alternatehistory.com

This is kind of abstract, I know, but hear me out. Let's say some unspecified scientocratic type of group gains influence in the US - not in terms of a revolution or anything like that, but rather by influencing public discourse through think-tanks, academic conferences, popular literature, etc. And, starting in the mid-60s, they are able to push total US R&D spending to 5%-ish of GDP. (Between 1964 and today it's bounced between 2% and 3%). This happens gradually enough to not completely overwhelm the R&D establishment - let's say they hit 5% in 1985, and after that it bounces between 4.5% and 5.5%. I'm being deliberately vague about how this happens because this is primarily intended as a thought experiment.

Now, the real world is not a Civ game, where spending twice as much money gets you results twice as fast. So how much difference would roughly doubling science and technology funding make?

Obviously, it makes a significant difference how the money is spent. Are there particular fields that are chronically underfunded, and could produce significant results from an infusion of cash? Are there others where you aren't going to go any faster no matter how much money you spend? And how does the balance between federal vs. academic vs. corporate spending effect things? (For reference, currently about half of R&D spending is the federal government, of which about half is for DoD projects.)
Top