zlacker

>>karako+(OP)
As a taxpayer I'm tired of funding everyone's project. Especially in private institutions which have billions under management and are ran like hedge funds, and not increasing their intake. Time to fix the deficit and kill off our debt.

If the rebuttal is "yeah but advancements improve the economy" -- The private sector can fund projects which are opportunities with an economic basis, they can take the risk and they can see if it is profitable in the market (ie beneficial)

If the rebuttal is "How will America stay competitive?" We cant seem to keep trade secrets anyways. [1]

[1] - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950

Edit: Also the 4 years at a time thing is probably a better choice too, because it makes them less twitchy politically. You get your 4 years, regardless of who's team is in office. This should be a win regardless of your affiliation.

>>maerF0+ym
So only opportunities with a path to economic profitability should be researched?

That is a very narrow view of advancing society

>>jswny+7n
Research anything and everything on your own dime. if it's taxpayer's money, then yes, it has to have at least a probability of profitability.

>>tw6000+yo
So absurdly myopic to restrict research to what may be profitable in this moment. Why are you wasting time researching number theory bro, that'll never be useful. Why are you studying y^2 = x^3 + ax + b if it can't be turned into a SaaS unicorn tomorrow? So fucking stupid. The whole point is that commercial R&D can find the immediate to short term gains and make billions, while the long shots get funded without putting anyone at risk.