Obama wants more money for science and technology
President Obama wants to devote 3% of GDP to scientific innovation. Obama claims his administration would double the budgets of key agencies such as the National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Now, who can argue with science? We all agree that science, research, and technology are vital aspects of human civilization. However, several, key questions should be considered.
Read more
Doesn’t the free market know better which research and development products consumers want and need? Or does government know better?
Couldn’t government intervention stifle private investment and competition?
Why doesn’t government cut taxes or provide other incentives to private outlets as well? Aren’t science foundations in the private sector just as worthy?
Will government sponsored science programs thwart critical analysis, objective critique, and thoughtful opposition in the name of “consensus”?
Who will police government oversight of scientific innovation?
What set of criteria will the government apply when assessing the success or failure of federally funded science programs? Will there be specific benchmarks and specific timelines?
How can government afford to increase federal funding when it’s running a nearly $2 trillion budget deficit? Will it cut other programs to make up the massive shortfall?
Is this even constitutional? Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that Congress has the authority to promote the progress of science and useful arts, only by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.
What are some of your thoughts and questions?
Read the article here.
Jim Fraser said:
The federal government does not “do” science very well.
One Federal Gov’t Department that I am familiar with is the Army Corps of Engineers(ACOE)(The agency that designed the New Orleans levees as one example of many boondoggles they have been a part of). They are Bureacratic and inefficient.
An example of how the ACOE works can be given by the following example.
Lets say the ACOE is asked how to fix a slightly flat tire on a car. The 50 department heads get together and ponder this problem. They all agree if they could get the car moving real fast, it would heat the air in the tire, causing it to expand. Since the 50 department heads have different ideas on how to make the car go real fast they decide to use all ideas. Slick carbureators, new exhaust system, racing cam shafts, a racing head etc, etc are used to make the car go real fast. It works but now has other problems since the engine has blown. The 50 department heads now get together to tackle this problem.
Would it have been better to simply add more air to the tire? But then again the ACOE would have had less to do to justify their jobs.
And now the Federal Gov’t is going to get more involved in scientific research. I expect the first order of business is designing pieces of paper that do not produce “paper cuts”.
April 27th, 2009 at 9:41 am
Thomas Sbrega said:
Scientific advances have always been secured through government funding. It wasn’t just the atomic bomb. War is priority, for the “safety of the nation” we are told, therefore advanced technology is discovered or usurped from the private sector scientists (think Nicola Tesla). Knowing that we have secret advanced technology (since this is a brief response I’ll resist siting sources, as those of you who know this need no convincing and those who do not I cannot convince in a paragraph), the real question is: What will they really use this $$$$ for?
April 27th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Susan Ritz said:
Science + politics = politics
April 28th, 2009 at 9:36 pm