BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Crawfords Electronics <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 26 Apr 1995 02:29:00 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
>
>    The US government has plunked billions into NASA over many decades.  I
>    recognize that this research was principally fueled by political and
>    military considerations but, today we enjoy an enormous array of consumer
>    goods whose origins came from publicly funded research (ps. lets not
>    forget the Internet we are using right now, and the chips inside the very
>    computers we use right now!).
>
>    In the agricultural field, we can use the celebrated example of canola.
>    The primary world producers of rapeseed were Poland and India.  Then, in
>    the seventies, Agriculture Canada unveiled this marvelous new crop called
>    Canola after years of breeding.  These studies were publicly funded and
>    as such, Canadian farmers had ready access to this crop.  Today, Canada
>    is the largest canola seed and oil producer in the world, which has
>    become a billion dollar industry.  I question whether farmers
>    collectively (and the numerous small prairie communities they live in)
>    would have benefited equally when Canola would have been introduced
>    initially by a multinational.
>
>    In today's environment of government cutbacks, reductions in
>    publicly-funded research is inevitable and also needed.  The process will
>    hopefully identify research priorities, but I for one believe public
>    -funded research has its place and future.
>
>    P. van Westendorp                           [log in to unmask]
>    Provincial Apiculturist
 
I truley love moments like this - when truth gets in the way of opinion.
Here I sit with my conservative out look on government, prattling on
about how I don't want my tax dollars to be spent on areas that should
be left to the private sector. And then I hear myself reviewing the
statement made by someone last week about: ~when the current miticide
is no longer is effective and there isn't enough money to be made to recoupe
the R&D of the next generation, what justifies going any further.
So    who takes the responsibility to serve the public good when there
is no first generation $ to be made?
The implicit is that my tax dollars should be spent here. But who has
the wisdom.
 
David Crawford
Pinole, Ca.
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2