4 ms·

*taxpayer funded research Government doesn't do shit, except write the check. this all comes from acadamia, nasa, darpa, etc. You're point that science is pu

*taxpayer funded research Government doesn't do shit, except write the check. this all comes from acadamia, nasa, darpa, etc. You're point that science is pushed forward by people pooling resources is absolutely correct, I just want to make it clear that Government has very little to do with it. This is just societ bolstering the resources of our greatest minds.

tw04 10y ago
>Government doesn't do shit >nasa, darpa I don't think you understand...
- wheelerwj 10y ago
  They are government funded but have exactly nothing to do with governance. They could be privately funded and accomplish the exact same things.
  - MPSimmons 10y ago
    In a mathematical sense, yes, every citizen who gives a certain amount of tax money to the government to pay for research bodies could, instead, give money straight to some sort of central body to distribute it to the same various groups. But they wouldn't. And you know it. Even the Science Philanthropy Alliance (http://www.sciencephilanthropyalliance.org/what-we-do/resources/faqs/ http://www.sciencephilanthropyalliance.org/what-we-do/resour...), which funds researchers using privately-donated money, says that taxes are necessary to have scientific progress.
    - wheelerwj 10y ago
      I didn't say anything IF taxes were important or IF people's WOULD pay them. And yes, we are talking about semantics (mathematical sense). People couldn't give money to the DoD and accomplish the same thing, nor could they give money to DHS or any of the other Executive Departments. NASA is an independent, federally funded, civilian agency. The part of it that is Federal, is its budget.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
SEJeff 10y ago
What do you think NASA and DARPA are exactly, private companies? They're both part of the federal government.
- wheelerwj 10y ago
  Sort of, yes. Neither one of them are actually PART of the federal government. They are separate, independent organizations whose largest (and probably exclusive) customer is the United States government. NASA for example doesn't actually rollup to any cabinet position. As opposed to the Department of Energy or Department of Education for example.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    > Neither one of them are actually PART of the federal government. Indeed they are. Their budgets are paid for by taxpayers and established by laws passed in Congress and signed by the President. Their employees are federal employees, AFAIK. > NASA for example doesn't actually rollup to any cabinet position. The agencies report to the President, whatever the org chart is. The President chooses their administrators, and directs their operations (assuming she/he has time and interest). DAPRA is in the Department of Defense. Finally, I believe the CIA was an independent agency, like NASA, before the DNI was created about a decade ago. Was the CIA not actually part of the U.S. federal government?
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - CalChris 10y ago
    The NASA Administrator, Charlie Bolden, was nominated by President Obama and confirmed by the United States Senate. NASA is not part of any department but rather reports directly to the President of the United States. https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/hqlibrary/ic/faqs.html https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/hqlibrary/ic/faqs.html DARPA is part of a department, the United States Department of Defense. http://www.darpa.mil/ http://www.darpa.mil/ Both NASA and DARPA are as Federal as Federal gets and as govmint as govmint gets. Full disclosure: my daddy worked for NASA on Mercury thru Apollo. He worked for the govmint.
ceejayoz 10y ago
> This is just societ bolstering the resources of our greatest minds. Via government.
- wheelerwj 10y ago
  The funding is provided by the people VIA government. But the government doesn't participate in its administration nor does NASA participate in the execution of the Constitution. There are A LOT of independent agencies that are owned or otherwise funded by the federal government but they do not participate in governance, and because of that, they are not PART of the federal government.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    > they do not participate in governance, and because of that, they are not PART of the federal government. The military does not participate in governance, by law. Is the U.S. military not part of the U.S. government? What about intelligence agencies? It's an interesting definition, but I'm not sure that many people will accept it.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - scott_s 10y ago
    NASA employees are federal civil servants. You are trying to make a distinction that is not supported by the federal bureaucracy.
jrcii 10y ago
He made a small mistake, GET HIM! Everyone licks their lips His examples of academia and DARPA were correct. The mentality of people here who can't wait to pile on and attack someone at the slightest error is sickening.

tw04 10y ago

>Government doesn't do shit >nasa, darpa I don't think you understand...

wheelerwj 10y ago
They are government funded but have exactly nothing to do with governance. They could be privately funded and accomplish the exact same things.
- MPSimmons 10y ago
  In a mathematical sense, yes, every citizen who gives a certain amount of tax money to the government to pay for research bodies could, instead, give money straight to some sort of central body to distribute it to the same various groups. But they wouldn't. And you know it. Even the Science Philanthropy Alliance (http://www.sciencephilanthropyalliance.org/what-we-do/resources/faqs/ http://www.sciencephilanthropyalliance.org/what-we-do/resour...), which funds researchers using privately-donated money, says that taxes are necessary to have scientific progress.
  - wheelerwj 10y ago
    I didn't say anything IF taxes were important or IF people's WOULD pay them. And yes, we are talking about semantics (mathematical sense). People couldn't give money to the DoD and accomplish the same thing, nor could they give money to DHS or any of the other Executive Departments. NASA is an independent, federally funded, civilian agency. The part of it that is Federal, is its budget.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]

SEJeff 10y ago

What do you think NASA and DARPA are exactly, private companies? They're both part of the federal government.

wheelerwj 10y ago
Sort of, yes. Neither one of them are actually PART of the federal government. They are separate, independent organizations whose largest (and probably exclusive) customer is the United States government. NASA for example doesn't actually rollup to any cabinet position. As opposed to the Department of Energy or Department of Education for example.
- hackuser 10y ago
  > Neither one of them are actually PART of the federal government. Indeed they are. Their budgets are paid for by taxpayers and established by laws passed in Congress and signed by the President. Their employees are federal employees, AFAIK. > NASA for example doesn't actually rollup to any cabinet position. The agencies report to the President, whatever the org chart is. The President chooses their administrators, and directs their operations (assuming she/he has time and interest). DAPRA is in the Department of Defense. Finally, I believe the CIA was an independent agency, like NASA, before the DNI was created about a decade ago. Was the CIA not actually part of the U.S. federal government?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- CalChris 10y ago
  The NASA Administrator, Charlie Bolden, was nominated by President Obama and confirmed by the United States Senate. NASA is not part of any department but rather reports directly to the President of the United States. https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/hqlibrary/ic/faqs.html https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/hqlibrary/ic/faqs.html DARPA is part of a department, the United States Department of Defense. http://www.darpa.mil/ http://www.darpa.mil/ Both NASA and DARPA are as Federal as Federal gets and as govmint as govmint gets. Full disclosure: my daddy worked for NASA on Mercury thru Apollo. He worked for the govmint.

ceejayoz 10y ago

> This is just societ bolstering the resources of our greatest minds. Via government.

wheelerwj 10y ago
The funding is provided by the people VIA government. But the government doesn't participate in its administration nor does NASA participate in the execution of the Constitution. There are A LOT of independent agencies that are owned or otherwise funded by the federal government but they do not participate in governance, and because of that, they are not PART of the federal government.
- hackuser 10y ago
  > they do not participate in governance, and because of that, they are not PART of the federal government. The military does not participate in governance, by law. Is the U.S. military not part of the U.S. government? What about intelligence agencies? It's an interesting definition, but I'm not sure that many people will accept it.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- scott_s 10y ago
  NASA employees are federal civil servants. You are trying to make a distinction that is not supported by the federal bureaucracy.

jrcii 10y ago

He made a small mistake, GET HIM! Everyone licks their lips His examples of academia and DARPA were correct. The mentality of people here who can't wait to pile on and attack someone at the slightest error is sickening.