Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!ucbvax!space
From: J.JPM@[36.21.0.13] (Jim McGrath)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: SDI and NASA budgets
Message-ID: <12183360054.8.J.JPM@EPIC>
Date: Fri, 14-Feb-86 14:55:37 EST
Article-I.D.: EPIC.12183360054.8.J.JPM
Posted: Fri Feb 14 14:55:37 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 16-Feb-86 04:31:42 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: mcgrath%mit-oz@mit-mc.arpa
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 20


    From: Slocum@hi-multics.arpa
    If the space program got as much support as SDI does, we would be
    living in space by now, practically.  I hear that Reagan wants to
    double the SDI budget in '87 and again in '88. And similar growth
    thereafter.  In '87, the SDI budget will equal the NASA budget, if
    he gets his way and also if the NASA budget doesn't get cut.  And
    this is in three years from the start of the program.  Just think
    where we could be if NASA's budget had seen that kind of growth.

But it never will.  One of the reasons I think SDI is a good idea is
that it is an excellent way to get funds for space activities.  I
would rather see the same amount going to NASA, but reasoning that if
you could just cut SDI then NASA would get the money is nonsense -
rather, the money would just to to fund another dam in some
congresscritter's district.


Jim
-------