Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!craig From: craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) Newsgroups: net.space,net.columbia,net.followup Subject: Re: Space Shuttle Children's Fund Message-ID: <971@dcl-cs.UUCP> Date: Wed, 5-Feb-86 06:22:38 EST Article-I.D.: dcl-cs.971 Posted: Wed Feb 5 06:22:38 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 7-Feb-86 22:03:29 EST References: <221@hadron.UUCP> <325@lifia.UUCP> <505@eneevax.UUCP> Reply-To: craig@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Craig Wylie) Organization: Department of Computing at Lancaster University. Lines: 55 Xref: watmath net.space:5638 net.columbia:2134 net.followup:5682 In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes: >In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes: >>In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes: >>> >>> A trust fund has been established by the American Security >>> Bank in Washington DC. The funds gathered are to be used >>> to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7 >>> astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle. >> >>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >>for the astronauts' children? >> >>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >>Francois Felix INGRAND (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-( \ | / > >[flame on, 104%] >The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a >fund for the families of deceased astronauts. They sacrificed their private >lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end >they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some >of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind >our most visible heroes. > I feel you must have misunderstood the comment from Francois Ingrand. He means that it must surely be the responsibility of the Goverment (who are responsible for the program on which the 7 died) rather than the responsibility of the people who so spectacularly watched them die. Yes it was a terrible tragedy and yes it is nice of you to think of the children. It was a job - with its risks, what about the guy who dies on the oil rig supplying energy to the nation or the Red Indian who died because he complained about selling millions of square miles of land for trifles ? >Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the >United States we like to take care of our own. > Perhaps you should see the comment above, when you supply free education, free medical care and goverment subsidised housing then you can be insulting, until then you are not taking care of your own at all. It is a great shame that inorder to move the people to 'taking care of their own' the people have to see 7 people die in an explosion on Television. People die all the time pushing forward frontiers and working for a greater ideal, dieing on TV shouldn't be the pre-requisite for acknoledgement. Craig. -- UUCP: ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!craig| Post: University of Lancaster, DARPA: craig%lancs.comp@ucl-cs | Department of Computing, JANET: craig@uk.ac.lancs.comp | Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK. Phone: +44 524 65201 Ext. 4146 | LA1 4YR Project: Cosmos Distributed Operating Systems Research