[vacri]

The author is misrepresenting his first quoted study: 'little or no direct effect', my emphasis. He takes this to mean 'no effect', which is a lot of screaming bullshit, as you say.

Another example of government research being very beneficial in an indirect manner is in things like mental illness research. Little is done privately outside of pharmaceutics, yet improved treatment of mental illness significantly improves the economy - workers are more productive, more people participate in the workforce (and subsequently fewer crimes), and of course there are a ton of non-economic benefits.

Similarly, the US saw a massive economic growth from its early days all the way to WWII

The US is an incredibly wealthy landscape, in terms of mineral wealth, agricultural wealth, and temperate weather. Throw in a massive population increase, successful wars of conquest, and a productive temperate climate, and the author is pushing shit uphill with a pointed stick if he's trying to make the argument against publicly-funded R&D this way.