And yet our vets are going without Medical care and some are homeless
Feds spend $82K trying to create stuttering mice
The National Institutes of Health has invested more than $80,000 into studying whether mice stutter.
A $16.5 million project examining genetic mutations that may lead to human stuttering recently released some of its findings: genetically-engineered mice that sound different.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/...cmp=hplnws
Haven't you heard? Veterans are considered terrorist threats. Refugees from Middle-eastern war torn countries, however, are sweet nice people and we need to ship them here.
The 2012 federal budget contained $100 billion in corporate welfare.
You're getting upset at $82,000.
$82,000 is 0.000082% of $100,000,000,000.
alot of small things like this add up to one big waste of tax dollars... that should't be difficult to figure out.
Quote:The 2012 federal budget contained $100 billion in corporate welfare.
You're getting upset at $82,000.
$82,000 is 0.000082% of $100,000,000,000.
Examples of said corporate welfare?
Also, can/should $82,000 be better spent elsewhere?
This is why we can't have nice things.
I don't see budget set aside for scientific research as waste… In fact, the amount of federal dollars allocated to scientific and medical research has been reduced significantly, as a whole.
Maybe I am just biased on this topic as I conduct neuroscientific research pertaining to Alzheimer's disease, fronto-temporal dementia, and ALS. I mean, who cares about a cure or reversal right? I understand that to the layman allocating money to research involving stuttering may not make sense - but it does not "hit home" unless you or a loved one experiences an issue like that (never mind even more impactful diseases/cases).
Nevertheless, there are other avenues of our government or programs that could be scaled back by 1/100 or 1/1000 and make a big difference in the issue of access to medical care. Unfortunately, politics gets in the way and nothing substantial can get done.
Quote:Examples of said corporate welfare?
Also, can/should $82,000 be better spent elsewhere?
I can't provide exact examples but the $100 billion number comes from a report by everyone's favorite conservative think tank; the Cato institute. If a corporate shill like the Cato institute can identify $100 billion in corporate welfare than think about how much is really lost in companies privatizing profits and socializing losses.
Quote:I can't provide exact examples but the $100 billion number comes from a report by everyone's favorite conservative think tank; the Cato institute. If a corporate shill like the Cato institute can identify $100 billion in corporate welfare than think about how much is really lost in companies privatizing profits and socializing losses.
/End of Line
Quote:I don't see budget set aside for scientific research as waste… In fact, the amount of federal dollars allocated to scientific and medical research has been reduced significantly, as a whole.
Maybe I am just biased on this topic as I conduct neuroscientific research pertaining to Alzheimer's disease, fronto-temporal dementia, and ALS. I mean, who cares about a cure or reversal right? I understand that to the layman allocating money to research involving stuttering may not make sense - but it does not "hit home" unless you or a loved one experiences an issue like that (never mind even more impactful diseases/cases).
Nevertheless, there are other avenues of our government or programs that could be scaled back by 1/100 or 1/1000 and make a big difference in the issue of access to medical care. Unfortunately, politics gets in the way and nothing substantial can get done.
As someone whose both parents suffered or suffer with Alzheimer's, I cannot like this post enough. It's easy to cherry pick one grant that looks ridiculous on the face of it, but the possibility exists this research may eventually lead to relief for thousands of Americans. Compare $80K to
billions spent on weapons systems that end up never being used.
Quote:As someone whose both parents suffered or suffer with Alzheimer's, I cannot like this post enough. It's easy to cherry pick one grant that looks ridiculous on the face of it, but the possibility exists this research may eventually lead to relief for thousands of Americans. Compare $80K to <a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2011/12/19/how-to-waste-100-billion-weapons-that-didnt-work-out/#4a303f602615'>billions spent on weapons systems that end up never being used.</a>
While I sympathize, one is a Constitutional mandate and the other is not. That's not to say they couldn't be better stewards of our taxes, just that there is a justification for military spending that doesnt exist for medical research grants.
Quote:While I sympathize, one is a Constitutional mandate and the other is not. That's not to say they couldn't be better stewards of our taxes, just that there is a justification for military spending that doesnt exist for medical research grants.
Does the Constitution not grant Congress the power of spending to promote the general welfare of the populace?
Quote:Does the Constitution not grant Congress the power of spending to promote the general welfare of the populace?
It talks about collecting taxes for the general welfare of the people. It says nothing about how to spend the collected taxes.
Quote:Does the Constitution not grant Congress the power of spending to promote the general welfare of the populace?
Abuse of that clause is rampant and a primary reason why the federal government is in its current state.
$82K for a stuttering mouse? Should have gone all out and paid for one that talks perfectly. Cheapskates.