http://www.cnbc.com/id/27719011/

But then again, whats the worst to happen huh? It’s just jobs and business, maybe its time for another revolution in history, I’m getting tired of the old back and forth rut anyway. Lets just scrap it and do it better.

Vanessa: That was a typo! Thanks for catching it.

Jason, you may be right. Time will tell.

John, thanks for chiming in. Indeed, there are lots of reasons that science and stimulus can go together.

In 2008 we spent 450 billion on paying the interest on our national debt. We spent ~350 billion on science.

Our national debt today is at 11.1 trillion I believe.

Source: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm

“The United States continues to account for somewhat more than half of the total annual R&D expenditures by the Group of Seven (G-7) industrial countries (of which the United States is a member). U.S. R&D expenditures are some 40% larger than the total for the 27 countries of the European Union. Among the 30 nations who are members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), U.S. R&D expenditures annually are about 2½ times larger than Japan’s (the second ranked country) and more than 5 times that of Germany (the third largest). While fast growing in recent years, China’s annual expenditures on R&D are only a quarter of the U.S. level.”

That statement is for the year 2007. I’m having trouble getting 2008 numbers. (I reckon there their, but I’m a little slow finding them!)

I think what is important to see is the we spend a tremendous amount, more then anyone, on science in the USA.

Note that: “National Science Foundation (NSF) estimates indicate that U.S. spending on research and development (R&D) totaled $368.1 billion (current dollars) in 2007, up from $347.9 billion in 2006 (table 1). This increase represented growth in 2007 of 5.8% over the 2006 level, or 3.1% in inflation-adjusted year 2000 dollars.”

We spend about 350 billion a year on science, that is more then any other country. Baisic research sees about 60 billion a year, 10 from the private sector, 38 from gov, and ~9 from Universities and Colleges, as I understand the NSF numbers.

Source: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08317/

Here are some numbers that don’t include the trillion from this last bill. Actually, what is the interest that will be paid on this money?

Total numbers for bailout as of Nov 8, 2008.

(TAF) Term Auction Credit (allocated) : 900 billion
AIG (allocated minus Treasury 40B) : 112.5 billion
Bear Stearns (initial loan to JPMorgan) : 29.5 billion
(TSLF) Term Securities Lending Facility : 225 billion
(MMIFF) Money Market Investor Funding Facility (allocated) : 540 billion
(CPFF) Commercial Paper Funding Facility *upper limit from Reuters : 1800 billion
(TALF) Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility : 200 billion
GSE MBS NO NAME Program : 600 billion
(TARP) Treasury Asset Relief Program : 700 billion
Exchange Stabilization Fund to guarantee principal in money market mutual funds : 50 billion
Treasury direct purchases of MBS since Sept. (08) : 26.5 billion
Citigroup (Treasury+FDIC guarantees) : 238.5 billion
Guarantees for Banks : 1900 billion

Automakers : 25 billion
(FHA) Federal Housing Administration : 300 billion
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac : 350 billion

total ~ 7.361 Trillion $ before the bill this week. I guess we need to add another trillion.

“This crisis is urgent,” the people on television keep saying, and when the cameras are turned off, they probably go home to plush apartments in Washington and New York. The people for whom it really is urgent have stopped listening, and not just because the cable is getting cut off. The problems are simply too immediate for them to pay attention to people who talk about economic theories, about bailouts and tariffs and gross domestic product. In this world, there are actual sheriffs with actual eviction notices. Something needs to be done now, today.

It won’t be. For a lot of people, it is already too late. People have moved back in with their parents, started living out of RVs, moved into trailer parks that are mushrooming around cities such as Las Vegas the way developments with real houses used to. Even pricey Santa Barbara, Calif., recently made several gated parking lots available to people living in their cars.

That is a hypothesis, and a controversial one at that. The activities you described as ’stimulous spending for science’ sound like normal capital projects that should be funded (or not) on their own merits.

I’m not arguing against spending on science. I’m suggesting that borrowing the money in unprecedented amounts has its own consequences that should not be overlooked just because some of the borrowed money is being routed towards worthwhile projects.