NSF Waste...

[TommyGunn]

M&Ms required government funded research? 

[longeyes]

And who invented and funded "the government?"

[charby]

M&Ms required government funded research? 

WWII

[TommyGunn]

M&Ms required WW2.  OK.   I thought our infantry grunts only had chocolate bars and cigarettes ....

[Ned Hamford]

If it wasn't for Government throwing money at Science and Industry we would be without a lot of things we take for granted.
Lets see....
The computer, duct tape, velcro, freeze dried food, M&M's, Internet, Nylon, Polyester, Kevlar, Carbon Fiber, etc.

And Tang 

[charby]

And Tang 

Yes glorious TANG!

I think SPAM may have come about because war spending also (WWI?), not sure about that.

[Regolith]

You sure about the M&M's thing? That sounds a bit too much like the Fisher Space Pen myth.

IIRC, Hershey's did get money to figure out how to prevent chocolate bars from melting in higher temperatures so they could be included in rations for soldiers heading to warmer climates, like in the Pacific or Northern Africa, though. You sure you're not mixing those two up?

[charby]

You sure about the M&M's thing? That sounds a bit too much like the Fisher Space Pen myth.

IIRC, Hershey's did get money to figure out how to prevent chocolate bars from melting in higher temperatures so they could be included in rations for soldiers heading to warmer climates, like in the Pacific or Northern Africa, though. You sure you're not mixing those two up?

Okay I needed to look this up because I might be confused a bit


The guy who invented M&M's got the idea during the Franco Spanish war when he saw soldiers eating candy covered chocolate bars. He noticed that the candy coating kept the chocolate from melting. He made something similar and Mars started candy production in 1941 and the US military jumped all over them for the troops fighting in WWII. Because the soldier had them in WWII they became very popular in the postwar era. So I guess it wasn't exactly a result of government support research but military spending that made this product very popular.

[Regolith]

After researching the Hershey thing, it isn't apparent that they got money for R&D for that either, though the US Military did approach Hershey and ask for them to develop it.

It also looks like it wasn't all that popular.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_chocolate

[longeyes]

The Roman Empire outlasted Caligula by 4-8 centuries, depending on the count. If Obama is Caligula, I think we're pretty well off.

Who says the Roman Empire really ended?  From what I can see we're having a pretty bad run of Emperors.

[longeyes]

If it wasn't for Government throwing money at Science and Industry we would be without a lot of things we take for granted.

Lets see....

The computer, duct tape, velcro, freeze dried food, M&M's, Internet, Nylon, Polyester, Kevlar, Carbon Fiber, etc.

Interesting how world wars can concentrate the mind, isn't it?

[GigaBuist]

You mean shrimp farming is vitally important yet shrimp farmers couldn't pull together the money needed to conduct a private study?

They could, but they wouldn't, so the government does it for them in taxes and releases the results to the public so everybody can benefit from it.

If it wasn't for Government throwing money at Science and Industry we would be without a lot of things we take for granted.

Lets see....

The computer, duct tape, velcro, freeze dried food, M&M's, Internet, Nylon, Polyester, Kevlar, Carbon Fiber, etc.

Atomic energy, GPS...

[S. Williamson]

I'll just leave this here.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMO8Pyi3UpY

[Fly320s]

So, there is a long list of successful products that were helped in some way by government funds or effort. Is there a list of failures?  Which group has used more money?

As for the food products, I don't see how that benefits the individual since the individual must pay for the M&Ms out of his own pocket. GPS and the interstate highway system are better examples of government projects that benefit everyone.

Even with all of the success stories, should the tax payer's money be used to fund these projects even though they may not be successful or may benefit select groups of people instead of the country as a whole? Should we still fund these projects even if over the next 10 years every project fails?