3 ms·

Yes, for instance, the NSF's budget has been static in nominal terms since the Bush years (or at least that's what the program manager told me the last time.i w

Yes, for instance, the NSF's budget has been static in nominal terms since the Bush years (or at least that's what the program manager told me the last time.i was on a panel). Getting a grant, especially for young researchers looking to establish a track record, is very difficult in this environment.

rsj_hn 8y ago
OK, but the NSF research budget (7 billion) is small potatoes compared to the NIH (37 Billion per year), and DOD (70 Billion). And it's about the same as the Department of Energy (7 Billion, not including the national labs). There is plethora of other Federal agencies that fund research, such as the EPA, NIST, NASA, Federal Aviation Administration, Food and Drug Administration, even the Bureau of Land Management is in on the act. The VA funds research in prosthetics. The Health and Human Services department (including CDC) funds research. As best I can tell, total Federal outlays for research are about 120 Billion. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ap_18_research-fy2019.pdf https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ap_18_...
- tacomonstrous 8y ago
  >but the NSF research budget (7 billion) is small potatoes compared to the NIH Exactly! And they are the main organization for funding non-medical basic science in the nation.
  - rsj_hn 8y ago
    I see, so is your argument not that we need more total federal dollars for research, but that they should be shifted away from the other organizations and towards the NSF?
- hedvig 8y ago
  Where does that funding come from? Why, your pocket. Imagine if the 1% who pays the 50% of that had that money back, how much better our society would be.
rsj_hn 8y ago
Now, I must revise and extend my remarks. I found this site: https://www.aaas.org/page/historical-trends-federal-rd https://www.aaas.org/page/historical-trends-federal-rd From which you can download R&D spending as a percent of GDP in an excel spreadsheet. They also have nice breakdowns for research, development, and facilities. If you look at total Federal R&D (all of the 3 above), it has indeed declined as a percent of GDP (although not in real terms). 1976: 1.23% 1986: 1.2% 1996: 0.89% 2006: 0.99% 2016: 0.81% Then there is a plunge: 2017: 0.67% 2018: 0.71% but the plunge comes with an asterisk: "Beginning in FY 2017, a new official definition of R&D has been adopted by federal agencies. Late-stage development, testing, and evaluation programs, primarily within the Defense Department, are no longer counted as R&D. " So, it's fair to say Federal R&D spending is at least stagnant and probably in a slow decline as a percent of GDP.

rsj_hn 8y ago

OK, but the NSF research budget (7 billion) is small potatoes compared to the NIH (37 Billion per year), and DOD (70 Billion). And it's about the same as the Department of Energy (7 Billion, not including the national labs). There is plethora of other Federal agencies that fund research, such as the EPA, NIST, NASA, Federal Aviation Administration, Food and Drug Administration, even the Bureau of Land Management is in on the act. The VA funds research in prosthetics. The Health and Human Services department (including CDC) funds research. As best I can tell, total Federal outlays for research are about 120 Billion. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ap_18_research-fy2019.pdf https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ap_18_...

tacomonstrous 8y ago
>but the NSF research budget (7 billion) is small potatoes compared to the NIH Exactly! And they are the main organization for funding non-medical basic science in the nation.
- rsj_hn 8y ago
  I see, so is your argument not that we need more total federal dollars for research, but that they should be shifted away from the other organizations and towards the NSF?
hedvig 8y ago
Where does that funding come from? Why, your pocket. Imagine if the 1% who pays the 50% of that had that money back, how much better our society would be.

rsj_hn 8y ago

Now, I must revise and extend my remarks. I found this site: https://www.aaas.org/page/historical-trends-federal-rd https://www.aaas.org/page/historical-trends-federal-rd From which you can download R&D spending as a percent of GDP in an excel spreadsheet. They also have nice breakdowns for research, development, and facilities. If you look at total Federal R&D (all of the 3 above), it has indeed declined as a percent of GDP (although not in real terms). 1976: 1.23% 1986: 1.2% 1996: 0.89% 2006: 0.99% 2016: 0.81% Then there is a plunge: 2017: 0.67% 2018: 0.71% but the plunge comes with an asterisk: "Beginning in FY 2017, a new official definition of R&D has been adopted by federal agencies. Late-stage development, testing, and evaluation programs, primarily within the Defense Department, are no longer counted as R&D. " So, it's fair to say Federal R&D spending is at least stagnant and probably in a slow decline as a percent of GDP.