On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 17:41:14 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote: > Rich Ulrich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > <snip> > > : > : It is an interesting observation. I have always wandered why granting > : > : agencies prefer to deal with organizations rather than with > : > : individuals > > : Are you kidding? Are you naive? Isn't it obvious > : on two seconds of reflection? > > You'd be surprised who gets government grants in Canada and what the money > goes to. For example, years ago, there was someone who dressed as a > jester and wanted to make his living as a town fool (no pun intended). > Guess who got funded? >
Well, the U.S. has various forms of 'arts' funding, too, if we are leaving behind the topic of research. If you are talking about small awards, the defense department can pay 'consultant fees' with much less fuss than formal grants. Your post eventually reminded me of two other traditions, an old one and a new one. 1) Governments used to offer PRIZES -- for the first person to develop <what-ever>. Accurate clocks in 1750. Canned food in 1800. 2) Private groups give annual prizes for 'excellence' in specific, past achievements. Book awards. Nobels. MacArthur 'genius' awards don't require a specific achievement. -- Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
