the Irish Republic and Denmark joined. The EU has continued to expand and now consists of 27 countries with an overall population of about 492 million people (2007). Additional countries are clamoring for admission. After all, nothing succeeds more than success.

Britain appears to be a reluctant member. It has still not succeeded in finding a post-imperial role for itself. Moreover, at key junctures many British politicians have badly underestimated the potential of the EU - and still do so.

So trade is easier in between the countries, and if they are in the EU, they can just have a common currency.