Given the mountains of evidence for the economic evidence of science funding, it baffles me how little we spend on the NSF. Their entire annual budget is a measly $7 billion. NASA, at least is not doing so bad, and have seen an increase in public support and funding. The NSF, unfortunately, is a much more behind-the-scenes bureaucratic organization, and doesn't have sexy images of Martian sunsets and Plutonian topography to generate PR. Yet I would argue their work is much more essential, as the academic breakthroughs of today create the game-changing technologies of the future. The most depressing part is that we even have a surplus of PhD's who would make good use of NSF funds.