http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/25/AR2010032501796.html

Our accomplishments in nanotech over the past few years have been lackluster and incredibly slow-moving. Although science is a slow process by nature, our progress in the tech industry needs a shot in the arm if we are going to compete out there in the cold, cruel world.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/25/AR2010032501796.html
Although science is a slow process by nature, our progress in the tech industry needs a shot in the arm if we are going to compete out there in the cold, cruel world.

What are you suggesting, state funding?

To get us ahead in the tech race, yes.

No doubt that the United States is the world leader in nanotechnology and has produced the highest publications and patents. The government agencies are involved in popularizing the nanotechnology and addressing the societal and ethical issues and at the same time also focuses on the development and commercialization of nanotechnology.

The various departments in US government ha made contributions in National Nanotechnology initiatives and according to an estimate in the year 2005 more than $1000 million has been spent on nanotechnology initiatives. The National Science Foundation (NSF) has invested around $ 350 million alone. The investment contribution in nanotechnology initiatives from the Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Energy is around $ 250 M and $ 200 M respectively. The other big investors in nanotechnology are National Institute of Health (NIH) and National Aeronautics and Space Applications (NASA).p

http://www.nanotechnologydevelopment.com/government/united-states-world-leader-in-nanotechnology.html

I wouldn't worry anytime soon.

I wouldn't worry anytime soon.Excuse me, but I would rather us be bullish in our competition with the rest of the world. Besides, tech spending stimulates the economy.

What are you suggesting, state funding?

I suggest state funding for education to the graduate school level.

I suggest state funding for education to the graduate school level.In fact, a lot of states already proudly give a huge discount (http://www.gibill.va.gov/gi_bill_info/ch33/tuition_and_fees.htm) for students attending in-state. If you take the Pell grant into account, you are basically attending free besides textbooks and housing. Admittedly, graduate-level textbooks cost a king's ransom, but even under Bush you could net some sweetheart research grants from Uncle Sam if you could show yourself to be capable of living up to it. Graduate students are really the backbone of scientific research in this country, by the way.

We, the US, not doing as well in the Prostitution race..... I suggest state funding... :D

We, the US, not doing as well in the Flying Car race...... I suggest state funding

We, the US, not doing as well in the shit-in-an-empty-lot race.... I suggest state funding

We, the US, not doing as well in the smoking weed race..... I suggest state funding

We, the US, not doing as well in the making marbles out of eyes race.... I suggest state funding

We, the US, not doing as well in the using your shit as fertilizers race.... I suggest state funding

Instead of wondering why, all you guys can think about is 'state funding'-

Peace be unto you ;)

We, the US, not doing as well in the Prostitution race..... I suggest state funding... :D
We, the US, not doing as well in the smoking weed race..... I suggest state funding

Last I check, We, the US, were doing rather well in those races, even despite the government's best efforts.

Why are we in a race for technology? What's the prize if we win? If it's airport x-ray security scanners and identification chips to "keep us safe" I'll just content myself with tying rocks to sticks and hitting shit while I grunt.

Why are we in a race for technology? What's the prize if we win?

Money, power, influence, envy, etc.

Instead of wondering why, all you guys can think about is 'state funding'-

Peace be unto you ;)

Lack of funding for education is the "why". At least one of the major ones. Also, the decline of respect for science when the space race ended.

Lack of funding for education is the "why". At least one of the major ones. Also, the decline of respect for science when the space race ended.I disagree. I think that people were very excited about information technology during 1990s. The Information Superhighway really captured people's imaginations. There was undercurrent of enthusiasm also over the Human Genome Project, and the whole face of science has changed as a result of it. One thing that has gone a long way in capturing the public imagination, as of late, is interest regarding neurological disorders. Outside the life sciences, I think we are getting closer to making some giant leaps in the applications of nanotech to resolving our energy problems.

Well, with the Democrats back in power, I think that there is a fair chance we can get some real money flowing into the sciences again, putting us more than just a few scarce steps ahead of Europe in terms of technological innovation and scientific research.