Gruss, you're being purposefully obtuse. There is a difference between basic research and for-profit technological development. Everyone else in this thread besides you has been very clear on that. Government funding dominates basic research, which is the origin of all those technologies that you listed. Then they are typically picked up by private, for profit, institutions and developed into commercial products. No one has said otherwise.
You're continually arguing against a straw man Gruss, knock it off. Judah On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Gruss Gott <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Judah wrote: >> >> No one here is saying that public-private partnerships aren't the way >> to go. I can see a variety of arguments for a variety of setups. But >> your argument about all these great technologies developed in private >> industry because of a profit motive is just bullshit. > > List the non-profit medical equipment manufacturers that are larger > than the for-profit ones. > > List the most valuable medical equipment patents and who owns them. > > List the total $$ in development for key medical technologies and who > spent them. > > If you're right, then the majority of money spent on research, > development, and manufacture of key technologies should be the > government and/or non-profit companies. > > If the majority of money spent is by for-profit companies then you're wrong. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:288864 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
