Posted on 10/31/2012 7:49:42 AM PDT by fishtank
Article at link.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Killing spending that isn’t in the Constitution is a good thing. 90% of our spending needs killing.
Bill Clinton is a self-serving.....fill in the blank, but we should be grateful any time something is cut.
Thank you for killing an $11 Billion welfare project for engineers and cement and construction contractors. No doubt the final tab would have been $40 Billion.
President Clinton did the right thing in this case.
And no one in the media called Clintoon a Anti-science creationist knuckle dragging Neaderthal...
I always thought he killed it because it was in Texas. What a waste of time and resources but maybe the new research of the same sort was better? Where did they finally do that research?
Peter Higgs already did it 48 years ago with pencil and paper. Let the EU blow treasure creating obscenely expensive bubble tracks through liquid hydrogen.
And France got a new N-plant, rather than building new power plants in Texas.
You could be right about that — New Mexico made a bid for the project as well. It went to CERN in Switzerland.
One of the few good things that he did.
I was there as a Senior Engineer in Magnet Testing. It was a typical smeer job by the press. Congress was turning it’s eye to cutting funds; SSCL went down, and then NASA as well, but nothing happened to NASA.
What happened to the SSCL was a travesty. From that point forward, the big science no longer occurred in this country. In this case, we “outsourced” it to CERN. We send money and tech to CERN. It was NOT rampant overspending at the SSCL. It was a failure to communicate to the public the benefits of such science.
That is my assessment and it didn’t make sense to end the progress that already had been made. The fact that CERN completed the project shows the interest and value. I know of a couple of people that worked on the project as well, one is my pastor’s wife.
Thanks for your post.
The small amount of money (comparatively) for the SCSC would have been called a “good investment” if the Higgs boson discovery had a big Lone Star on its portrait ‘photograph’.
Wow, send me a private with her name. We (my wife) still keep in touch with some of the ppl who worked there, and still live in the area of Waxahachie, etc., south of Dallas.
The SSCL machine was designed to be far more powerful than the CERN machine, and any collider machine on earth, but who knows if that would have made any difference-one would think so, though.
The SSCL was a black hole for techies coming in from all over the world, including other US labs such as Fermi and Brookhaven, which, of course, were not too happy about that! So it was very political in that respect. The technology to operate the cryogenic plants spotted around the 52 mile ring had not “matured” yet, but they figured that by the time they needed to make it all work in about 5 years hence (sync the control systems of the plants), the fiber optic tech would have been invented and ready for use. There were physicists, engineers, etc., coming to the Lab even after funding was pulled and most others had already left. This is because they had sold homes, quit jobs, bought homes in Texas, etc., and were then already committed to coming to Texas. Many came anyway, and found other jobs, started their own businesses, etc. But some had to move to Texas with no prospects at all.
$40 billion eh? Cripes, Obama spends more than this in one year alone on food stamps. At least the people at the SSC showed up for work.
Ah, the anti-science types just love this stuff. It’s a national shame that some conservatives are too uncaring to spend a pitance on keeping the USA as a scientific leader.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.