In article <1993Apr30.151033.13776@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov writes: >People who criticize "big Government" and its projects rarely seem to >have a consistent view of the role of Government in science and >technology.  Basically, the U.S. Government has gotten into the role of >supporting research which private industry finds too expensive or too >long-term.    >(Historically, this role for the U.S. Gov't was forced upon it because >of socialism in other countries.  In order for U.S.  industries to >compete with government-subsidized foreign competitors, the U.S. Gov't >has taken on the role of subisizing big-ticket or long-lead R&D.)  This definitely had nothing to do with the entry of the government into the support of science; some of it is relevant in technology.  There was little involvement of federal funds, or except through support of state universities, of state funds, for scientific research before WWII. The US research position had been growing steadily, and the funding was mainly from university and private foundation funds.  There were not that many research universities, but they all provided their researchers with low teaching loads, laboratories, assistants, and equipment, and funds for travel to scientific meetings.  Not that much, but it was provided, and a university wishing to get a scholar had to consider research funding as well as salary.  During WWII, the military and the defense departments found that pure scientists could do quite well with their problems, even though they  were not exactly in the areas of the scientists' expertise.  This is probably because of the "research mind" approach, which is not to try to find a solution, but to understand the problem and see if a solution emerges.  This works in stages, and as research scientists were used to discussion about their problems, the job got done.  The military realized the importance of maintaining scientists for the future, and started funding pure research after WWII.  But Congress was unwilling to have military funds diverted into this investment into the future supply of scientists, and set up other organizations, such as  NSF, to do the job.  It also set up an elaborate procedure to supposedly keep politics out.  Also, the government did a job on private foundations, making it more difficult for them to act to support research.  The worst part of the federal involvement is that in those areas in which the government supports research the university will not provide funding, and in fact expects its scholars to bring in net government money.  Suppose, as has been the case, I have a project which could use the assistance of a graduate student for a few months.  What do you think happens if I ask for one?  The answer I will get is, "Get the money from NSF."  Now the money at the university level is a few thousand, but at the NSF level it comes to about 20 thousand, and is likely to keep a faculty member from getting supported.  So the government is, in effect, deciding which projects get supported, and how much.    Also, the government decided that the "wealth" should be spread.  So instead of having a moderate number of universities which were primarily research institutions, the idea that more schools should get into the act came into being.  And instead of evaluating scholars, they had to go to evaluating reseach proposals.  As a researcher, I can tell you that any research proposal has to be mainly wishful thinking, or as now happens, the investigator conceals already done work to release it as the results of the research.  What I am proposing today I may solve before the funding is granted, I may find  impossible, or I may find that it is too difficult.  In addition, tomorrow I may get unexpected research results.  Possibly I may bet a bright idea which solves yesterday's too difficult problem, or a whole new approach to something I had not considered can develop.  This is the nature of the beast,  and except for really vague statements, if something can be predicted, it is not major research, but development or routine activity not requiring  more than minimal attention of a good researcher.    I believe that at this time less quality research is being done than would have happened if the government had never gotten into it, and the government is trying to divert researchers from thinkers to plodders.