about government funded research....

[blu]

I have been reading opinions from different sides of the political spectrum about government funded research and I honestly can't come up with a simply 'yes' or 'no' about it.

obviously in a truly free market, the government wouldn't drive innovation, entrepreneurs would, so from that standpoint its pretty black and white...

on the other hand, if the government wasn't allowing private companies to bid competitively on government funded research/needs then it would be like the old days when all government R&D was done by the government and its employees. This of courses bloats the size of the government and completely removes the private sector from the equation.

So while I don't think the government has a right to spend billions a year on research, the fact will always remain that the government has a bunch of needs that it has to fill and I would rather it include the private sector in that process than do it all in-house.

what are other people's thoughts?

 

[uscitizen]

According to some private industry will do fine on it's own. Perhaps we need no govt funded research?

 

[kyzr]

According to some private industry will do fine on it's own. Perhaps we need no govt funded research?

I can see government funded research for only the most significant and most expensive improvements. I can provide a few examples:

1. military research and counter-measures
2. batteries for electric cars including disposal
3. nano-technology
4. HSR & HSR planning (long range transportation planning)
5. Developing a cost-effective energy policy, fusion-reactors?, breeder-reactors?, fuel-cells? etc.
6. Most importantly, the government needs to prevent important research from being done over-seas. We can't allow any research to be used against us. The new GE czar Jeff Immelt apparently loves new research facilities in China?!

But then after the patents are filed, the government needs to auction them to recoup some of the investment.

 

[whitehall]

Ambulance chasing litigators make millions because of mistakes made by the federal government. The government doesn't hire the best or the smartest people because the best people make more money in the private sector. The people we elect to set the rules aren't the smartest people either. Government research is based on funding by the government. If the government requires certain conclusions the conclusions will be promoted as long as the funding lasts. Global Warming research is a prime example.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Ambulance chasing litigators make millions because of mistakes made by the federal government. The government doesn't hire the best or the smartest people because the best people make more money in the private sector. The people we elect to set the rules aren't the smartest people either. Government research is based on funding by the government. If the government requires certain conclusions the conclusions will be promoted as long as the funding lasts. Global Warming research is a prime example.

I excused you earlier because you're new. Frankly, you're a moron. Sadly, you don't know how ignorant you really are. Pity really.

 

[Trajan]

I have been reading opinions from different sides of the political spectrum about government funded research and I honestly can't come up with a simply 'yes' or 'no' about it.

obviously in a truly free market, the government wouldn't drive innovation, entrepreneurs would, so from that standpoint its pretty black and white...

on the other hand, if the government wasn't allowing private companies to bid competitively on government funded research/needs then it would be like the old days when all government R&D was done by the government and its employees. This of courses bloats the size of the government and completely removes the private sector from the equation.

So while I don't think the government has a right to spend billions a year on research, the fact will always remain that the government has a bunch of needs that it has to fill and I would rather it include the private sector in that process than do it all in-house.

what are other people's thoughts?

I have no problem wiht gov. funded R&D, some of our and the worlds greatest minds have worked for or under the gov in gov. funded labs.

We operate 5 major national labs and a bunch of small ones. we allow most nations access to laboratories as long as they share their findings.

the private sector rents space in these labs btw.

 

[Flopper]

I have been reading opinions from different sides of the political spectrum about government funded research and I honestly can't come up with a simply 'yes' or 'no' about it.

obviously in a truly free market, the government wouldn't drive innovation, entrepreneurs would, so from that standpoint its pretty black and white...

on the other hand, if the government wasn't allowing private companies to bid competitively on government funded research/needs then it would be like the old days when all government R&D was done by the government and its employees. This of courses bloats the size of the government and completely removes the private sector from the equation.

So while I don't think the government has a right to spend billions a year on research, the fact will always remain that the government has a bunch of needs that it has to fill and I would rather it include the private sector in that process than do it all in-house.

what are other people's thoughts?

I have no problem wiht gov. funded R&D, some of our and the worlds greatest minds have worked for or under the gov in gov. funded labs.

We operate 5 major national labs and a bunch of small ones. we allow most nations access to laboratories as long as they share their findings.

the private sector rents space in these labs btw.

An advantage to government sponsored research is that the results are publicly shared, whereas with privately funded research the ideas are controlled by a single group.

Often government funded research is pure research for stake of increasing our knowledge without any specific economic gain. Businesses are reluctant to fund this type of research even though it has laid the foundations that have change our way of life.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Industry tends to fund research that improves existing technology, government tends to fund research that creates new technologies. Throughout history, the truly break through stuff has always been done by folks getting government funding, or working on their own without any funding from either business or government.

Folks tend to forget that military funding for research especially tends to reap huge rewards. We are still getting freaking benefits from the Space race for heavens sakes.

 

[Sheldon]

I remember reading that the cellphone and laptop and sunglasses all came from military R&D. I've got no problem with government-funded research or grants, in principle.

 

[whitehall]

Ambulance chasing litigators make millions because of mistakes made by the federal government. The government doesn't hire the best or the smartest people because the best people make more money in the private sector. The people we elect to set the rules aren't the smartest people either. Government research is based on funding by the government. If the government requires certain conclusions the conclusions will be promoted as long as the funding lasts. Global Warming research is a prime example.

I excused you earlier because you're new. Frankly, you're a moron. Sadly, you don't know how ignorant you really are. Pity really.

Kiddie school insult stuff is typical of the left these days. Why take the name of a book carried by two political assassins? Same agenda and little intelligence?

 

[gekaap]

An advantage to government sponsored research is that the results are publicly shared, whereas with privately funded research the ideas are controlled by a single group.

Often government funded research is pure research for stake of increasing our knowledge without any specific economic gain. Businesses are reluctant to fund this type of research even though it has laid the foundations that have change our way of life.

This. With private research all the findings are private. If the development of internal electrical wiring had come a private source unwilling to share its findings, they could have potentially controlled it so much that there would be no such thing today as electricians, except those from a single company holding the patents. Hell, you can't even take your cell phone with you to a new service provider because they're designed to work only for the company from whom you bought it.

 

[Rat in the Hat]