Slashdot Mirror
Obama Says 3% of GDP Should Fund Science Research And Development
tritonman writes "Obama wants to set a goal that the US spend 3% of its GDP on scientific research and development. 'I believe it is not in our character, American character, to follow — but to lead. And it is time for us to lead once again. I am here today to set this goal: we will devote more than 3 percent of our GDP to research and development,' Obama said in a speech at the annual meeting of the National Academy of Sciences."
You mean like Merck? I agree, we can't trust them. http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/25/1626200&from=rss
FTA:
In recent years, he said, "scientific integrity has been undermined and scientific research politicized in an effort to advance predetermined ideological agendas." He then drew chuckles, commenting: "I want to be sure that facts are driving scientific decisions, not the other way around," Obama said.
hope none of the 420$ billion makes it's way towards the discovery institute.
They don't understand the future value of sending someone to the moon, or studying basic science of bird mating habits, or increasing blue laser efficiency 10% and how it eventually becomes useful. He just wants a job he can report to, and won't think about the future. Nevermind that his job might become outdated in 5 years...
It would be nice if the media would stop glorifying athletes, and stop portraying scientists/engineers/academics as nerds or evil.
..........FULL STOP.
2.6% The EU's goal is 3%, too.
This post climbed Mt. Washington.
I would like to think they are making this decision because someone finally realized that money doesn't actually grow on trees.
While this sounds like a good idea, I worked for a while at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. It was the poster child of government waste. Most of the funding we received was from the DOE and the DOD. Back in its hay-day the INEL was a front runner in nuclear research. Now its a money-pit. 2/3rds of all grant money is skimmed off the top for "overhead" (pays for buildings, security, office space, etc). To make matters worse, each engineer/scientist has a billable rate. This billable rate is again 2/3rds overhead. Half of your time goes to writing grants to get more money. Very few people there were doing actual science. It was very sad for me to experience directly after getting my degree.
The INEL is not alone in its current state. People I worked with from other labs have similar or worse horror stories.
I understand the desire, I just don't have enough confidence in our government to not botch it up.
Unless you want to pit your galleys against Aztec ironclads you'll want an R&D of 20% until you get infantry and artillery. After that you can dial it down to 10% and focus on production.
If you didn't come to party don't bother knocking on my door. Prince '1999'
The need to find newer, faster, and more efficient ways to kill people has always been a phenomenal "mother of invention"
All very true, largely because the military has always had an extremely large budget with which to fund research related to its goals.
Now, imagine what our scientists and engineers could do with that same budget, but also with a directive to use it in the areas that will best help our country. I think we would likely get an even better return on our investment if we were actually trying for those benefits, as opposed to just developing weapons and occasionally finding that the same research happens to have constructive uses as well.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
no.
Corporations only research things that will potentially make them money. Therefore, some things, like rare diseases, will never be researched. Individuals in academics will research it, but they need grant money in order to do so.
How about we stop runnaway spending and reduce the national debt. All five of the last presidents have had this idea that we can just spend to our hearts content. We are dangerously close to the point that the rest of the world will say enough is enough and stop buying our debt. When this happens, we as Americans will be in a world of Sh!t.
Agreed. Let's start with the biggest tax drain of all: military budget.
In other words, our children and grandchildren should pay for technological advances that make our lives easier.
More like their lives easier. Research is slow process - it takes years, maybe decades for an idea to progress from the sketching board to store shelves.
3% of GDP on "scientific R&D" doesn't mean 3% of GDP on grant funded projects, it means getting corporations and the private sector to get back to the kind of investments they made in the early days of Bell labs...
Does the public get any payback if research develops the Next Big Thing? Nope, the scientist goes off, gets a patent and gets wildly personally wealthy.
That would explain why all the kids these days want to grow up to be a wealthy scientist, rather than a pro athlete, rapper, or movie star. Stupid science, stealing our best minds!
I am not a crackpot.
removing money from the economy that would be invested by the people who earned it in things that are productive and worth investment
So you think science R&D is unproductive and not worth investment? We've got weather satellites and star trek tech, no thanks to your kind.
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
Actually, it should, if you go by what the Parties say. Democrats have long been known as "tax and spend"; they're famous for wanting big government programs. Of course, it's still possible to have a balanced budget by simply raising taxes to pay for this.
But the Republicans have long painted themselves as "fiscally responsible", "small government", "low taxes", etc. However, the 8 years of Bush have shown us that that's a lie: when the Republicans were in control, we got BIGGER government, and ridiculous deficit spending (not fiscally responsible).
So what it boils down to is that the Republicans, by their actions, have proven that they firmly believe in deficit spending, that we can borrow an endless amount of money for whatever our government wants to do. So yes, party allegiance makes a difference: if they're Republicans, they simply don't believe in following a budget.
The problem isn't science R&D, it's taking money from other worthwhile and productive investments in order to create an appearance
you mean like the manattan project? the apollo project? Nasa?
practically everything that makes our modern life modern stemmed from research in government labs, and at least 50%+ from the space program.
Are you going to tell me "girls gone wild" is worthwhile and productive? because a lot of money goes into making those vids and the commercials for them. How about all the R&D being put into more efficiently off-shoring exceedingly higher skilled jobs?
Economics does not have a "goal" of efficiency any more than nuclear physics has a "goal" of producing the biggest, most powerful bomb possible. It needs to be leveraged to the benefit of humanity.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
US R&D only seems to make money for China these days
Seeing as the government does not make a damn thing, the only way they're getting that money is from taxes. Either by increasing our taxes now, or by increasing taxes on future generations.
I see idiocy like this is rampant in the USA.
They don't make a damn thing? You mean, like the roads that you drove on the way to work? Or the legal system that protects you? Or the police that jail the bad guy who didn't carjack you today on the way to work? Or the licensing policies for the radio station that you listened to on the way to work? What about the 13 years of education that you got so that you could LAND the job that you went to this morning? Or the excellent college system that you went to if you are a "white collar" worker?
In the United States, government is so pervasive and so good at enabling the creation of wealth that many members of the population don't bother to think about it, and rail on it like it's some parasite. "I don't need no damned gubbmint!" But the truth is that every single American benefits from almost half a MILLION dollars in embedded infrastructure: roads, schools, libraries, jails, courthouses, telephone/telecommunications, power etc.
Is it just ignorance that makes people treat their gift of such incredible wealth so poorly? It's really sad, too, because if we don't properly understand and support the true role of our government, we'll fail to keep it and then we all lose. And we *ARE* losing: education is chronically underfunded and new student test scores are abysmal, with the result being that we jail a higher percentage of our population than any other "first world" country.
Rather than develop a sane approach to the Internet as public infrastructure, we've instead relied on private enterprise to elevate our status from first to near last among industrialized nations in broadband penetration.
Welcome to life without effective govt!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Are you going to tell me "girls gone wild" is worthwhile and productive?
Only the first few minutes, then it gets boring and annoying, plus you question whether it's normal to become bored with boobs so quickly.
Which makes sense.
If you're free from your employer supplied healthcare plan capitalism can flourish. Suddenly everybody becomes a free agent able to start their own competitive business.
The risk of creating your own business and going it alone is dramatically reduced. You don't have to literally wory about dieing and or going completely bankrupt for life because you quit your job.
Large projects still need large groups of people. But many tasks can be accomplished by smaller businesses which aren't able to compete with the insurance pool of a larger company. Universal healthcare is a boon for capitalism. Calling it socialist is incredibly short sighted by unimaginative people looking for political gain.