In a message dated 10/14/02 4:32:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > With the widespread intrusion of the federal government into the lives and > business of everyone, it might be fruitful to consider a spectrum of research > spanning the gamut from purely private to purely governmental rather than > considering just the two extremes. > > David Levenstam > GMU > On the other hand, if there really is a trend of increasing scientific value-added as one goes from totally public to totally private research, then would it not be beneficial to all concerned--science, government, industry, consumers--to eliminate all government funding of scienfic research? I am not convinced that this is the case, but, as they say, stranger things have happened. We ought to look and see. ~Alypius Skinner >> I'm not suggesting that we forget about the issue of whether government funding of science is a good thing. I'm suggesting that we look at a spectrum rather than two polar opposites, on the contrary, specifically for the purpose of attempting to discern whether there's any correlation between more government and worse science. Even if we accept--as I'm inclined to--that government funding of science is a bad thing, that doesn't mean that ending government funding will benefit everyone. People whose bread is buttered on the side of government funding of science will certainly not benefit in their own eyes when they lose their funding. David Levenstam
