2 ms·
Heh.. Perhaps you might use an apple computer to help cure cancer and you probably wouldn't use a football? >who gets to decide what spending is "right" and wh
by noonespecial 15y ago
Heh.. Perhaps you might use an apple computer to help cure cancer and you probably wouldn't use a football?
>who gets to decide what spending is "right" and what's "wrong?"
None. Noone. Perhaps not wrong. Interesting though.
Sorry guys, guess I kind of ran this one right off the rails. We underspend on medical research proportionally. That was all. I just tried to pick something a little more interesting than the TSA to joust at this time.
- _delirium 15y agoPicking a few billion that sports makes rather than the lots more billion that tech makes feels a little like pandering to the crowd, though (we're geeks, stereotypically don't like sports and "jocks"). A more edgy question, given the audience, would be to ask why our priorities are such that we pump much more money into web startups than cancer research.
- eli_gottlieb 15y agoOr, hell, why we pump more money into web startups than computer science research!
- bad_user 15y agoPerhaps some scientist gets a new idea while relaxing to a game of football ... you can't really predict what would happen to our society if you start playing around with priorities. Historically such decisions had awful consequences. Also sorting out the priorities of our society means getting rid of capitalism, and finding a new economic system that works better is (arguably) a harder problem than currying cancer.