Moderator: Soñadora
BeauV wrote:I think it is just trying to understand the numbers and discover what is really causative and what is simply a correlation.
Rob McAlpine wrote:Someone once told me that education is how the soul of a free society gets passed from generation to generation. I'm sure he heard it somewhere else, but it struck me as true.
It's pretty obvious that research and education are the drivers of the SF economy, just as Harvard, MIT, Tufts, BU, BC, Amherst drive the Massachusetts economy, and UT drives Austin's tech growth. These all seem to be pretty good investments. I just don't see how we can afford NOT to fund science research and education.
Rob McAlpine wrote:Someone once told me that education is how the soul of a free society gets passed from generation to generation. I'm sure he heard it somewhere else, but it struck me as true.
It's pretty obvious that research and education are the drivers of the SF economy, just as Harvard, MIT, Tufts, BU, BC, Amherst drive the Massachusetts economy, and UT drives Austin's tech growth. These all seem to be pretty good investments. I just don't see how we can afford NOT to fund science research and education.
SloopJonB wrote:Rob McAlpine wrote:Someone once told me that education is how the soul of a free society gets passed from generation to generation. I'm sure he heard it somewhere else, but it struck me as true.
It's pretty obvious that research and education are the drivers of the SF economy, just as Harvard, MIT, Tufts, BU, BC, Amherst drive the Massachusetts economy, and UT drives Austin's tech growth. These all seem to be pretty good investments. I just don't see how we can afford NOT to fund science research and education.
Z'acktly right - and not just university type education. Currently the biggest concern in that area in Canada is the lack of skills available to employers. For my whole life university has been regarded as the only really acceptable course for young people - everything else has been generally regarded as being only for those who couldn't cut it in academia.
The result is we now have PhD's driving cabs and skilled floor layers making 6 figure incomes.
In MY next life I'm coming back as a high level machinist I think.I'll turn out things like Kim's rudder and keel.
On a slightly different note, there has always seemed to be a very widely held mistrust & suspicion of academics & intellectuals in the States. That certainly doesn't help in relation to this topic.
cap10ed wrote:Nelson Mandela. Another great teacher and historic figure passes on.![]()
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/nelson-man ... -1.2417872
Brooke wrote:I hadn't heard of Dr Colgate before, what an interesting life he had. Bet he could have told some great stories if he was allowed to!!
One of my doctoral committee members passed away unexpectedly last year. He left an immense hole in the scientific community that he worked in (coastal ecology), one that won't be filled for a very long time, if ever. It's amazing to be around someone like that, who makes you think way outside the box and always question what you are observing.
The days of getting a job, even outside your field, because you have a masters or a phd and consequently you are obviously smart and focused and can figure things out is long gone. I crashed into that wall four years ago - ended up working in retail for three years (at least it was at a kayak shop, so I got paid to go paddling!), and finally had to move 1500 miles away to get any kind of job relating to science. I am finally employed, but in a job that doesn't require a phd. It works for me, but the pay is low and you miss out on a lot if years of earning potential by going to grad school. I enjoy learning for learning's sake, but my cousin's son who is going to a trade school for welding will probably find a job faster and make more money.
Brooke wrote:I hadn't heard of Dr Colgate before, what an interesting life he had. Bet he could have told some great stories if he was allowed to!!
One of my doctoral committee members passed away unexpectedly last year. He left an immense hole in the scientific community that he worked in (coastal ecology), one that won't be filled for a very long time, if ever. It's amazing to be around someone like that, who makes you think way outside the box and always question what you are observing.
The days of getting a job, even outside your field, because you have a masters or a phd and consequently you are obviously smart and focused and can figure things out is long gone. I crashed into that wall four years ago - ended up working in retail for three years (at least it was at a kayak shop, so I got paid to go paddling!), and finally had to move 1500 miles away to get any kind of job relating to science. I am finally employed, but in a job that doesn't require a phd. It works for me, but the pay is low and you miss out on a lot if years of earning potential by going to grad school. I enjoy learning for learning's sake, but my cousin's son who is going to a trade school for welding will probably find a job faster and make more money.
BeauV wrote:Rob, despite the obvious, indeed PAINFULLY obvious, benefits of investing in public education; all sorts of "great" men have decided it didn't make sense. The one I found the most painful is Ronald Reagan. As the governor of Calif. he basically tore apart the UC and St.Uni system. He even had the balls to say that higher education was best left to those how had parents who could afford it - or words to that effect. (He also closed all our mental health hospitals, but I can't start talking about that or I'll go crazy and there's no where left to lock me up!)
I really do have tremendous difficulty reconciling the obvious benefits with the pathological aversion to investing in education by some of the folks who would benefit from it most. I'm going to sound like a rich asshole here, but I paid for my two kids to go through Stanford and Yale. They both earned scholarships which I made them turn-down. I have enough money to pay for their education and the scholarships should go to kids who don't have parents with quite a deep enough checkbook. But, for middle-class folks who certainly can't "afford" Yale, Harvard or Stanford to be harping on the "waste" of public higher education is astounding to me. How can capitalism work if people won't argue for their own self-interest??? As a full-cry capitalist, I am DEEPLY offended. Also, I'm confused. We see this in our culture constantly. For some reason a reasonably good sized segment of our society supports the fantasy that we rich guys have foisted on them. They're frigging libertarians who don't understand that they are the hunted not the hunter! I so wish this wasn't so, but every time I see some middle class person railing against the "safety net" and against "single payer health care system of socialize medicine" I have to shake my head and mumble to myself: "How can we have a democracy that works and capitalism that works, if the citizens are too stupid to know their own best interest?" As the King in the King & I would say: "It is a puzzlement!"
BeauV wrote:Rob, despite the obvious, indeed PAINFULLY obvious, benefits of investing in public education; all sorts of "great" men have decided it didn't make sense. The one I found the most painful is Ronald Reagan. As the governor of Calif. he basically tore apart the UC and St.Uni system. He even had the balls to say that higher education was best left to those how had parents who could afford it - or words to that effect. (He also closed all our mental health hospitals, but I can't start talking about that or I'll go crazy and there's no where left to lock me up!)
I really do have tremendous difficulty reconciling the obvious benefits with the pathological aversion to investing in education by some of the folks who would benefit from it most. I'm going to sound like a rich asshole here, but I paid for my two kids to go through Stanford and Yale. They both earned scholarships which I made them turn-down. I have enough money to pay for their education and the scholarships should go to kids who don't have parents with quite a deep enough checkbook. But, for middle-class folks who certainly can't "afford" Yale, Harvard or Stanford to be harping on the "waste" of public higher education is astounding to me. How can capitalism work if people won't argue for their own self-interest??? As a full-cry capitalist, I am DEEPLY offended. Also, I'm confused. We see this in our culture constantly. For some reason a reasonably good sized segment of our society supports the fantasy that we rich guys have foisted on them. They're frigging libertarians who don't understand that they are the hunted not the hunter! I so wish this wasn't so, but every time I see some middle class person railing against the "safety net" and against "single payer health care system of socialize medicine" I have to shake my head and mumble to myself: "How can we have a democracy that works and capitalism that works, if the citizens are too stupid to know their own best interest?" As the King in the King & I would say: "It is a puzzlement!"
Orestes Munn wrote:Good points, Larry. However, if we can sell OIF and the NSA, state universities shouldn't be an impossible reach. In case no one remembers, the NIH (30 billion a year) was trotted out for effect by both sides during the recent shutdown. Of course, everyone is terrified of cancer, but people are interested in bugs and galaxies, too.
Orestes Munn wrote:Good points, Larry. However, if we can sell OIF and the NSA, state universities shouldn't be an impossible reach. In case no one remembers, the NIH (30 billion a year) was trotted out for effect by both sides during the recent shutdown. Of course, everyone is terrified of cancer, but people are interested in bugs and galaxies, too.
kdh wrote:Orestes Munn wrote:Good points, Larry. However, if we can sell OIF and the NSA, state universities shouldn't be an impossible reach. In case no one remembers, the NIH (30 billion a year) was trotted out for effect by both sides during the recent shutdown. Of course, everyone is terrified of cancer, but people are interested in bugs and galaxies, too.
Eric, I'm curious. To my thinking public funding of the development of new antibiotics given the resistance problems we have is a compelling idea. Drug companies given their profit motive are naturally more interested in drugs that manage chronic diseases rather than drugs that cure--they get recurring revenue from those drugs rather than one-time.
Is this happening in your sphere or do you know anything about it?
BeauV wrote:Keith,
We tried HARD to get a biz model that would work developing antibiotics, but just can't get the model to work. We couldn't find a way to even get through trials, let alone marketing, and the failure rate was really high. I'm hoping that the improving understanding of the genetics, and our ability to alter them in a way that will kill bugs like the ones that are munching on Kim's leg, might get a higher success rate. But the trials and approval process, as you know, is so bad that we wouldn't allow aspirin to be approved under the current system.
BV
Brooke wrote:I would much rather be doing something I enjoy than be paid better. But it's a little scary to think of the situation I would be in now if I didn't have financial support from my parents. And I can't even fathom what it would be like if I had college loans. I certainly wouldn't have a boat, or be able to travel or do basically anything other than survive. I'll be 37 in a couple of weeks and 2014 will be the first year that I will make more than 30k (and not much more!). Granted I did graduate into a terrible economy, and for some reason I did seem to get an even shorter stick than most if my friends in grad school, but it is not fun to think that without my folks I'd be in a pretty tight spot. Fortunately, this situation works for us - I have no siblings, we get along great (we better since we're all living together this winter!) and we are all very conscious of living within our means.
kimbottles wrote:BeauV wrote:Rob, despite the obvious, indeed PAINFULLY obvious, benefits of investing in public education; all sorts of "great" men have decided it didn't make sense. The one I found the most painful is Ronald Reagan. As the governor of Calif. he basically tore apart the UC and St.Uni system. He even had the balls to say that higher education was best left to those how had parents who could afford it - or words to that effect. (He also closed all our mental health hospitals, but I can't start talking about that or I'll go crazy and there's no where left to lock me up!)
I really do have tremendous difficulty reconciling the obvious benefits with the pathological aversion to investing in education by some of the folks who would benefit from it most. I'm going to sound like a rich asshole here, but I paid for my two kids to go through Stanford and Yale. They both earned scholarships which I made them turn-down. I have enough money to pay for their education and the scholarships should go to kids who don't have parents with quite a deep enough checkbook. But, for middle-class folks who certainly can't "afford" Yale, Harvard or Stanford to be harping on the "waste" of public higher education is astounding to me. How can capitalism work if people won't argue for their own self-interest??? As a full-cry capitalist, I am DEEPLY offended. Also, I'm confused. We see this in our culture constantly. For some reason a reasonably good sized segment of our society supports the fantasy that we rich guys have foisted on them. They're frigging libertarians who don't understand that they are the hunted not the hunter! I so wish this wasn't so, but every time I see some middle class person railing against the "safety net" and against "single payer health care system of socialize medicine" I have to shake my head and mumble to myself: "How can we have a democracy that works and capitalism that works, if the citizens are too stupid to know their own best interest?" As the King in the King & I would say: "It is a puzzlement!"
Yeah! All of what he said. I never understand why so many of my employees vote against their own self interests!
Rob McAlpine wrote:Theory and practice are sometimes a little different. Even as a capitalist, I am in favor of a strong safety net, and advocate a system of free government clinics, open to all, for health care.
In practice, I have little faith in the ability of Leviathan government to deliver many services with competence and efficiency. My experience with the breathtaking incompetence and arrogance of the US Dept of Interior has, I'm afraid, irrevocably colored my views. Or maybe it's just a Texas thang.![]()
I agree completely that the children of the wealthy should forgo scholarships, my son is presently in a state program that does not accept tuition, I'm pleased to have been able to make it up through donations.
Eric, did you ever discuss antibiotic development with Rick on the way to Bermuda? He spent his entire career at Pfizer and knows the workings of big Pharma quite well, I seem to recall him telling me that they had quite a few things in the pipeline, but they would be very, very different from what we are using now. The owner/skipper of Lyra is also a pharma guy.
BeauV wrote:Rob, despite the obvious, indeed PAINFULLY obvious, benefits of investing in public education; all sorts of "great" men have decided it didn't make sense. The one I found the most painful is Ronald Reagan. As the governor of Calif. he basically tore apart the UC and St.Uni system. He even had the balls to say that higher education was best left to those how had parents who could afford it - or words to that effect. (He also closed all our mental health hospitals, but I can't start talking about that or I'll go crazy and there's no where left to lock me up!)
I really do have tremendous difficulty reconciling the obvious benefits with the pathological aversion to investing in education by some of the folks who would benefit from it most. I'm going to sound like a rich asshole here, but I paid for my two kids to go through Stanford and Yale. They both earned scholarships which I made them turn-down. I have enough money to pay for their education and the scholarships should go to kids who don't have parents with quite a deep enough checkbook. But, for middle-class folks who certainly can't "afford" Yale, Harvard or Stanford to be harping on the "waste" of public higher education is astounding to me. How can capitalism work if people won't argue for their own self-interest??? As a full-cry capitalist, I am DEEPLY offended. Also, I'm confused. We see this in our culture constantly. For some reason a reasonably good sized segment of our society supports the fantasy that we rich guys have foisted on them. They're frigging libertarians who don't understand that they are the hunted not the hunter! I so wish this wasn't so, but every time I see some middle class person railing against the "safety net" and against "single payer health care system of socialize medicine" I have to shake my head and mumble to myself: "How can we have a democracy that works and capitalism that works, if the citizens are too stupid to know their own best interest?" As the King in the King & I would say: "It is a puzzlement!"
SloopJonB wrote:...appealing to the fantasy of getting them to vote for how they will want things to be when THEY become rich