I feel very sorry for Charles Arthur ("A waste of space", 4 December) in that he can only see investment in the International Space Station (ISS) in terms of money. I doubt whether many of those schoolchildren will ever be as inspired by investments in stocks and shares as much as by the space programme.
He admits that Mars Surveyor was a "spectacular success" but then goes on to say it showed Mars to be a "dead, cold, rocky desert". So what? A negative result in science is as good as a positive one.
Nasa's annual budget (around $14bn the last time I looked) is a relatively small part of the US government's spending, considerably smaller than social security, housing and defence.
It is those with vision, big ideas and dreams that alter our world and not those that sit and criticise.Reuse content