do you think that government funds (taxpayers money) should be spent on pure science research?

Phrase_shifter

i agree that science is extremely important but don't forget about oter important tings such as education and protection (hope y was helpful )

prasannanamuduri

The government funds should be spent on science research but not all of it. Just minimum

Capuchin

I think a moderate amount shoud always be spent on science research, technologies for use in other areas of spending like protection and medicine come out of scientific research, and so it's very important to spur it on as best you can, without neglecting other areas.

kp2171

scientific research has a way of reaching far beyond the original focus.

look at the soybean. ok. not JUST a soybean, but look at all thats come from research on the soybean. Glidden wanted to come up with a better paint. They ended up with offshoots that included fire retardants that saved lives on military ships to precursors to steroids such as progesterone and cortisone, tied to birth control and alleviation of rheumatoid arthritis. Of course, it didnt hurt that they had a brilliant black scientist, Percy Julian, at the helm of the research.

** sidenote- If youve never heard of him, take a minute and search him up... the reading doesnt do justice to how smart this guy was and how hard he fought racial injustice to make such great contributions to society. **

even the silly little "buckyballs" that were a novelty have been tied into medical research... so i think its hard to determine sometimes what scientific research is frivolous.

obviously, we need a balance of funding, and sometimes its hard to understand why a particle accelerator will really help you live a better life...

but generally id hate to see funding cut when a general population might not understand the implications of such research.

worthbeads

Do you mean all funds are to be used towards science or some funds should be given to pure science?

Yes, the government should fund some science (obviously they would not spend everything), and in fact they do. As some of you may already know you can work for the government in a field of scientific research.

Really, if you think about it, where would we be if the government didn't push us to advance technologically. One example may be the railroads. In the US, the government during the time of the building of the transcontinental railroad, the US would give them loans for millions of dollars to build the railroad and give 20 square miles of public land to railroad companies for every one mile of track. Now granted building railroads isn't exactly scientific research, but it's a fine example on how the government pushed to raise the par on technology.

Sure, there needs to be a balance, but think of the possibilities. If you could make a machine that eliminated 80% of all crime, would you cut funding, or would you think of a future where there is less crime and where less money had to be spent on keep the peace?