The National Science Foundation Board's 2018 Report of Indicators

iceaura

Valued Senior Member
https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report

As most of the data sets seem to end in 2016, this report can be a benchmark or watershed mark.

The first thing that caught my attention was the continuing decline (as a percentage of GDP) in US Federal Government support for basic scientific research. (Browsing Chapter 4).

"Most of the rise of the R&D/GDP ratio over the past several decades has come from the increase of nonfederal spending on R&D, particularly that by the business sector (figure 4-3). This reflects the growing role of business R&D in the national R&D system and, in turn, the growing prominence of R&D-derived goods and services in the national and global economies. By contrast, the ratio of federal R&D spending to GDP declined from the mid-1980s to the late 1990s, notably from cuts in defense-related R&D. There had been a gradual uptick through 2009, the result of increased federal spending on biomedical and national security R&D and the one-time incremental funding for R&D provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)."

But other issues suffuse:
https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report/sections/overview/workers-with-s-e-skills
Globally, first university degree awards in S&E fields, broadly equivalent to a bachelor’s degree, totaled more than 7.5 million, according to the most recent estimates. Almost half of these degrees were conferred in two Asian countries: India (25%) and China (22%); another 22% together were conferred in the European Union (EU; see Glossary for member countries) (12%) and in the United States (10%). University degree production in China has grown faster than in other major developed nations and regions (Figure O-1). Between 2000 and 2014, the number of S&E bachelor’s degrees awarded in China rose more than 350%, significantly faster than in the United States and in many other European and Asian regions and economies. Additionally, during the same period, the number of non-S&E degrees conferred in China also rose dramatically (by almost 1,200%), suggesting that capacity building in China, as indicated by bachelor’s degree awards, is occurring in both S&E and non-S&E areas.
 
https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report

As most of the data sets seem to end in 2016, this report can be a benchmark or watershed mark.

The first thing that caught my attention was the continuing decline (as a percentage of GDP) in US Federal Government support for basic scientific research. (Browsing Chapter 4).

"Most of the rise of the R&D/GDP ratio over the past several decades has come from the increase of nonfederal spending on R&D, particularly that by the business sector (figure 4-3). This reflects the growing role of business R&D in the national R&D system and, in turn, the growing prominence of R&D-derived goods and services in the national and global economies. By contrast, the ratio of federal R&D spending to GDP declined from the mid-1980s to the late 1990s, notably from cuts in defense-related R&D. There had been a gradual uptick through 2009, the result of increased federal spending on biomedical and national security R&D and the one-time incremental funding for R&D provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)."

But other issues suffuse:
https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report/sections/overview/workers-with-s-e-skills
Yep, our current economic system allows a few people to end up with all the money (sheltered from taxation) which is either used as a tool for making more money (interest, dividends) and spending on "one of a kind" collectable articles.

The auction price of say, a painting by Rembrandt, could build a school or fund important scientific research, or even for universal healthcare.

I believe this can be demonstrated by establishment of the Nobel prizes.
Nobel made all his money from manufacturing instruments of war, but at the end of his life experienced regret and established the prizes, for accomplishments in peace, literature, and the sciences.

There is no less money than before. It's all collected by a few and removed from the general economy of manufacturing and employment "at livable wages".

I recently heard that Trump's tax cut (some $1, 400,000,000) would benefit a "working person" by an amount of $1.50 p/wk!

Is it any wonder the GDP is declining, whereas the stock market for financial institutions is at an all time high?

Unrestricted Capitalism effectively leads us back to slavery, except the new kind of slavery is not based on race.
 
Back
Top