This questions sounds a bit controversial, but I will ask it anyway.
The USA, India, Canada, Israel, Sweden, Norway, Spain, Netherlands, Australia, France, Singapore, South Korea, Germany, Switzerland, Japan are spending billions of dollars every year on science.
Some companiesc say their created scientific research centers like Google DeepMind or Microsoft Research. Some billionaires such as Bill Gates or Michael Bloomberg are funding scientific research.
Is there any actual evidence that Science lacks money?
That more money would actually help scientists do more interesting stuff?
In PC video games, a gorgeous game called Crysis came out. Everyone was stunned. Since Crysis, video game studios have spent a tremendous amount of money to try to make games more beautiful, but it hasn’t really paid off.
Almost no one notices these small improvements anymore. In fact, many gamers actually question whether studios focus too much on graphics at the expense of gameplay and fun.
Don’t get me wrong. I love Science. I’m happy we are funding Science.
But I’m just wondering whether money is the real bottleneck neck that Science faces.
Right now, do scientists actually have money problems making it difficult to conduct ambitious research?
Would more money actually help them discover new things ?
Speaking in broad strokes, research yields improvements in the world’s quality of life. I couldn’t begin to list the amount of daily-life items built on research from NASA, but I’m pretty sure polarized sunglasses are one of the prime examples of how pervasive it is. Funding science is how we get cures and treatments for previously fatal illnesses. It makes products cheaper and better. It gives countries the advantage in wars, and may soon eliminate the incentive to wage war over oil.
Three weeks ago, my wife would have died in childbirth without a procedure that was studied and refined through research and experimentation, and her recovery was faster, easier, and safer because of new techniques and devices.