[robinsoncrusue]

> the damage has already been done to the United States' dominance in science

Why should my tax dollar subsidize for the dominance of US in science? How has US dominance in science helped the average American taxpayer in last decade other than funneling billions to arms or pharma industry or funding academians being out of touch with the rest of the country?

[ijk]

Other than, say, the GPS on your phone, the internet that you're posting on, or anything like that--you want to know what government-funded basic science has done to benefit you lately, not any of these decade-long timeline projects that are best funded by institutions with long time horizons, such as governments. Yes, we must have results that are brought to market this quarter, so the government-funded research justifies itself in the free market.

[robinsoncrusue]

If my memory serves me correctly, the ones you mentioned were DARPA projects. Which is defense arm - and AFAIK defense budget is not being cut.

I am not against government spending for dominance but I am just simply asking a question when the deficit spending is high and soon the line item for interest expense is greater than the defense budget, is dominance still more of a concern than say, I don't know, Govt unable to pay its debt or inflating away the currency?

[ijk]

Given that the article we're discussing explicitly mentions the NSF contribution to those projects and links to articles going into great depth about the details, including NSFNET, I'm going to assume you're working off prior assumptions.

Of course, in modern monetary theory GDP growth is one of the major factors keeping sovereign debt manageable [1], and NSF funding of about $9B [2] is about 0.2% of the national budget, and that money that is invested in basic research is generally found to significantly contribute to that economic growth [3], there are few ways I can think of to make the debt situation worse than to cut basic research.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt-to-GDP_ratio

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Foundation

[3] https://www.sfn.org/-/media/SfN/Documents/NEW-SfN/Advocacy/2...

[fzeroracer]

You are posting in a thread about the NSF. The very least you could do is be informed about what the NSF actually does and has funded before asking questions.

[conn10mfan]

great example of a reverse gish gallop right here, select one point to argue in a response and attempt to discredit someone based on that

brandolini's law in full effect

[asoneth]

> Why should my tax dollar subsidize for the dominance of US in science?

This is a fair question.

For one thing, the US dominance in science has allowed us to dominate many profitable products and new industries that were derived from that science. I'm not sure I believe the commonly-given estimate that every $1 spent on basic research yields $8-20 in economic return, but I do believe that the return has been positive.

If other countries become the preferred target for the best and the brightest scientists then the US is unlikely to continue to dominate new research-dependent industries as we did for the last ~4 generations.

I don't necessarily think this is bad for the world -- concentrating too much wealth, talent, and power in one country has had corrosive effects. But this decline may ultimately be bad for the average US resident, even if their taxes go down.

> other than funneling billions to arms industry?

As someone who has worked on several military research projects, for better or worse my sense so far is that US military research budgets will be the only ones to come out of this administration largely unscathed.

[conn10mfan]

it's not dominance, it's scientific achievement in general that benefits US citizens as well as the rest of the world

whether you care to admit or not, you've benefitted immensely from US investment in science, the entire digital & technological economy is downstream of basic scientific research

(the irony of a hacker news user and American taxpayer wondering how they've benefitted from tax dollars spent on science is not lost on me)

[realo]

What an amazing comment.

If I remember correctly Moderna is USA company and without their research on vaccines who knows how many millions more people would have died of COVID.

Did your precious tax dollars help Moderna directly or indirectly... Most probably. Are you happy to be alive? Most probably...

[cratermoon]

You're on the internet. Do you think Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg built that?

[allturtles]

“Apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system, and public health ... what have the Romans ever done for us?"

[GuinansEyebrows]

... and to pharma (similar money flow to arms), banks (bailouts), big tech (tax breaks)...