From: art@world.std.com (Al Thompson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Democrat == Loony Left??? (was Re: Christiani
Date: 5 Jan 93 07:28:59 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

In article <C0BFny.9Fx@unix.portal.com> mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz) writes:

   Al Thompson (art@world.std.com) wrote:
   : In article <C09FtM.6Ar@unix.portal.com> mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz) writes:
   : 
   :    Dr. Norman J. LaFave (lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov) wrote:
   :    : In article <C03q6D.J6y@unix.portal.com> mike myke schwartz,
   :    : mykes@shell.portal.com writes:
   :    : >Dr. Norman J. LaFave (lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov) wrote:
   :    : >: In article <C00z4x.8Ln@unix.portal.com> mike myke schwartz,
   :    : >: mykes@shell.portal.com writes:
   :    : >: >Jay Denebeim P025 (denebeim@brtph254.bnr.ca) wrote:
   :    : >: >: In article <1992Dec17.172656.27110@technology.com>
   :    : judy@technology.com
   :    : >: (Judy 
   :    : >: >McMillin) writes:
   :    : >: >
   :    : >: >NOT quite as rosey as you make it out to be...
   :    : >: > 
   :    : >: >: 1) The space program has always paid for itself by the worth of the
   :    : >: >:    technologies developed for it.  A very few are:
   :    : >: >:    a) Microelectronics without which we wouldn't even be talking.
   :    : >: >
   :    : >: >AT&T, the PHONE company (as opposed to a space technology company)
   :    : >: >invented the transistor.  Microelectronics would have happened without
   :    : >: >the space program.  DEFENSE technology had much more to do with all
   :    : >: >of the stuff you talk about here and even the space program itself.
   :    : >: 
   :    : >: And the space program was intimately involved in the development of the
   :    : >: integrated circuit. So what is your point?
   :    : >: 
   :    : >
   :    : >NOT quite as rosey as you make it out to be...
   :    : 
   :    : Oh, how so? The statement was made above that AT&T caused the
   :    : microelectronic evolution and the space program had nothing to do
   :    : with it. That is fallacious.
   :    : 
   : 
   :    Read again.  There are two false assertions above:
   :    1)	Without the space program, there would be no microelectronics
   :    2)	That anyone made the statement that AT&T caused the microelectronic
   : 	   revolution and the space program had nothing to do with it.
   : 
   :    The assertion 1) was made, and simply proven false.  Without NASA we would
   :    have microelectronics.
   : 
   : Whether or not we would have had microelectronics without NASA is not at
   : issue.  The indisputable fact is that it was NASA's willingness to buy
   : microelectonic components at any price that brought microelectronics into
   : the consumer market place.  This is amply documented.  For openers I
   : suggest you look at "The Chip" by T.R. Reid.
   : 

   I suggest you look at the United States budget for the last 20 years and see
   what the government has been spending money on.  The military budget for 1988
   was 10x what NASA's was.  Which costs more, an aircraft carrier or a moonshot?
   Didn't you see any of the video tape on TV during the gulf war?  The stealth
   bomber has zero technology in it, right?  To assert that NASA earned its keep
   by driving microchip technology is false.

Wrong again.  The fact is that the crucial investments in chip technology
were made in the 1950's and 1960's, not the last twenty years.  Of course
the assertion is not that NASA earned its keep by driving chip technology
but that it was the agency whose needs paid for the development of the
invention more than any other.  Comparing the military budget with NASA's
and then concluding that the larger is the one that drove the technology
is illogical.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:67182 talk.politics.drugs:8116