CSNbbs

We haven't revisited this subject in a while. We all know it to be true that Bush is a moron, he hates science and is bent on sending the US back to the Middle Ages.

Here's some proof:



We can all see that in the mid 1990's, Bush reduced science R&D spending dramatically. Fortunately, :ncaabbs: William Jefferson Clinton was around to pay down our national debt instead of investing in the nation's competitive future and defense.

Now what's really interesting about this picture



Is that is shows how Bush imposed his religion on the country and cut funding to NIH for a few years in the mid 1990's. (So much for the industrial biorevolution, but we all know that Bush is trying to destroy the country.) Bush allowed funding to increase toward the later part of the 1990s (again probably thanks to Clinton and his science guru Al Gore) who really helped the nation with their influence in 2001-2003.

One will note from this graph


that thanks to the endless drone of DNC party members, research dollars are now shrinking, both in real dollars and as a percentage of the GDP. Development dollars are at a constant, as that idiot Bush has his budget directed at developing products from past research so that production can generate jobs and so that those research efforts weren't wasted and new inventions just sit on the shelf. Man, W sure hates this country and his stupidity in these matters just seems to know no bounds!

Fortunately, we can all cheer for Hillary and/or Al to come in in 2009 and set things back to the way they were in the 1990s, as they take those R&D dollars and funnel them into national healthcare and other social programs designed to make up for the lost jobs that the US has seen with his 4.5% unemployement.

good post, however Clinton never paid down the National Debt. It increased each year during the 1990's and 2000.

you are right about clinton. the national debt will be our albatross during this century. especially with china owning a fair share of it.

GGniner Wrote:good post, however Clinton never paid down the National Debt. It increased each year during the 1990's and 2000.

Lets blame Clinton! Good to know Bush has brought the national debt down.

RobertN Wrote:

GGniner Wrote:good post, however Clinton never paid down the National Debt. It increased each year during the 1990's and 2000.

Lets blame Clinton! Good to know Bush has brought the national debt down.

You apparently don't follow the news. Not surprising.

the deficit and the debt are 2 different things.

aTxTIGER Wrote:the deficit and the debt are 2 different things.

Both are inherently related. When the deficit goes down, the debt usually goes down. Why? When the deficit goes down there's more to spend on paying the debt. Sorry you don't get it. I do. I would expect not looking to our economy, the way it stands right now, as a negative for RobertN, but not you. RobertN can find a way to tell us that 4.6 Unemployment is bad....somehow, and that France's economy is better.....at about 11% unemployment. Why? He hates Bush. Not like you, he hates Bush because there's an R behind his name. He's a partisan .....well, don't want to get that word deleted, so I'll leave it at that.

im not agreeing with robert in anyway.... just because your deficit goes down doesnt mean your debt goes down. the growth of that debt slows, because that extra money goes to paying the interest on that debt. however, we dont appropriate enough money to pay DOWN the debt

Am I reading this right? the only drop in funding was the 8 years Clinton was in office.

In Clinton's defense, it hit rock bottom in 1996 when the republicans were in control of congress (for 2 years at that point). Of course, it turned itself around after 1996 and has been on the up swing since.

I think most people don't say Bush is holding back science overall, most just feel he is holding back stem cell research with the rules he has put in place.

RebelKev Wrote:Both are inherently related. When the deficit goes down, the debt usually goes down. Why? When the deficit goes down there's more to spend on paying the debt.

I totally disagree. A few things on this.

1. You can pay down your "debt" by having no deficit, but actually still owe more at the end of the year (don't pay enough to pay the years interest).

2. If they switched to corporate accounting instead of government accounting you would see the debt is skyrocketing, and would be even if we had no deficit and were paying down the current debt (in government accounting views). With the guarantees the baby boomers have through social security the national debt is HUGE and only going to get bigger.

I've got a proposal for the baby boomer problem, your entitlements are based on the number of kids/workers you had to continue to pay into the pyramid scheme. If you didn't do your part you get less % wise benefits, if you had alot of kids you get more. Because this is the fundamental problem, the baby boomers didn't have enough babies for the pay as you go pyramid......yeah this has no political chance, so they are searching for amnesty to make this problem go away. Could be worse, we could be Europe.


I don't think the govt. should be spending much if any on Science. That is what the private market place does based on market forces. By in large the federal spending is based on political forces, which are corrupt and lie usually with emotional and substanceless claims, to people(voters) to rip them off, see Global Warming, Embryonic Stem Cells, etc.....politicized science is bad news, the first example was Eugenics probably? There is a role for some science spending by the govt., but its limited.

mlb Wrote:I think most people don't say Bush is holding back science overall, most just feel he is holding back stem cell research with the rules he has put in place.

I've heard alot of people say that Bush is holding back science. Usually it's in the context of stem cell research, but it's a generalized statement that people make b/c they want to believe that Bush is stupid.

I agree that most people "feel" he is holding back stem cell research, however the facts don't bear that out. Thus are people letting their perceptions be influenced by unreliable and blatantly dishonest sources.

federal government shouldnt pay for the R&D of a private company, which they do frighteningly enough. if the market wants it bad enough, the market will get it.

just look at embroynic Stem Cell research Funding in the private sector, there is no law against it and some funding still goes on. They've put millions if not billions into it(the companies), based on a market/substance based decision, but after it turned out nothing was there, they decided there wasn't much merit to it but there was to Adult Stem Cells which produce results. So as funding in the Private Sector dried up(for Embryonic) the political campaign to get Tax Payer dollars for it started by all the bio-tech firms based soley on embroynic stem cells research that the market deemed meritless. So you get the political debate, it becomes a politicized science and the taxpayers end up getting ripped off. Not on Federal level yet but its happened in states like Calif. and now Missouri. "Global Warming" is a another great example of this, although I think it has other motives other than certain people getting paid(see Marxism)

the Govt. doesn't have market checks, it has political checks and political debates turn to emotions and not logic. There are cases for some Federal R&D, but they are rare I think....

GGniner Wrote:just look at embroynic Stem Cell research Funding in the private sector, there is no law against it and some funding still goes on. They've put millions if not billions into it(the companies), based on a market/substance based decision, but after it turned out nothing was there, they decided there wasn't much merit to it but there was to Adult Stem Cells which produce results. So as funding in the Private Sector dried up(for Embryonic) the political campaign to get Tax Payer dollars for it started by all the bio-tech firms based soley on embroynic stem cells research that the market deemed meritless. So you get the political debate, it becomes a politicized science and the taxpayers end up getting ripped off. Not on Federal level yet but its happened in states like Calif. and now Missouri. "Global Warming" is a another great example of this, although I think it has other motives other than certain people getting paid(see Marxism)

the Govt. doesn't have market checks, it has political checks and political debates turn to emotions and not logic. There are cases for some Federal R&D, but they are rare I think....

As someone who becomes more and more libertarian every day I agree... the government doesn't need to be involved in science except in rare cases (and in defense science).

Defense R&D booms with biomedical research. Sounds like Bush is researching mutant super-soldiers.

Fanatical Wrote:Defense R&D booms with biomedical research. Sounds like Bush is researching mutant super-soldiers.

the "gay bomb"

DrTorch Wrote:b/c they want to believe that Bush is stupid.

Want to believe? Um, we know. Only the ones as dumb as Bush don't think he is.

BTW RebKev, I certainly hope you got your debt/deficit edumacation from a class in college.