I noticed that you ignored my questions and changed the subject, but here is one more that you'll ignore. If you have $100,000 in research money to spend, where do you think you will get more for it, putting it into private industry as buying stock in a company or paying it as tax to government?
You space heads are all alike in one regard. You all want someone else to foot the bill for your grandiose pipe dreams. You, like all statists, think that you know best how to spend the money that other people busted their buns for. In that regard you are no different than some "homeless advocate" or some militant welfare queen or Hillary Clinton and her tax based "health care" or any other government looter who has some hair brained scheme that no one would pay for except when forced at gunpoint by the government.
> If you have $100,000 in research money to spend, where do you think you will get more for it, putting it into private industry as buying stock in a company or paying it as tax to government?
A piddly $100,000? Private industry. But a billion? Government R&D. FOr the simple fact that the government has the capability to carry out or direct research projects that private industry would *not* tackle.
> You, like all statists, think that you know best how to spend the money that other people busted their buns for.
Blah, blah, blah. Do you get this twitchy when someone suggests that DARPA or an Air Froce or Army research lab should study such-and-such? Are you still cheesed off about the billiosn spent on the Manhattan project? Couldn't private industry have done it better?