d rather pay lower taxes. Because of this, any government funding outlay is scrutinized by the public, as it questions its merits. This is especially true of the DoD Budget. The budget has decreased steadily over the last decade, which has been viewed as the acceptable direction in which it should move by many. Much of the disdain towards the multi-billion dollar DoD budget comes from negative press portrayals. Years ago it was the revelation of outrageous prices paid for minor items such as hammers. The current controversy stems from the problems DoD has had accounting for the funds it is allocated from Congress. When the DoD cannot explain what happened to the money it is given, it is understandable that people would question why they are given so much. As the budget decreases the slice of the pie available for R&D funding becomes smaller as well. While R&D funding has stayed somewhat stable, as more critics call for a smaller military, the funding is threatened.Another cost that is cited is the notion that instead of supplementing private R&D outlays, the government is replacing it. This idea questions the way that the government, and DoD allocate R&D to private entities. David, Hall and Toole cite studies in their working paper Is Public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? in which the benefits that private firms derived from the public expenditures are said to have been both predictable and large enough to have elicited financing from profit-seeking firms. (5) This is a serious cost-issue, because it questions the fundamental purpose for government funding of R&D. This purpose is not to replace private funding, but to supplement it with research that otherwise would not have been conducted.The final important cost that relates to the general concept of funding military R&D is whether the government and the DoD are funding the right types of projects.The most important benefit that must be acknowledged is th...
