3 ms·
The important thing is that these things get funded. It doesn't matter what institute funds them. If an institute becomes stultified and corrupt, there's no rea
by istultus 2y ago
The important thing is that these things get funded. It doesn't matter what institute funds them. If an institute becomes stultified and corrupt, there's no reason to champion it over creating another.
- jghn 2y ago> If an institute becomes stultified and corrupt Are you implying the NIH is "stultified and corrupt"? If so, care to back that claim up?
- catlikesshrimp 2y agoThere is no certainty the new order will be better than the previous one. Trying to fix the world with a sledgehammer.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- yapyap 2y agoWhat does this comment mean? What institute are you referring to in this cryptic comment?
- karaterobot 2y agoThat's true, but I have lots of experience with the NIH, and haven't found it stultified nor corrupted. In fact, did you hear they recently funded a project that reversed type 1 diabetes?
- ipv4dhcp 2y agoThen fund it yourself! Don't try to force me to pay for it.
- jghn 2y agoI hope that you do not consume a single dime of government resources that I'd prefer not to pay for. But I'm going to be that's not true.
- anon84873628 2y agoBesides what others have said, the government is immune from many of the multi-agent coordination problems that trap other types of entities. It's basically the essential reason we have government at all. So no, not all things government does can be replaced by the private sector, for reasons of game theory.