3 ms·
How much other science isn't funded because we spend far too much money on other stuff? I'm sick of seeing engineers and sciences fight over a penny and demeani
by cromwellian 11y ago
How much other science isn't funded because we spend far too much money on other stuff? I'm sick of seeing engineers and sciences fight over a penny and demeaning the importance of each other's projects while we spend trillions on wars and other nonsense.
If you want more funding for other science projects fight to increase science budgets overall by taking money from stuff we don't need like yet another aircraft carrier. How many science projects weren't under because of just one of those?
Due to the long term nature of science benefits it's impossible to know the real importance of any one project anyway.
- titzer 11y agoCannot +1 hard enough. The F-35 will eventually cost $1 trillion.
- brandonmenc 11y ago> The F-35 will eventually cost $1 trillion. Yeah, but for over half a century of procurement and use, and including all operating costs and inflation.
- akiselev 11y agoSo, the equivalent of over half a century of the DARPA budget ($3 billion/yr) five times over, or two National Science Foundations ($7 billion/year), or half of another National Institutes of Health ($30 billion/year). The NSF alone is responsible for over 20% of public nonmedical basic research in the United States so for the price of one boondoggle we can increase that total pool of funding by 50%. For over half a century. Or we could nearly double NASA's budget and give it an economy of scale it hasn't had since the Apollo program to carry out even more basic research into astrophysics, climate change and metrology, geophysics, flight, material science, and countless other technologies that actually trickle down into the public market