3 ms·

I don't see a problem that could be solved within the current constraints. If we could convince taxpayers and private funders to double or triple the funding fo

I don't see a problem that could be solved within the current constraints. If we could convince taxpayers and private funders to double or triple the funding for academic research, many things could be done better. But today we have too many people trying to do a career in research and too little funding for them. Most issues in the academia arise from that.

godelski 2y ago
Then look for ways to solve it. I clearly didn't present a full solution and I don't have one. But the biggest issue is people being apathetic or trying to say there is no problem[0]. We're researchers. We solve crazy hard problems all the time. I'm not saying our "house" needs to be completely in order, but right now it seems to be in dismay. I'm certain we can solve this. We put a fucking man on the moon, we found the Higgs and gravitational waves, we made computers talk, and we rid the world of deadly diseases. Surely we can solve a problem like this. If anything, those should be reasons to motivate us to solve this, so we can do more! But I do think a problem is how people interpret economics. Maybe a research paper doesn't directly lead to a trillion dollar company, but those companies certainly rely on a lot of publicly funded research. The returns on investment are pretty high and that's worthwhile. [0] I believe some feel the need to defend a system due to their success in it. This needs to be disentangled. A critique on the system is not a critique on "you" or "your work".