Question for those outraged about funding cuts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The government can factor in the size of a university's endowment when awarding research grants and choose not to award a school that can afford to do the research on its own.

But the government not funding any research is extremely short sighted.

The govt gets extremely cheap labor to do the research at universities. It's extremely short sighted not to recognize that as well and want to continue getting very cheap, highly qualified labor for 5-7 years out of grad students.

A lot of the UNPAID internships have been cut his summer due to hiring freezes, you are literally turning away free labor in highly competitive programs (so they are earned), make it make sense.

[Anonymous]

Why supposed liberals are so enamored of cheap or "free" grad student labor, I'll never understand. Grad students should be paid a living wage.

[Anonymous]

People were saying Harvard can do whatever they want because it's private and doesn't take any government money Lol

[Anonymous]

You know who else has a lot of money, far more than they could ever spend? Elon Musk. In their next move I expect the federal government to cut the indirect cost rate for SpaceX to 5% since clearly he had the wealth to subsidize the remainder out of his own pocket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^PP again. The bottom line:
"In 1978, Harvard University had a $1.4 billion endowment and admitted 2,200 incoming students.

In 2023, the endowment sits at $50.7 billion—with 1,942 students admitted. That’s a 3,521% increase to their endowment and a 12% decrease to their admissions. And the same is true for the rest of Ivy League."

Why do you care? Only because you are interested in destroying excellence. Go to Truth Social to find your crew.

I'm not MAGA. At all. I'm not the OP. But Harvard is hoarding wealth in opposition to its stated and historical mission. You can't be so starry-eyed about ivy league schools that you don't call them out for this insane hypocrisy.

This sounds like the same troll that's flooding the other threads attacking Ivy League schools. Sir/maam, we get it. You don't like Ivy universities, teachers, or students. But please stop trying to gaslight us. There's no question that the Ivies and Ivy-plus are driving research in this country. There's a reason why international students want to come to the US to study. Harming these schools will only hurt the US and our standing as leaders in R & D.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would I write to Harvard? My kid isn't going to go there. My kid is going to go to a school with a much, much lower endowment that will be really harmed by these cuts in funding. And his tuition might go up.

Harvard is a red herring and you know it. If you want to try to justify what this MAGA admin is doing, try something else.

+1

Harvard is most set up for the rich.

The rich hoard wealth? Who knew.

Doesn't help my kid's school

Rich and poor.
Hard working tax paying middle class are always the ones getting fcuked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know who else has a lot of money, far more than they could ever spend? Elon Musk. In their next move I expect the federal government to cut the indirect cost rate for SpaceX to 5% since clearly he had the wealth to subsidize the remainder out of his own pocket.

Why not retroactively tax all the government subsidies Elon has received? Surely the richest man in the world doesn’t need to be subsidized. Tesla paid no corporate income tax last year. If we are selectively taxing endowments, seems that should be addressed as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why supposed liberals are so enamored of cheap or "free" grad student labor, I'll never understand. Grad students should be paid a living wage.

Most of the people in masters and PhD programs I know in stem their research assistantships gave them free tuition and some even housing stipends, that's a pretty good wage. Not to mention it also gave them experience and mastery under the guidance of mentors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know who else has a lot of money, far more than they could ever spend? Elon Musk. In their next move I expect the federal government to cut the indirect cost rate for SpaceX to 5% since clearly he had the wealth to subsidize the remainder out of his own pocket.

SpaceX got 20.1 billion from the govt. Just sayin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why supposed liberals are so enamored of cheap or "free" grad student labor, I'll never understand. Grad students should be paid a living wage.

Most of the people in masters and PhD programs I know in stem their research assistantships gave them free tuition and some even housing stipends, that's a pretty good wage. Not to mention it also gave them experience and mastery under the guidance of mentors.

No it's f**ing not. Give me a break.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why supposed liberals are so enamored of cheap or "free" grad student labor, I'll never understand. Grad students should be paid a living wage.

I do advocate for grad students to be paid a living wage, and even if/when they do, they would still be cheaper than workers in industry. Nice straw man though.

-A researcher who was paid a living wage, with no TA requirement, during graduate school, and now trains graduate students who end up in academia and industry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why supposed liberals are so enamored of cheap or "free" grad student labor, I'll never understand. Grad students should be paid a living wage.

I do advocate for grad students to be paid a living wage, and even if/when they do, they would still be cheaper than workers in industry. Nice straw man though.

-A researcher who was paid a living wage, with no TA requirement, during graduate school, and now trains graduate students who end up in academia and industry.

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You say you advocate for them to be paid a living wage: that means they are not typically paid a living wage. You say "if/when" they do: that also means they are not typically paid a living wage currently. I'm genuinely glad it worked out for you (and a few others), but don't expect me to cheer the current system that screws starry-eyed grad students.

This is a real problem, not a "straw man."

[Anonymous]

But hey, I'm sure cutting the funding to university research is going to create more money to pay them right?!! Oh. Wait..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why supposed liberals are so enamored of cheap or "free" grad student labor, I'll never understand. Grad students should be paid a living wage.

I do advocate for grad students to be paid a living wage, and even if/when they do, they would still be cheaper than workers in industry. Nice straw man though.

-A researcher who was paid a living wage, with no TA requirement, during graduate school, and now trains graduate students who end up in academia and industry.

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You say you advocate for them to be paid a living wage: that means they are not typically paid a living wage. You say "if/when" they do: that also means they are not typically paid a living wage currently. I'm genuinely glad it worked out for you (and a few others), but don't expect me to cheer the current system that screws starry-eyed grad students.

This is a real problem, not a "straw man."

Nope, you're putting words in my mouth. You can google NIH stipends for graduate researchers online and see what they're paid. I do advocate for students nation-wide (whether they attend a tier 1 research institution or not) to get a living wage. I do not think that I was screwed in the current system, and considering how well my students do on the job market, I'm highly confident they are not getting screwed. The students that get screwed go to small universities with a high TA requirement that stymies their progress in lab. Even if we paid those guys (maybe you?) a living wage, they would be cheaper than paying those in industry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^PP again. The bottom line:
"In 1978, Harvard University had a $1.4 billion endowment and admitted 2,200 incoming students.

In 2023, the endowment sits at $50.7 billion—with 1,942 students admitted. That’s a 3,521% increase to their endowment and a 12% decrease to their admissions. And the same is true for the rest of Ivy League."

Not true actually. Yale expanded its undergraduate student body over the last decade.

Good on them. Yale admits and matriculations had been basically flat for the previous 75 years. Glad they finally got around to it.

clearly this is new to you, so thanks for spouting off on something you know nothing about