Since you don't know physics, and if you see a video of a thing slowly turning you're willing to believe any absurd explanation and get all bent out of shape when it is pointed out you're being ignorant, yeah.
If that doesn't work, then the EM drive doesn't work. Same problem. Reactionless force.
The fact is that nobody spends a lot of money on academic research, and the tax loop holes involve serious money. If you want to argue with that, it would be nice if you found some numbers to support your implausible position.
Here's the 2011 National Science foundation budget totalling $6,859.87 million.
Here's a discussion of corporate tax loop holes
where individual companies seem to be skimming more than the NSF has to spend.
No. What I said was "The people funding the denialist propaganda - Exxon-Mobil amongst others - enjoy a variety of tax loop holes that rip off a lot more money from the US taxpayer than has even been spent on academic research."
This isn't saying that they enjoy tax loop holes specific to their industry, merely that they - like may other US corporations - exploit loop-holes that reduce their corporate taxes
The goal posts haven't shifted at all. You just didn't read my post very carefully.
The corporations get the tax loop holes written into law, so it is all perfectly legal - tax avoidance rather than tax evasion - totally immoral, and depressingly stupid.
Unfortunately they aren't dumb. They spend big momey on getting lobbyists to speakt to legislators on their behalf to get their tax loopholes written into law, and Exxon-Mobil has famously spent some $20 million on funding denialist propaganda via front organisations
It's the share-holder who get the benefit, rather than the customers.
The top 1% in the US has done a lot better than top 1% in most other countries - the US has an unusually high GINI index for an advanced industrial country, and it seems to be gettin gmore unequal, which is also unusual
Correct, corporations aren't individuals in this context. The richest
1% are individuals who have a lot of shares in corporations, sometimes a controlling interest.What has that got to do with anything? The US-orchestrated recovery of Kuwait from Saddam Hussein after he'd invaded the place was paid for by the Defence Department, not the oil companies.
ute
It's close to half the deficit - not insignificant.
You started way too early. WW2 ended in 1945. The question only gets interesting after 1991
only goes back to 1988, when the US was spending $532 billion against the Russian's $296 billion and France's $67.4 billion - $169 billion more than it's two closest rivals, an extravagance that had the useful effect of persuading the Russian's to spend more on defence than they could afford, which lead to the disintegration of the USSR in 1991.
You'd won at the point, but rather than turning off the extravagant spending, you kept at it ...
-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
"NEW"??? Yawn! Been around for over a decade - one aspect is the light sail that needs NO internal power... Another aspect is the lazer beam..
Very well it seems. With more R & D this could replace all energy needs for planet Earth.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.