[lb504]

> If this still bothers you, please tell me what kind of organization would exist to support 25 years of false starts, and what needs to change to make that kind of organization exist.

A Federal Universal Basic Income along with a Single Payer Healthcare system would go a long way to supporting 25 years of false starts for projects where the primary initial investment is intellectual labor. Many science, engineering, and cultural projects fit this description.

[mjevans]

Single payer healthcare, absolutely. Negotiating a market rate between professionals and the entire public is the most optimal approach for the consumers whom; in a moment of need, won't really be able to shop around and choose.

While I do believe there needs to be a first world floor to living conditions, I've come to more understand UBI as one more way of killing the middle class. It's the Supply side, a lack of competition, that is out of whack for many of the most expensive things in the US, and probably most other industrialized nations.

UBI increases how much the poorest can pay, it does nothing to limit how much can be demanded by the rent-seeking rich. In effect UBI is a subsidy to the rich and an attack on the middle class.

[bertjk]

But the same supply side problem is also an argument against single payer healthcare. Maybe you've negotiated an awesome rate for the public, but then this comes back to bite you in the form of shortages and/or reduced R&D of new treatments. I mean, essentially it is one big monopsonistic price control regime, right? On the other hand if we can somehow bolster competition, increase doctors trained, etc., then maybe prices can come down on their own to a level accessible to the public again.

[mjevans]

If a thing is desired by society but the market is unable to fulfill that need that sounds like an area the government (the people's organization of foundation, first / last resort) should apply work. Though sometimes government can be the cause if regulations aren't well thought out and there's a failure to minimize unintended consequences.

If there aren't enough doctors as a whole, that's a sign that either the incentives and detriments offered by society are incorrect or that barriers to entry are too high for the market to function. (In the case of medical professionals in the US I've heard that a combination of artificial scarcity and malpractice worries are the issue. For the latter I'd like to see criminal (reckless endangerment, etc), rather than economic, outcomes for egregious cases; which should also apply to institutions training and certifying doctors. With that layer of protection the 'insurance' against being harmed should instead be covered by normal disability programs at the society level.

In the case of insufficient doctors in an area, that sounds like a great place for the military to have a base and provide civilization; though the doctors (and possibly other professionals) not existing there might also be a sign of larger issues.

If a place isn't economically viable anymore it is important to identify the root cause and fix it, or offer assistance to relocate to places that are useful for their residents and society.

[sharpneli]

Doubt that. We have full socialized healthcare and great unemployment benefits. Yet we also suffer from the same problems in academia.

Having those is pretty orthogonal to actually getting results in science. No need to mix them in.

Universities should actually fund (so indirectly by the goverment from taxes) long term research. That’s kinda the whole point of Universities, in addition to education. Long term research that doesn’t have immediate short them commercial interest. Not make the scientists be basically startup founders that must constantly pitch to get money.

And the reason we want to support that is because on long term there often is very useful commercial benefits that then improve everyones lives.

[krona]

You're implying she could've done all this research in her bedroom? I doubt it.

[unethical_ban]

No, they're not. They're implying that a world where the government takes an even more active role in promoting economic activity, and secures the fundamental aspects of human dignity for its citizens, would be a society where more people can spend time on their passions, which often are things like "develop a groundbreaking new style of vaccination".

[kofejnik]

there's already a country where the government is taking a very active role in promoting economic activity, specifically North Korea

[creato]

Come on, are we being serious here? "Developing a groundbreaking new style of vaccination" requires far, far more support than just a salary. UBI/social safety nets are totally irrelevant here.

[easytiger]

And yet, it was developed under free market principles and delivered to market with no one getting a UBI.

UBI is a fantasy for children.