This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Budget

An Austrian Taxpayer Doesn't Like NASA Funding Priorities (Update)

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
October 27, 2012
Filed under ,

Felix Baumgartner Sounds Off on NASA, Sir Richard Branson, Daily Beast
“A lot of guys they are talking about landing on Mars,” he said. “Because [they say] it is so important to land on Mars because we would learn a lot more about our planet here, our Earth, by going to Mars which actually makes no sense to me because we know a lot about Earth and we still treat our planet, which is very fragile, in a really bad way. “So I think we should perhaps spend all the money [which is] going to Mars to learn about Earth. I mean, you cannot send people there because it is just too far away. That little knowledge we get from Mars I don’t think it does make sense.” Earlier this year Nasa landed the Curiosity rover on Mars. The plutonium powered robot will explore the surface of the Red Planet for upwards of 10 years at a cost of $2.5 billion ( 1.5 billion). “That is tax money,” Mr Baumgartner, 43, added. “People should decide ‘are you willing to spend all this money to go to Mars?’ I think the average person on the ground would never spend that amount of money – they have to spend it on something that makes sense and this is definitely saving our planet.”
Keith’s note: I find it baffling, to say the least, that someone like commercial thrill seeker Felix Baumgartner – who just did something rather gutsy and improbable by jumping from a balloon 24 miles above Earth – thinks that sending humans to Mars is not possible because “it is just too far away”. Really, Felix? How defeatist of you. As for the cost of what NASA does – the last time I checked, Felix was not an American taxpayer (you know, the people who actually pay those “taxes” for NASA) but rather, is an Austrian citizen. NASA doesn’t get Austrian tax funding. It would seem, based on some simple Google searches, that Austria doesn’t really have much of a space program to speak of. Nor do they seem to want one. Yet decades of polls clearly show that Americans really like their space program.
So, Felix … we’ll run our space program the way we want to – and perhaps you should focus your space exploration criticism at home – where you pay your taxes? Maybe Austria can have a space program someday.
Oh yes, Felix, since you raised the point: how many millions of dollars did your skydive project cost? How did it help to “save our planet”?
Red Bull Pays Record U.K. Fine for Failing to Recycle Packaging Waste, Environmental Leader
“Soft drink company Red Bull has been fined 271,800 (about $448,400) for failing to meet its requirements to recover and recycle packaging waste for eight years between 1999 and 2006, … This beats the previous highest fine of 225,000 (about $371,107) that was imposed in January 2008 on a company that also failed to register as a producer of packaging…” (hat tip to @SarcasticRover).
Keith’s update: It would seem that Felix Baumgartner has some other controversial things to say. I don’t think he’s going to be invited to speak at many space events …
Baumgartner: “Wir wrden eine gemigte Diktatur brauchen” (Google Translate: Baumgartner: “We would need a moderate dictatorship”), Kleine Zeitung
“Ist ein Wechsel in die Politik eine Option fr Ihre Zukunft? FELIX BAUMGARTNER: Nein, man hat das am Beispiel Schwarzenegger gesehen: Du kannst in einer Demokratie nichts bewegen. Wir wrden eine gemigte Diktatur brauchen, wo es ein paar Leute aus der Privatwirtschaft gibt, sie sich wirklich auskennen.”
[Google Translate] “Is a change in the policy is an option for your future? FELIX BAUMGARTNER: No, we have seen the example of the Schwarzenegger: You can not move anything in a democracy. We would need a moderate dictatorship, where there are a few people from the private sector, they know really.”
Daredevil skydiver Felix Baumgartner opts for ‘moderate dictatorship’, AFP
“Felix Baumgartner, the Austrian parachutist who broke the sound barrier by jumping to earth from the stratosphere said in an interview published Sunday he backed the idea of a dictatorship, though a moderate one.”

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

50 responses to “An Austrian Taxpayer Doesn't Like NASA Funding Priorities (Update)”

  1. Andreas says:
    0
    0

    I’m very unhappy about him saying this.

    You HAVE BEEN kind of my hero, you know?

    When “average joe” in a bar speak so to another, that’s one thing. But
    if a hero of million of people says such a stupid thing it makes me cry.

    Look at how much we spend on killing people. NASA is not even 1% of
    that. And NASA brings humanity progress! Killing just kills people and
    may bring som oil. Great.

    If the money on Curiosity was divided onto the many many million hungry
    people, each one would get several cents or maybe even near to one
    dollar.

    But if the money wouldn’t have been spent on Curiosity, do you really
    think it would have been given to the poor???? By 100% not!  They’d
    rather give it to some banks or to greece or for WAR.

    Thanks god, he won’t be heard by NASA.

    • Dr. Brian Chip Birge says:
      0
      0

       The problem isn’t that he would be heard by NASA, it’s that he will be heard by the public and seen as someone with expertise that can influence the layman’s already jaded opinion of NASA and scientific research in general.

  2. Yohan Ayhan says:
    0
    0

    Wow, excellent rebuttal. Can’t get better than that.

    I personally I think we should be establishing an outpost on the moon with research centers and continue to send robotic missions to Mars.
    When should we go to Mars? Very simple.
    Once we create devices that can produce simple elements like Oxygen and Hydrogen, and compounds like water and food for years then we should establish an outpost on Mars.

  3. John Kavanagh says:
    0
    0

    “I’m a bit of a wet blanket when it comes to the whole business of space travel, I would like to see us get this place right first before we have the arrogance to put significantly flawed civilisations out on to other planets. As I get older my unease at the time and the money that has to be spent on projects putting human beings back to the moon, and on to another planet, is so enormous, and it would take up so many resources, which I personally feel should be directed at our own planet.”  
    – Patrick Stewart (Capt. Picard), quoted by the BBC in 2004

    • Yohan Ayhan says:
      0
      0

      He’s a borg, he just wants us to stay on this planet and be assimilated! I rather be off this planet before he and his borg friends arrive 😉

    • Mel_Potts says:
      0
      0

       Wow – I really Like Patrick, even looks a bit like my Dad.  Wish he could see it different…….

    • rktsci says:
      0
      0

      I would like to see us get this place right first

      Well, since there will always be problems here, since nobody really knows how to Immanentize the Eschaton, it’s a prescription for never doing anything.

    • Mader Levap says:
      0
      0

      Did Patrick Stewart sorted out all his problems, issues and Things To Do before moving out of parent’s house? I don’t think so.

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      He’s an actor.

    • hikingmike says:
      0
      0

       Well at least he said it much better.

  4. Daniel L says:
    0
    0

    On the one hand we have actual, real science (a mobile science laboratory on another planet), with a daring, media-friendly stunt as a spinoff (the skycrane landing sequence). On the other hand we have a daring stunt (high-skydiving) with (I’m told) some science and medical spinoff. I know which of the two holds my respect. By the way Mr Felix, the cost of the 2012 London Olympics was apparently six to eight times greater than the entire MSL budget. Did this spectator sports-fest help “save the planet”?

  5. Ralphy999 says:
    0
    0

    It is small consolation to me that if Mr. Baumgartner earns any advertising money for work performed in the US, the IRS will come knocking on his front door. It’s a hurtin’ kind of love Mr. Baumgartner and we here on the NASAWATCH forum appreciate your contributions from doing dangerous and silly stunts.

  6. Helen Simpson says:
    0
    0

    I also find it a little baffling that Baumgartner is taking this position, in that one would have to assume that a thrill seeker would be after the ultimate thrill. But there are other ways to look at it. We see thrill seking a bit differently than Baumgartner does. He sees the thrill of high jumping as a personal one. We see the thrill of going to Mars as a national enterprise. It’s different. Us going to Mars is not about him.

    As to an Austrian weighing in on the sensibility of a U.S. investment in going to Mars, I have no problem with it. He’s just providing independent perspective. Now, the fact that Austria doesn’t have a space program that is sending people to Mars is consistent with his view. He’s preaching what his nation practices.

    It is a bit disturbing that Baumgartner doesn’t seem to acknowledge any value to our planet that would accrue from understanding Mars better. From the point of view of scientific exploration of Mars, one could make the argument that that we learn about Mars can benefit our planet.  Something happened to Mars that we very much hope won’t happen to our own planet.

    In large part, the reason that we spend huge amounts of money to do space spectaculars is to achieve what has been called soft power. That’s about building an image of national power and prestige that’s aimed squarely at other countries. Don’t mess with us, we’re saying, because we’re so good. His is one view from another country saying that such space spectaculars may not be particularly impressive to them.

    As to comparing the cost of going to Mars with the cost of Baumgartner’s high dive, there really is no comparison. As he says, it’s about making sense. I interpret that as providing value. Is the feat worth the money? For Felix Baumgartner, the millions of dollars he spent on his jump had enormous value to his Red Bull sponsor. Quality advertising isn’t cheap. But the question about whether a voyage to Mars makes sense is not something our nation has ever really discussed. In doing such a feat, we’re probably talking about a total expenditure of several years of current national budget deficits. What exactly do we get from that expenditure? It’s easy to get the public to agree that human space flight is good. Is it that good? Space advocates haven’t really sold such space spectaculars on the basis of national value.

     

    • Steve Whitfield says:
      0
      0

      Helen,

      Good points about the advertising and soft power.  Personally, I think that any comparison of MSL to his sky jump falls apart as soon as we consider the time frames involved.  His jump, and any advertising value to either Red Bull or himself, will be pretty much forgotten six months from now, whereas MSL, and similar programs, continue to return data and learning year after year (and in some cases, like the Voyagers, for decades).  And when we consider the number of people who could potentially benefit from each of these two undertakings, I suspect that MSL will turn out to have orders of magnitude more potential value than his jump.  Actually, unless this was just a bid for more media attention, I’m surprised that he would make statements like this.  He could have garnered more positive attention and considerable good will by contrasting the two events instead of comparing them.  It makes me wonder if he simply spoke before properly thinking it through.

      Steve

  7. dogstar29 says:
    0
    0

    Not to split hairs, but tax obligations are based on where one earns money, not one’s citizenship. Mr. Baumgartner and his sponsor are both US taxpayers.

    While I am interested in Mars, he has a point regarding earth. NASA and NOAA’s failure to keep the weather satellite program on track could cost lives, not to mention the political interference with the climate science program and the lack of funding for environmental observation from ISS as well as unmanned satellites. I agree we can learn about Earth by studying the differences between it and Mars, but only if we also study Earth as comprehensively as possible.

    • Steve Whitfield says:
      0
      0

      NASA and NOAA’s failure to keep the weather satellite program on track could cost lives

      vulture4,

      I certainly agree that having anything less than the best possible facilities could, and will, cost lives, and it’s a danger that is only increasing with time.  I don’t understand, though, why you say that NASA and NOAA are responsible for this.  Some of the blame, if we want to call it that, lies with launch failures, which NASA and NOAA bought from contractors and therefore can’t be held accountable for.  But I would say that most of the falling behind is the direct result of funding cutbacks, and insufficient funding in the first place which, once again, NASA and NOAA can’t be held accountable for.

      It seems we are all to suffer from the senseless debates among politicians as to whether climate change is “real” or not.  They haven’t a clue, nor do their advisers, and they’re apparently not smart enough to realize that when in doubt, err on the side of caution.  The penalty for their failure to do so could be millions, even billions, of lives lost or destroyed.  One thing that they don’t seem to have realized is that when it all starts going to hell, the forces of nature will take absolutely no notice of things national borders, personal income, or how many votes you got in the last election.  Disaster doesn’t play favorites.

      Steve

      • dogstar29 says:
        0
        0

        I agree. The world is what it is, not what we happen to believe. But while Congress decides the budget, NASA has some freedom to advise the administration and Congress on budget priorities. Although some failures have occurred in launching LEO climate satellites, no attempt has even been made to launch the major weather satellites which would track hurricanes; program management has permitted major delays and cost overruns and NASA and NOAA have been unable to work together efficiently.  We must perform the fundamental tasks that are our responsibility consistently and well before we can leap on to more exiting goals.

        • Alvaro says:
          0
          0

           I have to point out that NOAA and probably the EPA (maybe the department of interior) are the correct entities to be in working on climate satellite.  It just happens that these expertise are beneficial to NASA when looking at climate in other planets.  Knowledge that can be use to learn about earth’s climate.  That is why NASA is involved in this kind of work.

          BTW: the debacle on weather satellites was caused by previous administrations thinking that joining the meteorology satellites from NOAA and DOD into one program will create great saving.  After 3 or 4 years they found that was completely wrong (What the DOD needs is not the same as what the NOAA need), and each decided to go their own ways, NPOESS was the name of the program.  Of course the civilian satellites were extremely delay and that is what we are seeing now.  It is not NASA’s fault or purview, but as a scientific in nature entity (NASA), they will be involved by trying to help and provide instruments.

          a2c2

      • Andrew B says:
        0
        0

        OCO and Glory (the missions with the launch failures) weren’t weather satellites.  They had very specific instruments to measure different aspects of the Eath’s climate, which is actually different from weather.  While the failures set back our understanding of climate, I don’t believe those missions had much to do with real-time detailed prediction of hurricanes or anything like that.  They weren’t in the right orbits.

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      Red Bull is a muti-national company with offices in other countries. Baumgartner is a resident of Switzerland.

  8. Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    One of the justification points for Baumgartner’s leap was that it might help the design of spacesuits. There were numerous discussions here about science versus engineering and their interrelation. Now he dishes all that. Guess he’s already marketing for his next mission.  Guess space really is for the US and not Austrians.

  9. Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    I hesitated about commenting on the previous Patrick Stewart reference, but now I have to ask why?  Patrick Stewart is a great actor and has a right to speak his mind, but that doesn’t make him any more of an authority on the direction of space exploration than anyone else.  I mean, when I get sick, I’m not going to go see Hugh Laurie. 🙂

  10. James Stanton says:
    0
    0

    Why is it that people think NASA is responsible for planet Earth. Sure this guy has his beef with NASA  but this is not useful or productive in any way. He would be better off channeling that creative energy into ways that can be of benefit rather than complaining.

    • Robin Seibel says:
      0
      0

      You are correct in that “Earth” was removed from the NASA mission statement in 2006, if I dismember correctly.

  11. Laura Sherdell says:
    0
    0

    His comment is unsurprising if we keep two things in mind.

    First, he’s not a scientist, explorer, or space enthusiast.  His purpose was to log another record in his personal record book (lowest parachute jump, highest parachute jump, jumping off buildings,jumping onto buildings, jumping off a viaduct, etc).  Any technological advances and space related technology involved were just required to set the record – they were not the purpose of his jump.  He’s not interested in space exploration.  He’s interested in setting records for his own personal reasons.

    Second, he’s European; specifically Austrian.  His comments just reflect the not uncommon European cultural view that we need to put being “green” above all else and focus all our efforts on “saving the planet”.

    Thus his comments.

    It seems that some people have mistakenly taken what he did as being motivated by an interest in space exploration.  Obviously not the case.

  12. Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    Now that you made me think about it a bit more, I see your point.  People like Nichelle Nichols used their Star Trek work to great advantage for NASA.  It is a little disheartening to read what Stewart said.

  13. npng says:
    0
    0

    Keith, the record fines you’ve noted, for Red Bull’s failure to recover and recycle waste, are hysterically funny.  Such hypocrisy.   This Felix “I’ve got an opinion” deal reminds me of similar antics in Hollywood, where truly superb actors or actresses will suddenly get on some soap box political bent only to prove themselves to be absolute political morons.  Just because you may be truly heroic at one thing doesn’t mean you’re an authority on everything.

    • Steve Whitfield says:
      0
      0

      npng,

      Very true.  And yet, it’s a common failing. Even scientists and engineers are often guilty of this.  And the greater their expertise in one field, the more likely they are to think that that expertise somehow flows over into other fields.  In the end, I guess we’re all just human.

      Steve

  14. Mader Levap says:
    0
    0

    One things annoys me… why Cowing thinks that someone from country without significant space program have no right to opinion about space exploration? This is ludicrous logic. I seen it already multiple times on this site in past year, both in articles and comments.

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      Then don’t read NASAWatch – and you won’t be annoyed!

    • Ralphy999 says:
      0
      0

      The reason why is that most of these countries’ citizens would have a hernia if their government would throw the equivilent of $500-$600 million a year into space let alone $2 billion a year. Let’s be serious, I think that if Britain and say Germany and France decided to do it, they could put a man into space ON THEIR OWN, NO HELP NEEDED. And they could of done it many years ago. Yet they don’t. Why is that? So no, I don’t want hear about why we  could better spend the money on earth than space. I agree with Keith on this matter. 

  15. rockofritters says:
    0
    0

    isn’t it interesting that people like to get on NASA about spending as though NASA is still the budget outlier it was in the late 60’s. sure a billion or so to send a rover to mars is a lot of money. but it’s a lot of money spent over several years employing highly productive individuals to achieve. contrast that with the billions wasted in months over at places like the department of agriculture, commerce, state, etc. NASA could be eliminated tomorrow and the federal budget would still have a deficit that would dwarf most other countries budget and debt.

    nice stunt Felix, but using technologies that NASA spent billions developing to pull off an advertising stunt for red bull doesn’t make you an expert on space policy. or any other policy that doesn’t involve falling a long way to parachute height..

     

  16. Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    Sounds like Felix’s fame is going to his head.
     

  17. Alvaro says:
    0
    0

    I want to add a note about Felix comments:  A while ago there was a mention that people were a bit upset that NASA was not involve with his jump.  Maybe it was casual ineptitude or maybe some people knew about his opinions about the space program.
    IMHO.
    a2c2

  18. Jim says:
    0
    0

    I could less what he thinks.  Sounds like he fell on his head after his jump. 

  19. JadedObs says:
    0
    0

    Typical European perspective. While a few Europeans were such visionaries in the past – i.e.  von Braun and Arthur C Clarke the fact that the continent has no grand commitment to space – even its Ariane investments are principally focused on making a buck – or Euro – and ESA gets like one quarter of what NASA gets annually even before their budget crisis. Lets hope the Germans win the battle over investing in the ATV to support Orion but I would not be surprised if the French win and dump more into the Ariane rat hole.

  20. JadedObs says:
    0
    0

    And I’d also observe that here we have an Austrian national musing about the need for a dictatorship to get things done. hmmm, what other Austrian thought this was a good idea? (and no, it’s not Arnold!)

  21. Joseph Cooper says:
    0
    0

    Ahahahaaahahahahaha, dictatorship.

    I think we’ve learned something instructive about the effects of supersonic jumps on the brain.

  22. objose says:
    0
    0

    Keith, I was surprised by your comments regarding Australian criticism of US space priorities. Especially since this forum is known for its criticism of US space priorities. It took me a while to understand how seriously you take your headline definition for this site: “It’s YOUR space agency.”  You are right. It is ours. If we want to send rats to Uranus, neither Patrick Stewart or Felix or anyone else should be part of the conversation. Well spoken. Signed: US tax payer

  23. Christopher says:
    0
    0

    How do you have a moderate dictatorship?  Isn’t that like being “a little pregnant”?

    • JadedObs says:
      0
      0

      And of course, if it starts to get out of control, the “body politic” has ways to shut it down naturally… 😉

  24. Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    Usual nitpicking on NASA, the Right says it is a waste of taxpayer money and the Left says there’s better ways to spend taxpayer money. However, both are silent on other govt and private programs at govt expense (which many are far larger expenditures).

  25. hikingmike says:
    0
    0

    I think it’s kind of hilarious that he brought up the Austrian governator Schwarzenegger as if that was the only hope our country had. (Because he’s Austrian too?) Felix should become a citizen if he wants to give opinions on how our country should work. I invite him in actually. Otherwise his comments seem in poor taste. Does he know how our country was founded, and how all that stuff back then shaping how government works still is vital today? Sure there are arguments there to be made on the disadvantages of democracy, especially for specific things, but he really backs the idea of a moderate dictatorship?

    Everytime I hear the argument that we should fix our problems at home first, I’m reminded of the web video from the vlogbrothers about the James Webb Space Telescope and how we should sometimes focus on “increasing the awesome” rather than always “decreasing the suck”.
    http://www.youtube.com/watc

  26. bobhudson54 says:
    0
    0

    Seems Baumgartner has become disgruntled with NASA’s refusal to support his  project and is now “voicing” his opinions over it. Words of advice: get over it! 

  27. Dr. Brian Chip Birge says:
    0
    0

    This nonsense that we go to Mars to understand Earth as the primary reason needs to stop. Sure, it’s valid, it’s important, etc. But the reason to go is to escape the bonds of the Earth as a species. At least it should be the reason, recognized and not ridiculed. The science folks that hold the community accepted views on Mars thinking don’t like it but the best way to get their science funded long term is to support a robust manned program that is far ranging and future looking and works hand in hand with the robotics push.

    And yeah, Baumgartner is an idiot and either has an agenda here or is completely uneducated about space exploration or both.