<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Scrambling for dollars</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.spacepolitics.com/2006/01/05/scrambling-for-dollars/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2006/01/05/scrambling-for-dollars/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=scrambling-for-dollars</link>
	<description>Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Parkin</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2006/01/05/scrambling-for-dollars/#comment-6514</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin Parkin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2006 22:08:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=777#comment-6514</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Jeff, please can you delete previous post as links only working in this one)

In general I couldn&#039;t agree more, though in this case AAAS compiled the figures and to their credit break them down in all kinds of interesting ways:

&lt;p&gt;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fy06.htm&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Take a look at the Supplemental Tables and Charts:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fst06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Table A. &quot;FS&amp;T Budget&quot; by Agency&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/earm06c1.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Table B. Congressional Earmarks for R&amp;D by Agency and Program&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trtot06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006 &lt;/a&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fy2006rdc.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;FY 2006 R&amp;D Appropriations (Final vs. Request)&lt;/a&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trtot06gdp.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Federal R&amp;D as % of GDP, FY 1976-2006&lt;/a&gt;  
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trnon06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Nondefense R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006&lt;/a&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trdef06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Defense R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trres06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Research, FY 1995-2006&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trbas06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Basic Research, FY 1975-2006&lt;/a&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/cht9006c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1990-2006 (DOD, NIH, NASA, NSF, DOE)&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/cht9006d.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1990-2006 (USDA, DOC, DOI, DOT, EPA)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Jeff, please can you delete previous post as links only working in this one)</p>
<p>In general I couldn&#8217;t agree more, though in this case AAAS compiled the figures and to their credit break them down in all kinds of interesting ways:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fy06.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fy06.htm</a></p>
<p>Take a look at the Supplemental Tables and Charts:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fst06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Table A. &quot;FS&amp;T Budget&quot; by Agency</a>
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/earm06c1.pdf" rel="nofollow">Table B. Congressional Earmarks for R&amp;D by Agency and Program</a>
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trtot06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006 </a>
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fy2006rdc.pdf" rel="nofollow">FY 2006 R&amp;D Appropriations (Final vs. Request)</a>
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trtot06gdp.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Federal R&amp;D as % of GDP, FY 1976-2006</a>
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trnon06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Nondefense R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006</a>
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trdef06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Defense R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006</a>
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trres06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Research, FY 1995-2006</a>
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/trbas06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Basic Research, FY 1975-2006</a>
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/cht9006c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1990-2006 (DOD, NIH, NASA, NSF, DOE)</a>
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/cht9006d.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1990-2006 (USDA, DOC, DOI, DOT, EPA)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Parkin</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2006/01/05/scrambling-for-dollars/#comment-6513</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin Parkin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2006 21:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=777#comment-6513</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In general I couldn&#039;t agree more, though in this case AAAS compiled the figures and to their credit break them down in all kinds of interesting ways:

http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fy06.htm

Take a look at the Supplemental Tables and Charts:

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;hist06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Historical Federal R&amp;D by Agency, 1976-2006 (current dollars)&lt;/a&gt;  
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;hist06c2.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Historical Federal R&amp;D by Agency, 1976-2006 (CONSTANT FY 2005 dollars)&lt;/a&gt;  
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;fst06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Table A. &quot;FS&amp;T Budget&quot; by Agency&lt;/a&gt; 
                                &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;earm06c1.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Table B. Congressional Earmarks for R&amp;D by Agency and Program&lt;/a&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;trtot06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006 &lt;/a&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;fy2006rdc.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;FY 2006 R&amp;D Appropriations (Final vs. Request)&lt;/a&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;trtot06gdp.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Federal R&amp;D as % of GDP, FY 1976-2006&lt;/a&gt;  
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;trnon06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Nondefense R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006&lt;/a&gt;  
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;trdef06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Defense R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006&lt;/a&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;trres06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Research, FY 1995-2006&lt;/a&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;trbas06c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Basic Research, FY 1975-2006&lt;/a&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;cht9006c.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1990-2006 (DOD, NIH, NASA, NSF, DOE)&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;cht9006d.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1990-2006 (USDA, DOC, DOI, DOT, EPA)&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In general I couldn&#8217;t agree more, though in this case AAAS compiled the figures and to their credit break them down in all kinds of interesting ways:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fy06.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fy06.htm</a></p>
<p>Take a look at the Supplemental Tables and Charts:</p>
<p><a href="hist06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Historical Federal R&amp;D by Agency, 1976-2006 (current dollars)</a>
</p>
<p><a href="hist06c2.pdf" rel="nofollow">Historical Federal R&amp;D by Agency, 1976-2006 (CONSTANT FY 2005 dollars)</a>
</p>
<p><a href="fst06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Table A. &quot;FS&amp;T Budget&quot; by Agency</a>
                                </p>
<p><a href="earm06c1.pdf" rel="nofollow">Table B. Congressional Earmarks for R&amp;D by Agency and Program</a>
</p>
<p><a href="trtot06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006 </a>
</p>
<p><a href="fy2006rdc.pdf" rel="nofollow">FY 2006 R&amp;D Appropriations (Final vs. Request)</a>
</p>
<p><a href="trtot06gdp.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Federal R&amp;D as % of GDP, FY 1976-2006</a>
</p>
<p><a href="trnon06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Nondefense R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006</a>
</p>
<p><a href="trdef06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Defense R&amp;D, FY 1976-2006</a>
</p>
<p><a href="trres06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Research, FY 1995-2006</a>
</p>
<p><a href="trbas06c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Basic Research, FY 1975-2006</a>
</p>
<p><a href="cht9006c.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1990-2006 (DOD, NIH, NASA, NSF, DOE)</a>
</p>
<p><a href="cht9006d.pdf" rel="nofollow">Trends in Federal R&amp;D, FY 1990-2006 (USDA, DOC, DOI, DOT, EPA)</a> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rand Simberg</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2006/01/05/scrambling-for-dollars/#comment-6512</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rand Simberg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2006 13:44:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=777#comment-6512</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And as usual, we seem unable to make critical distinctions between &quot;science,&quot; &quot;R&amp;D,&quot; and &quot;technology.&quot;

These are all different animals, but they tend to get lumped into the same federal cubbyhole.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And as usual, we seem unable to make critical distinctions between &#8220;science,&#8221; &#8220;R&#038;D,&#8221; and &#8220;technology.&#8221;</p>
<p>These are all different animals, but they tend to get lumped into the same federal cubbyhole.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
