Re: global warming

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 22:07:21 +0100, ChrisQ <meru@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Bill Sloman wrote:


It all depends what you mean by "at tax-payer expense". I was
supported through my Ph.D. by an Australian government funded research
grant, which paid me roughly half what I would have been paid if I'd
had a proper job in industry. According to some economist I read at
that time, this meant that I paid half the cost of my Ph.D. by working
for half what I was worth, and I had a very clear title to the data
that I'd accumulated.


I don't know you, as someone who must at least have part of a clue,
could be so out of touch with reality. The *market* decides what you are
worth, not you and that's based not so much on the paper, which just
says you have some ability to learn and for critical analysis, but more
experience and proven track record. If that were the case, we would all
be very rich and business would be bankrupt. There are a lot of highly
qualified academics etc who work for very low salaries just to be able
to do work they love or are just interested in, yet freely share their
work with others. Such people are everywhere, believe it or not. They
just don't make a big noise about it.


The government support was essentially an investment - someone with a
Ph.D. earns more than someone with B.Sc. and the difference rises as
they get older, and the government expected to recoup their investment
because I should have ended up paying them a lot more income tax after
completing the degree than I would have done if I stopped at my first
degree. They weren't buying the data I collected, merely the extra
income I was expected to earn by virtue of collecting the data.


I'm having great difficulty understanding the logic behind that. If the
data is from real science and there is no fiddling with the results,
what have you to fear from publication ?. It may irritate you to have it
criticised, but that's life and if you are sure of your facts, request
proof or tell them stfu. Peer group review is encouraged in most
enlightened organisations, precisely because it's more likely to find
the gotchas not envisaged in the original work and produces a better
final result.

As for investment, that is not primarily based on future possible tax
revenue, but the contribution that individual may make later to the sum
of knowledge for the common good. If research is funded from the public
purse, the results of that research belong to those that funded it,
though you may get some patent fame if you are lucky...

Regards,

Chris

Thanks so much for providing ample data for a troll-feeder filter.

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: A Nation of Takers
    ... Social Security is paid back from withholding, so it isn't "government ... support". ... taxes paid by business in your calculations. ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Harry will be removed by Time...his good image is tarnished
    ... The government should resign if it has any moral diginity. ... The money paid now is an "investment" for the future, ...
    (soc.culture.singapore)
  • Re: I hope they get it.
    ... government are back looking for enormous bonuses. ... Every British family has paid £5,500 to support their Banks ... The Government must, must show the resolve to say NO ...
    (soc.culture.scottish)
  • Re: Boy Scouts 1, Homophiles 0
    ... If the boy scouts are involved with government at all, ... they must be getting support from government, which is paid for ... by taxes, including mine. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Boy Scouts 1, Homophiles 0
    ... If the boy scouts are involved with government at all, ... they must be getting support from government, which is paid for ... by taxes, including mine. ...
    (soc.retirement)