Government Not Funding Research

[pbelter]

Recently I stumbled across an article that listed number of civilians killed by governments in the 20th century.

The Union of Soviet Socialists Republics (known under its shorter name of Soviet Union) killed about 61,000,000 of their citizens
The Chinese Socialist Democracy (also known as People’s Republic of China) comes second with about 35,000,000, although other sources list the number as high as 76,000,000

The Hitler’s National Socialist party (known also as NaZis from the German abbreviation for National Socialism) comes third with about 21,000,000 people.

All of those are great crimes, and not surprisingly all of them are committed by a socialist government.
I happen to grow up under a socialist regime and in recent history they drastically limited their physical violence. They have figured that it is much cheaper to kill people’s souls and minds rather than physically liquidating them. This is primarily done by government controlled media, but that’s a subject for another discussion.

My point is that the ultimate goal of an effective totalitarian government is to create a belief that individuals are worthless and nothing can be accomplished unless “the government does something about it”. As a famous Soviet poet said "The individual is nonsense, the individual is zero”. As the Western world turns more and more towards the Left this attitude becomes more and more common.

I recently read an article about a town in Europe where they used to have a nice Stork colony. The Storks nests have overgrown with weeds and the villagers are petitioning the local government “to do something about it” and they are outraged that for the third consecutive year the government took no action. Well it they channeled that energy into cleaning the nests themselves…

Why the Government is not finding Polywell? For the sake of our future I hope they don’t.

Outside of the military the government is incapable of inventing anything useful, and any research funded by the gov becomes heavily politicized and the results are always around the corner but never materializing.

I hope to walk on the Moon one day and I hope that all the gov will cancel all the funding to NASA, so good people will take the matter into their hands to make it happen. Burt Rutan asked NASA once when will space flight become available to the public. They said that in 30 years. 30 years later then answer was still the same… Does that sound like government sponsored fusion?

[JLawson]

If you're looking to stimulate job growth then energy technology is a better investment than space technology, I would think. We need it more.

As for the investment in Polywell technology, I think they're doing what they can under the circumstances. There are peer reviewed papers out there saying this particular idea won't work, can't work, and even here amongst the fans there isn't a consensus that the technology is viable. I can't see anyone staking their career on a proposition with so many obvious and prominent red flags. I think that until experimental data refutes that paper and opens the door for the theorists, you're only going to see chump change investments in the technology.

I think we can all agree that we don't want another Tokamak boondoggle.

Oh, I fully agree there - the Tokamak seems to have been a very expensive blind alley - which is why I believe Polywell should be very well funded (even to excess) over the next couple of years. Prove it, or disprove it - but don't keep tossing money at it in a limited fashion, enough to keep it alive but not enough to prove things one way or another.

As far as energy sectors go - sure, we could do government-sponsored massive wind-farms. That'd help job up the manufacturing sectors also... until the environmentalists hit with stop-work orders. But windmills... where's the excitement in them? Where's the glory? Where's the challenge? What kid has ever looked at a modern windmill and gone "When I grow up, I want to work on those!" and been inspired to learn about the sciences from it?

I was lucky enough to be able to take the offspring down to see a Shuttle Launch. Even from a good ten miles away, it was impressive. Windmills aren't.

I really think we need both - and as our government has proven, we're fully capable of funding whatever they think needs funding. The problem is convincing them that something needs funding.

[vankirkc]

My point is that the ultimate goal of an effective totalitarian government is to create a belief that individuals are worthless and nothing can be accomplished unless “the government does something about it”. As a famous Soviet poet said "The individual is nonsense, the individual is zero”. As the Western world turns more and more towards the Left this attitude becomes more and more common.

You can't be referring to the U.S. there. Individualism and ego centrism in the U.S. is the most extreme on the face of the earth. It's the world capital of Me.

Outside of the military the government is incapable of inventing anything useful, and any research funded by the gov becomes heavily politicized and the results are always around the corner but never materializing.

I think the governments of the west do a lot of things better than you give them credit for. Despite all the claims of 'poor infrastructure' in the U.S., the roads and bridges are in fact among the most productive and reliable in the world. The air and water is mostly clean, the streets mostly safe, and the education system, while not the best in the world, does actually produce a fair number of educated adults. The political system, while not perfect, is about as free of corruption as any other country.

As with all things, you have to compare the actuality of life in a particular regime with the actuality of life somewhere else, not with some idealized fantasy world that you create in your mind. So in the real world, where is this anarchic utopia that you suggest is preferable to what we have? Somalia has no government. Perhaps you think we should follow their model?

[vankirkc]

[quote="JLawson]
But windmills... where's the excitement in them? Where's the glory? [/quote]

The glory is in stemming the flow of money out of our economies and into the hands of terrorists. At least partially.

[MSimon]

I can't see anyone staking their career on a proposition with so many obvious and prominent red flags.

Fortunately I have no career. Sign me up.

My most positive indication so far? Art Carlson is only 99.9% dismissive. He used to be 100%.

[MSimon]

But windmills... where's the excitement in them? Where's the glory?

The glory is in stemming the flow of money out of our economies and into the hands of terrorists. At least partially.

Except they can't do that. Their electricity is intermittent and overpriced.

[JLawson]

But windmills... where's the excitement in them? Where's the glory?

The glory is in stemming the flow of money out of our economies and into the hands of terrorists. At least partially.

Oh, yeah - THAT'LL fire up a 10-year old's imagination like nobody's business! I can see the recruiting posters now...

"Power to the Masses! Join the 23rd Windmill Corps today! We keep the lights on for YOU!"

Besides - you want to stem the flow of money? We had a REAL good chance to get moving on that last year. We've got loads of domestic oil - but we can't drill for it. Ask Pelosi and Reid just how much 'good' they were able to do on THAT front. They're proud of saying 'No' to increasing the domestic supply.

Sorry for the snark there, vankirkc - but we're trying to make the sciences ATTRACTIVE to kids at an early age. They don't get interested in cars because of how many mpg a hypermiling hybrid can get - they love the thunder, the noise, the sheer impression of POWER. They don't get all that hot about planes in a museum - they love to see them FLY - with all the noise and power it implies. You won't see a kid get excited about a fire extinguiser - but you'll see 'em flock to fire trucks. Kids don't get excited about trilobites, they love T-Rex.

If you're looking to boost the economy, a return to the moon in a big way would do it. We could probably do it for much less than a trillion, and the actual results across the economy would beat any 'stimulus' package all hollow.

[Helius]

But windmills... where's the excitement in them? Where's the glory?

The glory is in stemming the flow of money out of our economies and into the hands of terrorists. At least partially.

Except they can't do that. Their electricity is intermittent and overpriced.

I'm really curious as to what leverage the current administration thinks it has over the Chinese that we might convince them to stop using prodigious amounts of coal to drive their Industrial expansion (at the expense of American business). "Awww, C'mon. Use Windmills. Uh.... Please?"

[TDPerk]

It's the world capital of Me.

Except it's population is among the most generous anywhere, because they choose to be.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp

[Roger]

All of those are great crimes, and not surprisingly all of them are committed by a socialist government.

So the USSR wasnt commie? China neither? And just what was that Commie manifesto thing I heard about....maybe it was the socialistic manifesto?

Take a fookin hike, thats the funniest thing I've heard all week.

-Sir, have you ever been a member of the communist party?

-They were socialists.

-You are under oath

-Yeah I know, its true, Hitler Stalin & Mao were all socialists....

-Have you been doing drugs?

-They all had Socialistic governments...

-Senator, I'm done with this witness.

[djolds1]

All of those are great crimes, and not surprisingly all of them are committed by a socialist government.

So the USSR wasnt commie? China neither? And just what was that Commie manifesto thing I heard about....maybe it was the socialistic manifesto?

Communism is a subset of socialism Roger. Go back to the primary sources. Karl Marx was pushing SOCIALISM.

[vankirkc]

But windmills... where's the excitement in them? Where's the glory?

The glory is in stemming the flow of money out of our economies and into the hands of terrorists. At least partially.

Oh, yeah - THAT'LL fire up a 10-year old's imagination like nobody's business! I can see the recruiting posters now...

"Power to the Masses! Join the 23rd Windmill Corps today! We keep the lights on for YOU!"

Besides - you want to stem the flow of money? We had a REAL good chance to get moving on that last year. We've got loads of domestic oil - but we can't drill for it. Ask Pelosi and Reid just how much 'good' they were able to do on THAT front. They're proud of saying 'No' to increasing the domestic supply.

Sorry for the snark there, vankirkc - but we're trying to make the sciences ATTRACTIVE to kids at an early age. They don't get interested in cars because of how many mpg a hypermiling hybrid can get - they love the thunder, the noise, the sheer impression of POWER. They don't get all that hot about planes in a museum - they love to see them FLY - with all the noise and power it implies. You won't see a kid get excited about a fire extinguiser - but you'll see 'em flock to fire trucks. Kids don't get excited about trilobites, they love T-Rex.

If you're looking to boost the economy, a return to the moon in a big way would do it. We could probably do it for much less than a trillion, and the actual results across the economy would beat any 'stimulus' package all hollow.

I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at how popular the sciences become over the next ten years. As a general rule, the success oriented pursue whatever path they think is most likely to lead them to success. For the past twenty odd years that path has been quantitative finance. I'm pretty sure those days are behind us now, which means technical careers might be much more attractive than they have been.

[vankirkc]

It's the world capital of Me.

Except it's population is among the most generous anywhere, because they choose to be.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp

If you're referring to American charity, you have to admit that it suffers from a bizarre double standard. People are starving and homeless in the U.S., and yet people there seem more comfortable sending money to Africa etc than giving food and money to the shelters in their own back yard.

[vankirkc]

I can't see anyone staking their career on a proposition with so many obvious and prominent red flags.

Fortunately I have no career. Sign me up.

My most positive indication so far? Art Carlson is only 99.9% dismissive. He used to be 100%.

Well, Dr. Nebel arguably has the clearest view of the viability of this technology, and he said "I don’t have strong opinions about wind power one way or the other..."

If I were about to trivialize energy production in the way that's been proposed, I would have a very strong opinion on every other form of power generation.

[Professor Science]

This new energy deal makes me think about the old testament, "I am a jealous god, you will have no other gods before me"

I mean, i guess some people might not want other forms being pursued because economies of scale might diminish, but it's weird how many people only want their tech to proliferate. I don't think there's a reason for a fusion man to give two squats about a wind man as long the both of them are making progress.