The vast majority of undocumented immigrants come here seeking gainful employment–not to get on welfare or mule drugs.
1 Like
They’re heavily propped up by the state.
They are eligible for small amounts of welfare as illegals and their anchor baby children are entitled to a lot as citizens.
Their children are legally allowed to attend public schools and enjoy other publicly funded institutions.
The only reason it’s cheaper to employ illegals than to automate is because the government heavily subsidizes their living costs.
I’m not interested in having this same discussion about illegals being valuable to the economy for the 10 billionth time.
Fine, but if you feel that way, perhaps you shouldn’t have started us down that path.
1 Like
I’ll be back later but I’m curious.
Is there a specific example of scientific research that you don’t see Being funded in free market system? What research has to be funded by the government or it wouldn’t happen? I have one example potentially but I’ll let you answer first.
Not to pull the obvious, but research of curing any disease in which it is more profitable to treat than to cure.
1 Like
I would venture, conservatively, that 99% of all research would not be funded by the free-market system.
1 Like
Not necessarily.
If one company offers treatment, what would prevent another cutting edge firm from coming in and offering a cure?
New people get sick all the time
Give an example
By buying them and shelfing it. Lobbying the correct people and shutting down their trials. Lobbying the correct politicians and shutting down their everything.
Also said cutting edge firm has no incentive to find a cure if it’s more profitable to treat.
If government is minimal in size and scope lobbying becomes ineffective
I thought your question was in reference to lowering/removing funding from scientific research?
Also with smaller govt, the buying and shelfing aspect becomes quite a bit easier.
I dunno, how about virtually anything ever published in this journal…
Or this one…
https://www.press.jhu.edu/journals/american_journal_of_philology/
Or here…
http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/njhn20/current
James Joyce has at least three journals dedicated to scholarship regarding his work; I dare say the free market couldn’t support them all:
http://muse.jhu.edu/journal/579
http://www.utexaspressjournals.org/loi/jsa
Perhaps you read Hypatia:
How many more do you need?
1 Like
How about the most recent Nobel Prize in Chemistry? Molecular machines have been studied in academia by synthetic chemists for the last few decades, but had no commercial use at all. They are now being envisioned as synthetic motors in cells that can perform tasks at the molecular level. This work was funded by government funded grants decades before its use would be apparent.
I am an academic chemist that conducts basic research using federal grants. My own research program studies mechanistic organic chemistry applied to building new polymeric shapes. Most of the specific architectures we build have no (current) commercial use, but our focus is developing and understanding reaction pathways that can be used to construct complex shapes. The federal funding that supports our research, pays the stipend of undergraduate and graduate students to work in the lab over the summer, and allows us to travel to conferences to present our work to the scientific community.
I don’t blame your question, but as a scientist it is disheartening to think that this could be asked with a straight face (I assume you’re serious with your question). We must do a better job at getting this across to the general public.
For example, without an understanding of quantum mechanics, we would have no super computers or smart phones. When Einstein discovered the “photo-electric effect”, this was the epitome of basic research. Decades and decades of federally funded quantum research have been instrumental in allowing for the technological breakthroughs of today’s society.
7 Likes
Ya… I worked at JHU for a short time a few years back and the vast majority of research dollars came from the NIH. The number of fed grants was easily 10 to 1.
1 Like
That sentence sounds so communist - which is pretty logical since you’re actually a socialist totalitarian fanboy.
Both you and the Comrade General Secretary of the Communist Party of the USSR Nikita Khruschev are on the same page regarding modern art (and Hitler as well for that matter).
Just take a look at this rant given by Khruschev when he attended a modern art exhibition, which wouldn’t sound much out of place at a Trump rally.
“What is this anyway? You think we old fellows don’t understand you. And we think we are just wasting money on you. Are you pederasts or normal people? I’ll be perfectly straightforward with you; we won’t spend a kopeck on your art. Just give me a list of those of you who want to go abroad, to the so-called ‘free world.’ We’ll give you foreign passports tomorrow, and you can get out. Your prospects here are nil. What is hung here is simply anti-Soviet. It’s amoral. Art should ennoble the individual and arouse him to action. And what have you set out here? Who painted this picture? I want to talk to him. What’s the good of a picture like this? To cover urinals with? The people and government have taken a lot of trouble with you, and you pay them back with this shit.”
You are stealing from society. You are a parasite. We have to organize our society so that it will be clear who is useful and who is useless. What right do you have to live in an apartment built by genuine people, one made of real materials?“Judging by these experiments, I am entitled to think that you are pederasts, and for that you can get 10 years. You’re gone out of your minds, and now you want to deflect us from the proper course. No, you won’t get away with it …Gentlemen, we are declaring war on you"
2 Likes
Raj missed the part where art is only as valuable as people give it value.
I much much prefer silly art to the body count we typically see out of the more mentally disturbed members of the right 
1 Like
Why do I keep reading through this thread?
5 Likes
I assume you are just going at Raj here, correct? You’re not truly comparing a sovereign nation defending it’s people, with the government funding NPR,PBS and Meals on Wheels, right?