🚀 go-pugleaf

In SPACE Digest V10 #351 rochester!dietz@rutgers.edu  (Paul Dietz) write:
>In article <5941@timbuk.cray.com> lfa@timbuk.UUCP (Lou Adornato) writes:
>>
>>A while back someone (Tom Neff?) called the space program "techno-welfare".  
>>This might be true, but econometric studies have shown that every dollar spent
>>on Apollo generated seven dollars worth of economic growth.  No, I don't have
>>the study, but Collins cited it in "Carrying the Fire" (I always meant to write
>>him and get the name of the study...).

>I called it technowelfare.  I believe the "study" that "showed" the space
>program paid off 7-1 just *assumed* that space R&D was as productive
>as civilian R&D.

>The supposed economic boon of the space program is an example of the
>Big Lie technique, IMHO.

I'm not about to argue the contents of that study when neither of us has a copy,
but IF the authors felt justified to make that key assumption, (and >I< will
assume that this assumption was justified (or at LEAST rationalized) within the
study), I don't see why that assumption should be discarded out of hand.  In
fact, I don't see why space R&D wouldn't be >more< productive than civilian.  
By law, NASA research is available to the public (with the _major_ exception of
that which is determined to be sensitive to National Security).

The point I was trying to make is that the value of a national research and 
development project goes beyond the contract deliverables.  The basic research,
(albiet in limited areas), the engineering, and the new technologies all con-
tribute to the economy.  The more subtle contributions include a pool of
experienced engineering talent, more interest in science and technology by the
next generation of students, and national prestige.  

My major beef with the "technowelfare" slander was that welfare doesn't return
ANYTHING to the economy except new generations of recipients.  I humbly submit 
that, unless your host system uses vacuum tubes, disparaging the value of space
research on this network is self defeating. 

Lou Adornato    |  Statements herein do not represent the opinions or attitudes 
Cray Research   |  of Cray Research, Inc. or its subsidiaries.
lfa@cray.com    |       (...yet)