I post this question on politics.se, as suggested by [this answer][4] of [Bjørn Kjos-Hanssen][5].  


The research in [pure mathematics][1] has (generally) no other choice that being funded  by public organizations and universities, so that the money allocated to it (for new positions, new institutes, conferences...) depends on decisions of people with high responsibilities (generically *politicians*), who are (generally) unfamiliar with this research area.  

> **Question**: Why fund the research in pure mathematics?

  
Through this question, I would like to know and understand, on one hand, the main arguments of the *politicians* (or eq.) for deciding to allocate a particular proportion of their budget to the research in pure mathematics, and on the other hand, the main arguments of the *mathematicians* themselves.  
I'm also interested in new (or not sufficiently developed publicly) arguments.   
 
**Remark**: In order to be fair, the arguments in support **or** against (either some or more) fund the research in pure mathematics, are likewise requested (see [this comment][2] of [Steven Landsburg][3]).  




  [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_mathematics
  [2]: http://meta.mathoverflow.net/questions/1609/is-the-question-why-fund-the-research-in-pure-mathematics-allowed-on-mo#comment7408_1609
  [3]: http://www.thebigquestions.com/the-author/
  [4]: http://meta.mathoverflow.net/a/1612/34538
  [5]: http://math.hawaii.edu/wordpress/bjoern/