Global warming?

[Fair&Balanced]

The American Academy for the Advancement of Sciences has a brief report on the subject.

http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/presentat...rcanada908.pdf

Today, R&D funding is 1/3 government and 2/3 private, with the government spending in current dollars relatively flat for the last 30+ years. (see chart on page 5).

The report concludes: Current policy concerns
- Despite large industry investments in R&D, U.S. policymakers are concerned about the state of U.S. innovation and competitiveness.

- U.S. R&D/GDP ratio and other indicators are steady or declining, while other nations are growing (esp. Asian nations) -- (chart on page 7)

IMO, that is a bad trend for our long term economic competitiveness.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

The American Academy for the Advancement of Sciences has a brief report on the subject.

http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/presentat...rcanada908.pdf

Today, R&D funding is 1/3 government and 2/3 private, with the government spending in current dollars relatively flat for the last 30+ years. (see chart on page 5).

The report concludes: Current policy concerns
- Despite large industry investments in R&D, U.S. policymakers are concerned about the state of U.S. innovation and competitiveness.

- U.S. R&D/GDP ratio and other indicators are steady or declining, while other nations are growing (esp. Asian nations) -- (chart on page 7)

IMO, that is a bad trend for our long term economic competitiveness.

Typical Progressive response. Tax, Spend, and throw money at it! That will solve all our problems!

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Typical Progressive response. Tax, Spend, and throw money at it! That will solve all our problems!

Hardly a progressive response given that the US govt has been investing in R&D at a significant level since the 1950s, only leveling off in the Bush years to pay for a war and tax cuts that primarily benefit the top taxpayers.

You can ignore the economic impact, but that wont change the fact that in a global economy, if we dont invest, we dont compete on a level playing field.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

Hardly a progressive response given that the US govt has been investing in R&D at a significant level since the 1950s, only leveling off in the Bush years to pay for a war and tax cuts that primarily benefit the top taxpayers.

You can ignore the economic impact, but that wont change the fact that in a global economy, if we dont invest, we dont compete on a level playing field.

Sort of like the ponzi scheme of Cap and Trade? Rigggghttttt......

[Undertoad]

I have written a comprehensive reply, and anyone interested in substance over sniping can ask me for the URL for it via PM.

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

I have written a comprehensive reply, and anyone interested in substance over sniping can ask me for the URL for it via PM.

Meaning no disrespect, but why not discuss it publicly?

I dont think it would be sniping to ask you to explain this further:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

...Even by the 50s, government involvement in R&D was so unlikely that the March of Dimes was actually founded by FDR, but remained 100% privately funded as it solved the problem of Polio. Not one of those dimes came from government. They came from people giving dimes. That's just how it was.

Given that from the 1950s through the 1970s, the federal government funded more than 50% of R&D annually.



I think that is substantive and not sniping as is the fact that the total US R&D as percent of GDP has been flat for the last 20 years while Japan, Korea, and to a lesser extent Germany and even China (starting very far behind) are all increasing R&D spending as percent of GDP.