[ratelimitsteve]

lets do austerity for the wealthy first. we give them money hand over fist, in fact we've never met a problem we didn't try to solve by giving the rich more money. we currently fund R&D for three private space programs, from which we buy the technologies we paid the development costs for. Lets get down to 0 publicly-funded privately-owned space programs before we start picking which grandmothers we need to starve out

[Hammershaft]

That R&D money to private space companies has lead to the biggest advances in space technology in our lifetimes.

[creer]

And for very small amounts too (compared to the whole mess). Fantastic return (on that little bit, out of the whole mess). Same for medical research.

[Hammershaft]

Yeah, estimates of returns on public science generally are dramatic.

[ratelimitsteve]

that's great, but it's not an unqualified Good Thing(tm) when we're putting it up against meeting basic needs for people today. We managed to have amazing gains in technology and a functioning state that can care for its citizens in the 60s. Also, this doesn't imply that 3 publicly-funded privately-owned space programs are better than 1 publicly-funded, publicly-owned space program, only that research is good (which was never the issue at hand).

[Hammershaft]

We had significantly less welfare in the 60s. We also had more poverty per capita in the 60s but living standards were rising as a result of technological improvements. Clearly a private space company (spaceX) has dramatically outperformed our public space company at advancing technology, despite being a scrappy startup with a fraction of the funding 20 years ago.