Will we ever see HUGE government initiatives for Science and Engineering jobs?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the potential for significant government initiatives aimed at creating jobs in science and engineering within the United States. Participants explore the implications of funding for scientific research and education, the current job market for science PhDs, and the economic factors influencing outsourcing in these fields.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that increasing government funding for science and engineering could lead to unprecedented breakthroughs and job creation, especially given the surplus of science PhDs in the country.
  • Others express skepticism about the feasibility of such funding, citing economic considerations and the potential for outsourcing to reduce costs.
  • One participant notes that while outsourcing can save money, it may also lead to failures that necessitate hiring local workers, suggesting that not all projects benefit from being outsourced.
  • Concerns are raised about the sustainability and effectiveness of the current education system in preparing students for specialized fields in science.
  • Some participants highlight that the reduction in government spending on science and engineering may be linked to historical events, such as the end of the Cold War, and question whether public interest in science can be maintained without a significant external threat.
  • There is a viewpoint that the perceived glut of science PhDs may not reflect unemployment but rather a saturation in certain career paths, with some participants asserting that many PhDs are successfully employed in research or industry roles.
  • Historical examples of government initiatives in science and engineering, such as the Apollo program and the Manhattan Project, are cited as evidence that such initiatives already exist.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions, with some advocating for increased government involvement in science and engineering, while others emphasize economic constraints and the effectiveness of outsourcing. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing views on the necessity and feasibility of such initiatives.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of the job market for science PhDs and the potential impact of historical and economic factors on government funding for science and engineering. There are also discussions about the effectiveness of current educational approaches in preparing future scientists and engineers.

avant-garde
Messages
195
Reaction score
0
You can tell me if this is bull**** but it seems to me that all there is left for America (whether it is possible to fund is another story) to create more jobs is to make engineering and especially science a regular, highly funded aspect of the government.

There is a glut of science PhD's in this country, and it's clear that the nation overall could be making unprecedented breakthroughs in science if all or most of them were put to work in their respective fields. To me, the only justification for big government is to fund this type of an initiative.

What are your thoughts? What do you guys think about this issue, and what will likely happen in the near future?


*edit: also, should children be given intense science education starting at a much, much younger age? With all of the previous discoveries/knowledge there is to learn in order for one's work to contribute to even more specialized fields, is the current education system sustainable and effective?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
avant-garde said:
You can tell me if this is bull**** but it seems to me that all there is left for America (whether it is possible to fund is another story) to create more jobs is to make engineering and especially science a regular, highly funded aspect of the government.

There is a glut of science PhD's in this country, and it's clear that the nation overall could be making unprecedented breakthroughs in science if all or most of them were put to work in their respective fields. To me, the only justification for big government is to fund this type of an initiative.

What are your thoughts? What do you guys think about this issue, and what will likely happen in the near future?

I agree. Not even to just create more jobs I think that more science specific jobs should be created just for sheer amount of knowledge we have to gain from it. I wanted to go into Biology but when I was looking at job outlooks it didn't look so great. Now I'm not sure if it's worth the time or money.
 
From the economic point of view, Science/Engineering in US is a huge financial drain when same can be done if outsourced for a fraction of the cost. Companies that have outsourced have been tapping cheap labor and as a result generate more wealth which can be reinvested to make better products.
 
what said:
Companies that have outsourced have been tapping cheap labor and as a result generate more wealth which can be reinvested to make better products.

1.
Not true in all cases. I have heard of some outsourced projects that failed so the company had to spend more money hiring local peoples to fix the things... I think only big budget projects are outsourced currently and there are special companies (e.g. http://www.accenture.com/) that carry out the projects. But still you need to have someone here to meet with customer and define requirements/keep constant communication.

(My past employer went outside country for a month while I was starting on a new project. Because of inadequate communication, it took twice the time relative to other ones. He tried outsourcing before me)

2.
Other countries might not have as technological advanced tools as US. Most funding is done for research in new areas. Why would you outsource when the other country government doesn't provide sufficient support for carrying out the research?

3.
Political instabilities/Dealing with the laws
(Google in China)
 
Last edited:
Somewhat ironically, the US's victory in the cold war may be a major reason for the reduction (or reduction as percentage of spending, I don't have the figures) you are talking about.
 
avant-garde said:
There is a glut of science PhD's in this country

I think that's nonsense. The "problem" is that there are more science PhD's produced that can go down a career path that produces more science PhD's. But it's not like they are unemployed or unemployable.

I have what most people would call a successful research career. I also have people from industry calling regularly trying to entice me to leave it and work for them.
 
Galteeth said:
Somewhat ironically, the US's victory in the cold war may be a major reason for the reduction (or reduction as percentage of spending, I don't have the figures) you are talking about.

Yes, and this begs the question of whether it is possible to maintain the masses' interest in science when there is no "big threat" looming over us.

However, it seems that the "big threat" could come in the shape of depleting resources coupled with overpopulation. Ironically, though, that doesn't feel as imminent as pitting ourselves in competition against other human beings (as in the case of the USSR). Human nature, I guess.
 
Last edited:
Maybe Thomas Edison knows, or perhaps John Galt.
 
We already have "huge government initiatives" for science and engineering. See the defense and aerospace industries.
 
  • #10
TVA, Apollo program, Manhattan Project, Army Corps of Engineers...

Heck, anything that supports infrastructure is an engineering initiative.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
Replies
11
Views
12K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
37
Views
8K