Privatizing American Science

[mas]

The incremental trend towards globalization will have devastating consequences for the general public as individual wealthy "elites" continue progressively toward their goal of privatization of basic utilities; such as water and power.

The NY Times posted an article about billionaires who have come out and actually made statements about the very nature of "science" and how they would like to shape their goals with constant assurances of philanthropy. NGOs (non governmental organization interface) and singular wealthy cadres in the past have always had major influence in political scientific policies, but now with dwindling tax revenues for science funding, these monied groups will fill in the gap and close it up completely.

He who pays the piper calls the tune
_______________________________________

Billionaires With Big Ideas Are Privatizing American Science

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/scien ... .html?_r=0

 

[j.]

You want it government-run? You want the same geniuses who grope you and x-ray you at the airport in charge of science? There should be no government involvement in science.

 

[j.]

Talking about elites, you're quoting the New York Times approvingly. That should make you think twice. The New York Times fighting the elite, a hilarious thought.

 

[LucyL]

Billionaires with big ideas run governments. (Poor people don't get invited to Bilderberg). There isn't really any difference. "Privitization" in this usage is a non-sequitur. What is really needed is de-regulation of science. Then the poor people with big ideas will have a chance to make a difference, instead of being hounded and jailed for trying to solve problems billionaires and governments can't make money off of.

 

[CellularIconoclast]

There's a lot of science we can do as individuals who demand answers, outside of big corporations or government.

For example, Hackerspaces are popping up all over the country and doing lab research on their own. Some are even very aggressive and doing highly illegal research on human "orphan diseases" in human cells. Small startup companies are also doing novel research. In my opinion a major portion of medical innovation in the past has been done by small startups.

Medical research is generally not as expensive to do as it seems... there are a lot of important studies that can be done with almost no budget.

Also, when we're talking about "government funded" research, it's mostly grants to individual professors. These are people who operate much like a small business with considerable freedom on how the money is actually spent. When an open minded and creative person is good enough at politics and communication to keep one of these positions, they generally have enough freedom to do innovative work. You guys know about Dr. Pollack, but his situation isn't that rare- many universities have several people that are able to still operate as individuals within an authoritarian system.

 

[mas]

J
You want it government-run? You want the same geniuses who grope you and x-ray you at the airport in charge of science? There should be no government involvement in science.

I did not say I wanted anything "government run."
_______________________________________
J
There should be no government involvement in science.

So who is going to make this conditional statement happen? You?
_________________________________

I said that NGOs (which include corporations and institutions interface with government implementation (Facism) of scientific policy and funding; and I acknowledged this alliance exists and that these entities have huge influence in policy decisions. I am well aware of the level of influence peddling that emerges out of Beltway policies.

If one posts an article from a newspaper, which is a vehicle for posting news stories; it does not mean that if a person presents an article from said newspaper that total groveling approval of that newspaper's political bent is to be expected.

I posted this article to illustrate that the NGO/Government interface, which previously would would get no press at all as big megabusiness leaders remained silent. Now they are using their ACTUAL NAMES, OPENLY stating on the record endorsements for their own self-financed scientific goals. And yes, Lucy mentioned the Bilderburgers, and these leaders are only concerned with their interests, not the population as a whole.

The subject is PRIVATIZATION and this is incrementally encroaching the US and world, with the phantom Agenda 21 hiding in the shadows. Privatization is part of that implementation platform, and will encompass every aspect of our life; public ownership of electricity and water utilities, legal homeownership, freedom from coercive medical and scientific policies, freedom to pursue our own personal goals, etc… There will be ramifications down the road for not thinking about this subject and addressing it.

______________________
J
Talking about elites, you're quoting the New York Times approvingly.

You use the word "approvingly", not me.

 

[Beatrix_]

View: https://twitter.com/bmj_latest/status/1642421624942018561