Poll: Do you support federal funding of science?

[Darwin333]

We're not talking only science here, we're talking Government funding of it. Without proper oversight money is distributed based on political connections, social connections,alma maters, political supporters, old boys networks and political payoffs that have nothing to do with where the money is needed and where it would make the greatest benefit for the money spent. Come on folks we're talking the Federal Government here, be realistic.

And despite all of that you and I are communicating because of one of their successes. On this specific topic, does the good outweigh the bad?

 

[Fenixgoon]

yes. some research topics simply require funding available typically only to governments.

 

[monovillage]

And despite all of that you and I are communicating because of one of their successes. On this specific topic, does the good outweigh the bad?

In this and many other points Government funding of science is a good thing, what i'm trying to stress with Pres. Eisenhower's warning is that oversight and control are imperative to keep spending in control.

 

[rudder]

"Real" science? Maybe.
Spending $71,000 to study the effects of cocaine on monkeys? No.

Spending money on research for the simple reason of spending stimulus funds and senators getting budget earmarks for local universities... nope.

However, we live in a world with things like ebola, anthrax, influenza and it becomes a matter of public safety.

blah, blah, blah, but i thought conservatives hate big governments. Well there are some things the government needs to handle rather than private industry (Air traffic control for instance). There is stuff the government does not need to be involved in (competing with Fedex and UPS with overnight express service for instance). The government needs to be involved in medical research for national security reasons.

So if the OP means funding any research by the government, the answer is yes. If the OP means funding private research, then maybe, if it has national security implications. If the OP means spending money trying to figure out what gay drunk people in brazil are at risk for AIDS... hell no.

 

[bamacre]

Where do you think universities get money for research?

Where the hell do you think government gets money?

Yeah, two can play this game.

 

[evident]

"Real" science? Maybe.
Spending $71,000 to study the effects of cocaine on monkeys? No.

do you think having volcano monitors on active volcanos is a waste of money as well? but then when your state has a crap ton of environmental problems come begging for the fed to help?

 

[JSt0rm]

do you think...

the dude doesn't think. He is a ideological sock puppet.

 

[ShawnD1]

Well there are some things the government needs to handle rather than private industry (Air traffic control for instance).

Air traffic control in Canada is handled by a private company called Nav Canada. It works ok

 

[wirelessenabled]

I support funding but we need to get away from funding mostly military research which is mostly engineering.

No basic research means no products in the 20-30 year future. You can only engineer basic research findings so far before you need to start over with something else.

For example we are approaching the physical limits of silicon based processors. Only basic research can show the way to a replacement, engineering can't.

 

[Cogman]

For example we are approaching the physical limits of silicon based processors. Only basic research can show the way to a replacement, engineering can't.

Ummm. No.

This is one place where the government should NOT be investing research. Both intel and AMD have very strong invested interests in finding a silicon alternative. Basic research nothing, they have teams and teams of chemical/material scientists working on trying to find a new solution/new material that will allow them to go father (graphene perhaps). That requires more then just basic "You hook this wire to this!" sort of advancements. Heck, the advancements in Lithography alone from both AMD and Intel are really quite impressive.

And it really isn't just AMD and Intel that have a strong vested interest in the future of microprocessing. Pretty much everyone that deals in silicon is looking for the next silver bullet material.

Where there is already big corporate interest, the government need not get involved. It is research into less lucrative ventures that the government should be investing its money (IE Nuclear research, quantum physics, ect). Its role should be "Discover what would otherwise be left undiscovered by the capitalist market" as far as research goes.

 

[soccerballtux]

It must have been horrible living in the days before federally funded science - everyone hated progress, everyone wanted to remain living in caves hunting bears with nothing but their two hands.

It was a blessing upon mankind when the federal government finally stepped in and said "Let There be Science!" and there was science.

Yeah, that was back when everyone loved congress.

 

[ShawnD1]

[processor engineering] is one place where the government should NOT be investing research. Both intel and AMD have very strong invested interests in finding a silicon alternative.

Cogman nailed it. The government doesn't need to fund that because it's already extremely well funded by private companies.

Government money should go to things that would otherwise not be funded. I already gave the example of drug companies putting enormous amounts of research into anti-viral drugs, so that's something the government doesn't need to fund. Drug companies do not attempt to cure or prevent anything, so that's a good place to start throwing money. Do we have a vaccine that prevents HIV from happening in the first place? If not, we should probably put some research into that.

 

[Fern]

Devil's advocate: private funding and tuition... obviously it would be a drop compared to federal funding.

No.

Private sector funding is quite substantial and go into the billions. There are large investments by venture capital firms, then add to that IPO's etc.

Link:

http://www.bionomicfuel.com/the-alt...nvest-billions-in-the-second-quarter-of-2010/

------------------------

Do you support federal funding of science?

Yes, but think it should be directed into areas that are the fed gov's responsibility, e.g., NASA, military, infrastructure.

(Of course, now-a-days the gov is into so many aspects that one could argue that any science project met that parameter.)

Fern