Why do very rich people earn more on their capital than less rich people? (in proportion to the size of their wealth). There are several reasons, but one of them is that they can afford some frivolity. Then it is possible to buy shares in 10 companies, accept that seven of them will go bankrupt, two will pay off just fine, and one will make a fabulous profit, so that the annual total is, say, ten percent.
Science works very similarly. Out of hundreds of researches, only a few will yield benefits. It’s just that (as with investments) no one can tell in advance which ones they will be. However, in the long run, it turns out that supporting science pays off even where most of the money is wasted.
If the state were to support key strategic sectors, we could expect something similar. Most individual projects are just money wasted, but significant positive overall benefits. It would make sense. It’s just that try to imagine – the newspapers are awash with dramatic descriptions of individual rip-offs or debacles, and solemn economists proclaiming that most of the projects supported have ended in bankruptcy… we can imagine that visually there would be a feeling that it doesn’t work and that it’s just a huge theft.
One of the necessary conditions for the recovery of national wealth is enough people capable of navigating not by what evokes the greatest emotion. People capable of understanding that success is measured by the whole, not by individual projects.
