The government grants to scientists with other peoples’ money. Private grantors (or those who donate to the grantors) spend their own money.
Discussion
True, but that’s more a statement about government theft than anything. These grant proposals are reviewed by blinded academics, not government employees or appointees.
Unless the private grantors have the expertise to review proposals at scale, they would likely follow a similar process
As Effective Altruists have pointed out, charitable giving is not as results-driven as it could be. Still, it has to be less wasteful than government grants, because the givers have skin in the game.
You’re assuming the givers are giving with a near-term expected application of results, which is not the case with grant funded research.
What you’re saying is true about privately funded research and development within business. Reread what I said about that
No, I’m not. Private givers may not always expect a marketable product to result from the research they fund, but they at least expect new knowledge. Preferably important or profound knowledge.
Ah so the scientists would be incentivized to spin their findings as marketably as possible in order to secure more funding in the future? You don’t say
That was never in dispute. I’m not suggesting that substituting private grants for government grants would produce science nirvana.
What was it Milton Friedman said about the four ways to spend money?
Here it is.