<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:14pt"><div><span>I wrote:</span></div><div><span><div><br>> What happens to private investment in science when the money<br>> is taken from private hands then directed towards those supporting<br>> government directed orthodox science?</div><div> </div><div>Bill K wrote:<br><br>> Private investment in science doesn't exist. It is a myth used for the<br>> purposes of argument.<br><br>> Private investment is for near-term profit.<br><br>> You obviously want to live in a sort of utopia nothing like the world<br>> we actually live in.</div><div> </div><div>Are you saying science investment must come from money taken</div><div>at the point of a gun? I see it as a problem of investors not putting</div><div>money into science because it is difficult to financially compete with </div></div><div>others
who are able to <span id="misspell-0"><span>extract<var id="yui-ie-cursor"></var></span></span> money as needed at the point of a gun.</div><div><div> </div><div>Long term investment was common in freer economic times. Short</div><div>term thinking is the result of uncertainty caused by government</div><div>interference in private markets.</div><div> </div><div>The world we live in is not as economically free as times when</div><div>long term thought and investment produced consistently better</div><div>growth rates - and booms in engineering and growth in science.</div></div><div><br>Dennis May</div></span></div></body></html>