[thesmart]

You can't really compare them because SLS was a jobs program intended to spread out contracts across many states by reusing suppliers from shuttle programs. Cheap? No. Wasteful? also no. Most of that money went back into those economies.

[Ajedi32]

That's not how it works. If you pay people to dig a giant hole in the ground and then fill it back in, that money "goes back into the economy" but that doesn't mean it's not wasteful.

[marcusverus]

> Wasteful? also no. Most of that money went back into those economies.

If the government 100B to dig a big hole and fill it up again, that money would also "go back into those economies". Does that mean it wouldn't be wasteful?

[chermi]

Ahh, much like the economy has grown so much because the government gave people money and shovel to dig and refill holes. Went back into the economy, must've been a good move. Let's not bother considering what else could've been done with the money.

[jjk166]

The money could have gone into those economies while also securing a productive accomplishment (or more productive accomplishments depending on your opinion of SLS). Factories could have been retooled and workers could have been retrained to produce things of greater value instead of deliberately keeping them obsolete. It's still wasteful even if not completely useless.