Is it possible to make science as marketable as Engineering?

[symbolipoint]

Good point.

Bad point, for America at least. Capitalism does a decent job of making marketable that which IS marketable and trying to force the issue rarely works well. Just look at disasters created in China and Russia when the state decided what is marketable and what isn't. Even now, when China no longer has a totally central economy, it is not doing as well as it would if they avoided state owned and run companies.

Good point.

Bad point, for America at least. Capitalism does a decent job of making marketable that which IS marketable and trying to force the issue rarely works well. Just look at disasters created in China and Russia when the state decided what is marketable and what isn't. Even now, when China no longer has a totally central economy, it is not doing as well as it would if they avoided state owned and run companies.

What disasters were there?
What is the problem with the state deciding what is marketable and what is not?

Government can make some things marketable, such as the Sciences, and this has been done, outside of ordinary routines of capitalism, and this has made sciences more marketable. Pick any example country you like. An example may be, the space-race during the 1960's. Increases in students studied the Sciences, Mathematics, and Engineering. Those who graduated either found government jobs or jobs in companies involving S.T.E.M.

 

[ISamson]

Government can make some things marketable, such as the Sciences, and this has been done, outside of ordinary routines of capitalism, and this has made sciences more marketable. Pick any example country you like. An example may be, the space-race during the 1960's. Increases in students studied the Sciences, Mathematics, and Engineering. Those who graduated either found government jobs or jobs in companies involving S.T.E.M.

Good explanation, thank you.

 

[Mark44]

What is the problem with the state deciding what is marketable and what is not?

A related question is "What is the problem with the state deciding what to manufacture and what not to manufacture?"

The answer is that a centralized entity does a far poorer job of making this decision than do millions of separate buyers, each acting on his or her own behalf. This decision-making by the multitudes was called the "invisible hand" by Adam Smith. An example of central planning was the Soviet Union, where citizens routinely had to stand in long lines for items like bread, shoes, etc.

 

[symbolipoint]

What disasters were there?
What is the problem with the state deciding what is marketable and what is not?

Depends what State wants to market. If the State people decide they want stronger scientific or engineering capabilities, then State can promote this and several people may try to study for sciences and engineering. Harder for the State to say, "people, we wish you would eat more squash, so we are going to import many different ones from several places; please buy and eat some."

 

[Grands]

. Just look at disasters created in China and Russia when the state decided what is marketable and what isn't.

I don't think that there is a relationship between the job opportunity the race to moon made and the lack fo the "invisible hand".
In my opinion still today Russian and Cina does not have a completely free trade.

In some cases the State promotes people that want to study engineering, giving them scholarships or financial help, so it encourage people to do it, but don't oblige no one in a explicit way.

The problem is that Science, unless it is linked with engineering, and remain on his own, do not give the possibility to create goods or services, only in few cases, for example the Einstein's relativity theory makes GPS to works with great precision, but I can't so so many application that can create lot of job opportunities.

 

[phinds]

The problem is that Science, unless it is linked with engineering, and remain on his own, do not give the possibility to create goods or services, only in few cases, for example the Einstein's relativity theory makes GPS to works with great precision, but I can't so so many application that can create lot of job opportunities.

In what way do you believe that GPS systems are not linked to engineering? Do you understand that ALL of modern electronics is based on Quantum Mechanics "linked to engineering" ?

 

[Grands]

In what way do you believe that GPS systems are not linked to engineering? Do you understand that ALL of modern electronics is based on Quantum Mechanics "linked to engineering" ?

It's a rare case where a company that want to create a GPS need a physicists that studied the relativity theory.
It's implied that everything else that makes the GPS to work is made by engineers, from the case to the electronic circuits.
I never said that GPS do not need engineers.

 

[phinds]

It's a rare case where a company that want to create a GPS need a physicists that studied the relativity theory.
It's implied that everything else that makes the GPS to work is made by engineers, from the case to the electronic circuits.
I never said that GPS do not need engineers.

A reasonable point. I was addressing a specific aspect of your post and not your more broad question of creating a situation where scientists get jobs. I still think the market does a good job.

 

[symbolipoint]

I don't think that there is a relationship between the job opportunity the race to moon made and the lack fo the "invisible hand".
In my opinion still today Russian and Cina does not have a completely free trade.

In some cases the State promotes people that want to study engineering, giving them scholarships or financial help, so it encourage people to do it, but don't oblige no one in a explicit way.

The problem is that Science, unless it is linked with engineering, and remain on his own, do not give the possibility to create goods or services, only in few cases, for example the Einstein's relativity theory makes GPS to works with great precision, but I can't so so many application that can create lot of job opportunities.

A reasonable point. I was addressing a specific aspect of your post and not your more broad question of creating a situation where scientists get jobs. I still think the market does a good job.

The point intended was missed. Governments can be clients, too, just as other companies and ordinary citizens and other organized groups. When the governments decide that "we need more engineers and people to learn more in sciences", and then supplies funding to schools, and tells people that "we need more people to become scientists and engineers", do you then believe no motivated students will respond?

I earlier mentioned the "space-race". That was real. Suddenly many young people were attracted to Mathematics, Technology, Sciences, and Engineering, even if some of the encouragement to do so came from their parents. That was marketing for S.T.E.M, and it worked.

 

[Grands]

I earlier mentioned the "space-race". That was real. Suddenly many young people were attracted to Mathematics, Technology, Sciences, and Engineering, even if some of the encouragement to do so came from their parents. That was marketing for S.T.E.M, and it worked.

Really?
Wow!
I didn't know that, it was a kind of propaganda ?
In my opinion, beside this, the arriving of the man on the moon was one of the greatest thing humanity did.

Anyway, why the parents used to encourage people to study STEM?
I know plenty of parents that discourage or do not give to their son the possibility to study physics or math.

 

[symbolipoint]

Really?
Wow!
I didn't know that, it was a kind of propaganda ?
In my opinion, beside this, the arriving of the man on the moon was one of the greatest thing humanity did.

Anyway, why the parents used to encourage people to study STEM?
I know plenty of parents that discourage or do not give to their son the possibility to study physics or math.

Far less propaganda than actual selling or asking or encouragement.

Putting a man-on-the-moon was mostly not the point. This was just one goal or objective. Technological advancement and applying it was the basic goal. Men actually reaching and making contact was just one example but mostly an interesting or fascinating spectacle.

Why would parents encourage their children to study sciences, mathematics, or engineering, you ask? Get serious!

 

[phinds]

I didn't know that, it was a kind of propaganda ?

Yes. It was started entirely as a response to the Russian's Sputnik in the cold war. Once it got started, the American public embraced it wholeheartedly, partly because of the brilliant marketing by NASA, putting the "All American" astronauts and their wives on the cover of POST magazine every now and then. (The magazine was happy to oblige since it boosted ratings).

 

[symbolipoint]

phinds, #42 very well-said.