Should we stop funding science programs in favor of investing the military?
Science is pretty useless compared to military, Military is a better use of money than the science is, military capabilities not only protect the country and its citizens from direct threats, they also help maintain peace and stability in regions and underwrite U.S. defense commitments around the world. for those who think spending on science and space exploration are dumb, there are more important things that money could be put towards, and also there are many countries not interested in science, Take a look at a country such as Saudi Arabia. It has a lot of money in the bank, and can afford the third most expensive military in the world after the US and China (List of countries by military expenditures), but has put relatively little effort into developing its own scientists because many countries. The government spends lots and lots of money on the military (in the billions), on getting better guns, better air forces, better weapons. It's a much better use of their money than explore what we don't know, What is the point of spending if you don’t know what you are going to find?, just look of a example when scientists were trying to find the new Higgs particle in 2012, the cost is so unbelievably expensive ,the total cost of finding the Higgs boson ran about $13.25 billion.
but there are over 50 billionaires on the Forbes list actually worth more than that. Electricity costs alone for the LHC run about $23.5 million per year ($286 million annually, the total cost of finding the Higgs boson ran about $13.25 billion. That's a large amount, but there are over 50 billionaires on the Forbes list actually worth more than that. it's a great achievement in science world but what are the real benefits to people and the new particle have to do for further use?
- 4 days ago
Of course not. Science is what improves the military's hardware. To stop funding science would lead to the US fielding feces against ICBM's.
- AouarLv 66 days ago
Governments should continue to support science and millitary financially and balanced but wasting on one single project like discovery of Higgs Boson was wasteful, they need to rethink before inject some cash to a particular project.
- D gLv 76 days ago
I wonder if the person saying they need more millirary spending actually spent some time on the other end of a rifle or explosive ...probably the most useless spending is millirary as most is wasted or thrown out
We shoklv maybe not waste money on phase 2 or phase one students as thinking is something they are never going to be good at
- thomas fLv 76 days ago
This is a comedy posting, isn't it.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- PeriferalistLv 76 days ago
Without science, there's no military.
- 6 days ago
I think the money should be used for finding a cure for whatever wacko drug you're addicted to.
- 7 days ago
Can you think of any military weapon that didn't use science to develop it ?.
- ANDRE LLv 77 days ago
No, quite the opposite.
And, this has NOTHING to do with this section, and should be in (Stupid) Polls & Surveys.
- NyxLv 77 days ago
Without science, there wouldn't be much of a military.
- StarryskyLv 77 days ago
A choice between those two might lead to benefits to the one not chosen. Science has advanced the military. A wartime effort has lead to many science advances when military weapons research is accelerated.
Sometimes some governments must spend on military just to keep in power. Strong forces can back an unpopular regime. That keeps the leader who makes spending decisions in charge.
While it is commendable to advance the welfare of the general populace through science research, it does no good if the people become a victim of aggression and occupation by a military state that has superior weapons. That is what happened to much of Europe 80 years ago. That is a lesson that should be remembered.
It is a tough call for many countries (like North Korea, Iran, etc) which have limited funds to spend on military and anything else. Not as tough for some other countries.