I know we have our Marxist definition and all that, but it seems to be a really pervasive 
, everywhere I go. Some people I’ve talked to think for instance, all scientists are silver spooned and never worked a day in their life because they don’t do construction, or whatever.
How do you argue with people like this? Can you?
Do mean that, very rarely, they can get lucky with a product/new science thing and potentially make some good cash from a firm/create their own?
From state point of view investments in science are small and very wide, sometimes (most of the times) you get knowledge that bugs do be like that, but sometimes you get atom bomb or genetically modified organisms.
People financing science can’t know where this shit will come from, so state usually casts wide net across all fields and hope for the best.
The funded organizations also will give funding to the best projects. Does that mean most interesting? Most likely to succeed? Biggest potential commercial/industrial application? It obviously depends.