316
Trump administration reportedly planning to fire 2,145 NASA employees
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2025
316 points (98.5% liked)
News
30904 readers
3164 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Let’s say it’s $250,000 on average for these employees base pay + benefits. That’s about half a billion in savings.
Which is ~~0.0016%~~ 0.016% of the $3Trillion dollars in debt the MAGAs just approved. So this basically saves us nothing and only hurts our ability to invest in technological innovation.
What a bunch of dumb fucks.
But but... If every NASA employee is fired, we'll have 0.00001% of the money we need to buy Greenland.
It's way, way worse than. When you spend money at NASA you aren't just setting it on fire, those salaries support everything that the people who work there spend money on in their personal lives. It pays local taxes. It supports the salaries of workers in the local communities (I don't mean where NASA buildings are either, that money goes to all 50 states). It also mostly gets spent issuing contracts to the fabricators that make the things for NASA. It pays salaries at Northrup, Lockheed, Boeing etc. There are also all the drivers pushing the advancement of industry and education and their knock-on effects that come from leading the world in aerospace science and engineering.
And the real kick in the pants: all of those things together GENERATE TAX REVENUE. Even if, for some insanely immoral and degenerate reason, you wanted to ignore the ways that NASA makes the world a better place--when viewed through a purely fiscal lens the money spent at NASA generates more in tax revenue downstream than it costs to run NASA. When you cut their budget like this you aren't reducing the debt/deficit, you're increasing it.
And don’t forget that NASA research has lead directly to, or helped to enhance things like:
And so on…
I still feel like that’s an overestimation. I have worked there in the past, and the best and brightest often are because they’re passionate people. They tend to get undervalued and taken advantage of because of that passion.
MAGA Nazis can't do math. The truth is what they declare it to be.
Being pedantic about a good point, but I'm pretty sure you have an extra zero in that percentage. 0.016% of 3 trillion is 480 million, 0.0016% is 48 million