Comment Re:Crrot and Stick (Score 1) 94
Seriously, the idea that we know all the practically important physics there is is the kind of thing only somebody who's never done science or engineering would believe.
Seriously, the idea that we know all the practically important physics there is is the kind of thing only somebody who's never done science or engineering would believe.
> No reference to subsidies. All that matters is the export price being less than the fair market price in the country of origin.
Exactly.
China doesn't have the concept of "fair market price" for many industries. Such as domestically produced cars.
We are in agreement.
You seem to be confusing "wanting to get rid of communists" with "wanting their countries to be poor and dangerous".
Wow, I had no idea you were dumb enough to fall for the Red Scare.
Adjusted for inflation, the federal government simply spend less on education than we used to (ref1). And that doesn't even account for the fact that the population has grown.
Not that per student spending is the only or best metric to measure education. You could look at college graduation rates, in 1980 it's 16.2% and by 2020 it's 37.5%, so by that metric we're doing very well. (sorry, Statisa won't provide me the source unless I pay the money. I had a hard time finding the 1980 graduation rates)
Looking at the statistic of "Attained Tertiary Education" on wikipedia, which convenient has linked reference.
USA 43.1% (ref2)
China 16.1% (ref3)
From that point of view, the USA is winning. Right?
Not really, it's also a bad metric (I chose it intentionally). Take into account China's long-term strategy, which is no open secret. We saw a dramatic increase in the influx of Chinese students into American Universities, becoming the dominate source of international students for US schools. And now we see their numbers going back down, after Chinese Universities were built and expanded over the years. We would of course expect a shift, with cheaper and improved schools in China reducing the number of foreign students applying to US schools.
Long-term what does this even mean?
It means China has a plan and they have been executing on that plan for decades.
What's the US's plan?
*ref1: Education Spending Declined During 80’s, Report Says
*ref2: S1501 - Educational Attainment
*ref3: 4-4 Population aged 25 and over by region, sex, and educational attainment
New and improved! Now with 21st century anarcho-capitalism in every bite.
This is the second time parody metal band Psychostick has foretold the future of US politics, first with "Political bum" and then "Numbers" - complete with muppets!
Then why should anyone put the effort in to watching it?
That's the problem with AI slop. You cut humans out of one end of the equation but don't realize that also is going to remove humans for the other end.
The media executives of the world must think we're all pretty stupid if they think that your average consumer is OK with ever decreasing quality of content. It gets to a point where watching grass grow is more entertaining than confusing moronic slop, and nobody is getting paid then.
You seem to be confusing "wanting to get rid of communists" with "wanting their countries to be poor and dangerous".
Industrial R&D is important, but it is in a distrant third place with respect to importance to US scientific leadership after (1) Universities operating with federal grants and (2) Federal research institutions.
It's hard to convince politicians with a zero sum mentality that the kind of public research that benefits humanity also benefits US competitiveness. The mindset shows in launching a new citizenship program for anyone who pays a million bucks while at the same time discouraging foreign graduate students from attending universtiy in the US or even continuing their university careers here. On average each talented graduate student admitted to the US to attend and elite university does way more than someone who could just buy their way in.
"It might help if we ran the MBA's out of Washington." -- Admiral Grace Hopper