[Rhodes22-list] Politics and Science a reply to Mike W
Rik Sandberg
sanderico1 at gmail.com
Sat Jan 12 13:14:56 EST 2008
Mike,
> Maybe we need
> to rethink the real problem - all them lawyers looking to pay for their
> jumbo mortgages!
Well said!! Most of our legislators could learn a great deal from you. :-)
Rik
"Two things are infinite: The universe and human stupidity; and I'm not
sure about the universe."
- Albert Einstein
Michael D. Weisner wrote:
> Brad,
>
> You know, for a guy who has been deprived of proper oxygenation most of the
> time, at least that in which you are at altitude, your thought processes are
> remarkably keen. It is a lousy way to get a bill defeated. Maybe we need
> to rethink the real problem - all them lawyers looking to pay for their
> jumbo mortgages!
>
> Mike
> s/v Shanghai'd Summer ('81)
> Nissequogue River, NY
>
> From: "Brad Haslett" <flybrad at gmail.com> Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:16 AM
>
>> Ed,
>>
>> I'll pass on oxygen debates. My only choice is between "demand" and
>> "100%". But, since we are talking about oxygen, here's someone that needs
>> to be deprived of it!
>>
>> Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J.
>>
>> Bush was forced to use a pocket-veto during the current Congressional
>> recess
>> in an attempt to overcome a provision in the Defense spending bill that
>> was
>> slipped in by Lautenberg. The immediate downside is that Armed Forces
>> recruiters cannot offer bonuses and until this is settled, re-enlistments
>> can't receive bonuses either. The Lautenberg provision would have allowed
>> Americans to sue in American courts for issues they "suffered" under the
>> Saddam regime. I'd say hanging the bastard would be justice enough. What
>> it would really do is allow the new Iraqi government's money in overseas
>> banks to be tied up until all the litigation is settled. The provision
>> does
>> two things - cuts off funding for Iraq to re-arm itself and the resulting
>> veto makes it more difficult for the US Services to man itself. In a
>> nutshell, it is a poison pill designed for the anti-war crowd.
>>
>> Thanks Frank, you're a real patriot!
>>
>> Brad
>>
>> On Jan 12, 2008 8:55 AM, Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Mike:
>>>
>>> Now that you have some good experience under your belt, how about running
>>> for public office?
>>>
>>> When you asked the question, tongue in cheek, "To save 10% across the
>>> board,
>>> we could reduce
>>> oxygen usage by 10% when treating patients requiring O2 therapy, placing
>>> patients on 90% instead of 100% oxygen." Unfortunately you are now
>>> critical
>>> of a valid question. A pulmonary doctor should be asked what is the
>>> optimum
>>> % for this patient. Only a penny? If it beyond what is necessary to
>>> achieve results, why be wasting resources?
>>>
>>> Therefore, I disagree with your point of view, it was a valid question in
>>> all instances. Just as often the minimal maintenance level of 2L is not
>>> adequate for a particular patient. It resides in area of education,
>>> experience and good judgement.
>>>
>>> Maybe the best dose of O2 is received in a cockpit of a sailboat in a
>>> breeze?
>>>
>>> Ed K
>>> Greenville, SC, USA
>>> "Modern research ... Ah, the sound of a million monkeys typing (on their
>>> PCs?) ..." Michael D. Weisner
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> R22MikeW wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ron,
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, research funding cuts continue to be made by folks who
>>>> really
>>>> have no idea what they are doing. In the mid 80s I entered industry as
>>>>
>>> a
>>>
>>>> result of a similar instability in medical research and high energy
>>>> physics
>>>> funding cuts (can you say Reagan and Brookhaven?) Most of us scattered
>>>> fairly quickly as the paycuts (10% at first) and layoffs began to
>>>>
>>> threaten
>>>
>>>> the security of our growing families. Every postdoc was approached by
>>>> industry and most of us found new "homes" within months.
>>>>
>>>> The attitude of the bean counters seem to be that research funding is a
>>>> luxury. It can therefore be cut without great loss. One administrator
>>>> who
>>>> had to cut 10% out of his budget at the last minute, thought hard and
>>>>
>>> long
>>>
>>>> when I offered, jokingly, "To save 10% across the board, we could
>>>> reduce
>>>> oxygen usage by 10% when treating patients requiring O2 therapy,
>>>> placing
>>>> patients on 90% instead of 100% oxygen." He was so intrigued with the
>>>> idea
>>>> that he asked for a full justification why some patients had been on
>>>>
>>> 100%
>>>
>>>> oxygen in the first place. Peter principle at work ...
>>>>
>>>> I hope your funding is restored - call Obama and ask him why IL was not
>>>> represented properly.
>>>>
>>>> Modern research ... Ah, the sound of a million monkeys typing (on their
>>>> PCs?) ...
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>> s/v Shanghaid'd Summer ('81)
>>>> Nissequogue River, NY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: "Ronald Lipton" <rlipton at earthlink.net> Saturday, January 12,
>>>> 2008
>>>> 12:17 AM
>>>>
>>>>> 2008 was supposed to be a good year for science in the US. A study
>>>>> by the National Academies had made a strong argument that basic
>>>>> research is vital to the economic health of the US. That resulted in
>>>>> a
>>>>> bipartisan agreement to increase funding for the physical sciences.
>>>>> Budgets were increased for the NSF and DOE Office of Science in
>>>>> the appropriations bills passed by the House and Senate. Last summer
>>>>> these bills were vetoed by the president as "budget busters". The
>>>>> government
>>>>> operated on a continuing resolution until the end of last year when
>>>>> the Omnibus bill was passed.
>>>>>
>>>>> This bill reduced overall funding for Science by $1 billion below the
>>>>> level agreed last summer. The cuts in Particle Physics and at
>>>>> Fermilab, where I work were particularly devastating. All funding
>>>>> for a new experiment to measure the properties of neutrinos was
>>>>> cut. R&D funds for the next generation particle accelerator, the ILC,
>>>>> which was intended to regain leadership in the field in the next
>>>>> decade
>>>>> from
>>>>> a new machine in Europe scheduled to start up next year, were cut to
>>>>>
>>> 1/4
>>>
>>>>> the level expected. Since the budget was passed 1/4 of the way
>>>>> through
>>>>> the year all of this money has been already been spent.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a result all work on the projects which would have been the future
>>>>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>> field in the US have to stop. At Fermilab 170 people were working on
>>>>> these projects and will be reassigned and 200 layoffs are planned. At
>>>>> Stanford Linear Accelerator Center 125 people will be laid off. The
>>>>> Fermilab
>>>>> budget was $52M below the budget initially passed by Congress. Those
>>>>> of
>>>>> us who survive will be asked to take 2-3 days/month of unpaid
>>>>> furlough.
>>>>>
>>>>> The cuts were a result of a last minute flurry of adjustments to bring
>>>>> the
>>>>> budget below the limit set by President Bush for veto. Fermilab was
>>>>> hit particularly hard because Dennis Hastert, former speaker of the
>>>>> house,
>>>>> had resigned a month earlier and none of the Illinois delegation was
>>>>> watching the store. The cuts were not the result of any plan as far
>>>>> as
>>>>> I can tell, just a random cut in the final weekend of preparation of
>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>> Omnibus bill. US commitment to ITER, a demonstration fusion reactor
>>>>> to be built in France was also cut to zero in spite of international
>>>>> funding
>>>>> agreements that took decades to negotiate.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the sort of thing that can't easily be recovered from. The
>>>>> accelerator
>>>>> group at Stanford, the best in the world, will be fragmented. People
>>>>> will be
>>>>> laid off and leave the field. Bright students will go elsewhere. The
>>>>> international
>>>>> community will get yet more evidence that the US is not a reliable
>>>>> partner.
>>>>>
>>>>> I had been working on detectors for the ILC. We had a program
>>>>> that led the field in the development of advanced silicon detectors
>>>>> and
>>>>> electronics. Because we do R&D much of our work with US companies
>>>>> funds
>>>>> beyond state-of-the art work too risky for immediate commercial
>>>>> applications but which
>>>>> lay the technical base for the future. We we strongly involved in 3D
>>>>> electronics,
>>>>> where ~10 micron thick layers of circuit are stacked vertially,
>>>>> increasing the
>>>>> density of electronics without decreasing the transistor size.
>>>>> We may be able to continue, but certainly at
>>>>> a reduced level. Our group of IC design engineers, one of the best
>>>>> such
>>>>> groups
>>>>> in the world, will likely fragment, and much of the R&D will be
>>>>> delayed
>>>>> or
>>>>> narrowed.
>>>>>
>>>>> This was not due to on party or another, but our government has become
>>>>> increasingly
>>>>> dysfunctional. As by far the richest country in the world we could
>>>>> afford to be inefficient,
>>>>> but we have real challenges now. Killing the future of a field of
>>>>> science that, aside
>>>>> from enormous scientific and intellectual contributions, has generated
>>>>> technologies such
>>>>> as medical imaging, fast electronic logic, practical superconducting
>>>>> magnets for MRI,
>>>>> and the world wide web protocols, essentially by accident, is one
>>>>> example of that
>>>>> dysfunction that hits close to (my) home.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ron
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Politics-and-Science-tp14770106p14774326.html
>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>
>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
>
More information about the Rhodes22-list
mailing list