Business
New fund incentivizes US investment in Israeli start-ups
Ynetnews
Published: 03.07.10, 08:57
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
3 Talkbacks for this article
1. The real danger to Israel isn't the boycott movement or terr
The Dude   (07.03.10)
terror. It's out own divestment from education! The fact is that in the end of the day we live in a meritocracy. People need processors, search engines, operating software, cellphones, pharmaceuticals, medical advances, and biotechnology, and the list goes on and on. We need to invest more into our schools and Universities. We need to make them rise in ranks and make education once again a societal priority. Everyone should be able via merit to rise through the knowledge ranks and help produce more advances for Israel. This is what keeps Israel in it's position of power. The fact is that for all the talks of boycotting Israel, you can't realistically boycott Israel when you send an email complaining about the country on a Windows running PC, with an Intel processor, followed by instant messaging friends about an anti-Israel rally, then use your cellphone to call and double check the time, after you take a TEVA generic Ibprofin to alleviate that headache, followed by visiting a sick relative at the hospital getting some kind of stem cell treatment.
2. The Dude
Mark ,   israel   (07.03.10)
Eloquently put and I agree with what you say. One thing that bothers me is, is the solution to the education problem to be found in throwing money at it? I have the distressing feeling that it runs deeper and wider than that. Regretably it seems to me that it hasn't begun to be addressed .
3. To 2
The Dude   (07.04.10)
While at the elementary and highschool I have to admit I'm a bit unaware how to solve and improve the situation... I do believe that at the University level we can fix things by following the Swiss model. Unlike a lot of other Universities in the world, you don't get a full tenured position in many major Swiss Uni's,in particular ETH Zurich. What they do instead is that they have 5 year contracts, and during each interval, depending on how successful the faculty member was, decides how well he/she can negotiate for a better contract. Another aspect is that instead of just building new buildings all the time, their should be funds to help start up laboratories to buy new equipment. Or to help in buying generally shared equipment in departments. The problem is that we shouldn't be throwing money blindly as you state. What we need to do is view the money differently. That each time the state does something, it's an investment. Is this investment in this microscope worthwhile? Will it improve the research or is it just a fancy toy. What needs to continue and be enforced, is again a meritocracy. You do well you get money. No vitamin P.
Back to article