Science funding was already way too low(gabrielweinberg.com)
gabrielweinberg.com
Science funding was already way too low
https://gabrielweinberg.com/p/science-funding-was-already-way-too
3 comments
[deleted]
I'm not sure what the rationale for the Trump administration cutting science funding is? Is there some method in the madness as it were?
My hypothesis: it is about control.
Education level is correlated with voting preference [0].
US universities are funded in large part by scientific research grants. Cutting funding directly damages these institutions, and it gives the current administration leverage they can use to influence university political policies through either overt ultimatums (cut DEI or we don’t give you the money) or indirectly by funding professors with pro-administration viewpoints while defunding professors with anti-administration viewpoints.
[0]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1535279/presidential-ele...
Education level is correlated with voting preference [0].
US universities are funded in large part by scientific research grants. Cutting funding directly damages these institutions, and it gives the current administration leverage they can use to influence university political policies through either overt ultimatums (cut DEI or we don’t give you the money) or indirectly by funding professors with pro-administration viewpoints while defunding professors with anti-administration viewpoints.
[0]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1535279/presidential-ele...
> I'm not sure what the rationale for the Trump administration cutting science funding is? Is there some method in the madness as it were?
Childish "retaliation" in the only way they know how (bullying) against the people who prove their favorite "tinfoil hat" theories wrong time after time (science nerds) mostly?
Childish "retaliation" in the only way they know how (bullying) against the people who prove their favorite "tinfoil hat" theories wrong time after time (science nerds) mostly?
Furthermore, I concur with the piece that a proper investment in the said fields would further the common good.
However, take objection with equating investment with investment in the way specifically done up until now.
The article opens with longevity; the Alzheimer amyloid hypothesis, which served as a bandwagon for low impact, perhaps even bad faith research, whole syphoning out billions of public spending and blocking out alternate research pathways.
Many of the other domains mentioned exhibit similar dynamics. To my ears, it makes little sense to champion further spending without exploring the reform that needs to be carried out to align that spending with the various notions of public good.
To reiterate, I abhor the populist choice of dismantling everything and putting cronies to feed off the rest. I'd be looking forward for a way forward to make change, because some change is due.