 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: "all the way over on the West Coast"
Posts: 1,032
|
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: "all the way over on the West Coast"
Posts: 1,032
|
two things
1. Wondering if comparing state funding of research in the UK and the US possible (apples to oranges or not?) because I don't know how the UK works.
2. Rick, you said, "About 30 years ago, the US was sold on the idea that the State should not be spending tax dollars on research and that the private sector could do better. That turned out to be ideological slop and we are paying the price."
Wondering how you can back this up. One of the reasons dropping stem cell research from the NIH agenda was such a big deal was the loss of money that couldn't possibly be made up by the private sector (government research dollars traditionally fund R&D projects before they are transferred to industry in the profit-making phase) . In fact, Bill Gates once said that the US government was the biggest venture capitalist in the world.
Now, whether all that government research money has been well spent is another question entirely. But I didn't think the amount of money was in question.
__________________
Carey
“Cautious, careful people, always casting about to preserve their reputation and social standing, never can bring about a reform. Those who are really in earnest must be willing to be anything or nothing in the world’s estimation, and publicly and privately, in season and out, avow their sympathy with despised and persecuted ideas and their advocates, and bear the consequences.” — Susan B. Anthony
|