![]() ![]() Buy WILLisms XML Feed ![]() ![]() Mar. 21, 2005 11:50 AM ![]() June 20, 2005 5:36 AM ![]() Oct. 31, 2005 12:41 AM ![]() Nov. 23, 2005 3:28 PM ![]() Nov. 30, 2005 1:33 PM ![]() May 12, 2006 6:15 PM ![]() Oct. 17, 2006 12:30 AM ![]() Dec. 13, 2006 1:01 PM ![]() Dec. 18, 2006 6:37 PM ![]() Dec. 21, 2006 12:31 PM ![]() Dec. 22, 2006 10:22 PM ![]() July 25, 2007 4:32 PM ![]() May 28, 2008 11:12 PM ![]() June 9, 2008 12:25 PM ![]() ![]() Blogroll Me! ![]() ![]() July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 ![]() March 13, 2008 ![]() Due: July 29, 2008 ![]() Mar. 14, 2006 ![]() Apr. 4, 2008 ![]() May 19, 2007 ![]() July 9, 2006 ![]() July 14, 2006 ![]() Powered by Movable Type 3.17 Site Design by Sekimori WILLisms.com June 2008 Book of the Month (certified classy): The WILLisms.com Gift Shop: ![]() ![]() This Week's Carnival of Revolutions: ![]() Carnival Home Base: ![]() |
![]() « Shadowboxing. | WILLisms.com | Revolutionizing Revolution. » Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 138 -- Research & Development.Research & Development- ![]() Source: Correlation does not necessarily mean causation, and there could be any number of things happening in this graph, but it does seem to be the case that the private sector will gladly spend the bucks on research and development if the government mostly stays out of it. When the government monopolizes science, it stifles the competitive spirit that so many scientists might otherwise have. And large levels of public funding on certain projects might dissuade private entities from taking the plunge with their dollars. That being said, certain scientific projects have costs that are so great, and benefits so nebulous, far-flung, and intangible, that the government must do what the market will not. In general, however, it's best that public dollars go toward building a scientific infrastructure, of sorts, upon which other scientists can base their research and development. Next, and totally unrelated to the previous point, this research and development explosion roughly correlates with the rise in personal computing power. The beginning of the information technology revolution is vaguely like the beginning of the first printing press. People can share information, and more of it, more efficiently than ever before. People can also make calculations and create intricate three-dimensional simulated models that once might have been inconceivable on paper. One of the mysteries economists have been attempting to solve in recent years is how American productivity growth was so robust immediately following World War II, then so flat for an extended time, and now so robust again today. R&D dollars likely have at least something to do with that.
Previous Trivia Tidbit: Religions In Congress. Posted by Will Franklin · 14 August 2005 11:33 AM CommentsI would be interested in what the "other category" is made up of. Are those personal foundations / funds like Bill gates? Also, it is interesting that investment in R&D rose in conjunction with cuts in income taxes - see the early 1980s. Posted by: jp at August 14, 2005 12:36 PM The worst thing that's happened in my lifetime is that the general agreement that the gov funds basic research, and industry funds applied research, has broken down. First, the idea that universities should be patent holders, and compete in the marketplace, spread beyond the narrow domains of medicine. Then, the gov gave up funding basics, and moved to things like hydrogen filling stations for the (bs) hydrogen economy. I personally like clear understandable distinctions, and would like a return to gov/basic/long-term and industry/applied/short-term, but we've been screwed. I think the people who screwed us are those recently in power (probably of both party) who didn't understand the fundimental difference between basic and applied research. What bs. Posted by: odograph at August 14, 2005 02:47 PM Strange. I went back to the original source ( http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf05308/secta.htm#fig3 ) and they don't seem to agree. The figure from AAAS shows federal inputs not growing much from 1965-on but the original source shows significant growth from 1965-1985... Posted by: Yali Friedman at August 15, 2005 09:22 AM |