Question for those outraged about funding cuts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But it is a MAGA talking point to yell about Harvard's endowment. Slashing NIH funding will hurt West Virginia University, Pitt, University of Maryland, and so on. And you didn't give those as an example. You picked the instituion in the BEST position to weather this storm.

Also, if you were genuinely asking, when you ask schools to dig in to their endowments to fund research, you're asking universities to pay for the research the public needs. University of Maryland doesn't need us to cure lukemia, the public does. Which is why the public invests in research. Universities won't see it as their jobs to cover the public need for health research.

I'm in research, and every biomedical health researcher I know thinks this is going to drastically impact our progress. People who are actually in the field and know how things work. It's astounding to me that either people outside of the system think they know better - either that of they don't even care that health innovations will be drastically cut. Clinical trials won't be funded at anywhere near the same pace.

Those of you in red states, please call your congressional representatives. PLEASE.

I would love to know if anyone is reading these well reasoned arguments about NIH funding and listening. Are any folks who have digested MAGA talking points open enough to say "Oh I didn't think of it that way. Geez I guess this is a big deal." I would feel so much better if I heard of ONE person who approached this with humility and didn't blindly accept right wing rhetoric (rhetoric offered mostly by people who have spent no time understanding the complex issues here).

Would you grant the same courtesy and justify all the funding and not just listen to the left-wing propaganda?

Of course, every researcher whose income is in some way tied to this funding has a massive incentive to say the sky is falling if not funded. You know, it is like asking a barber if you need a haircut. You know what the answer is going to be.

I voted for Hillary, Biden, and Kamala. Cannot get myself to vote for someone who instigated Jan 6th and many such atrocious behaviors. So, not MAGA at all.

But I fully support these cuts.

Not because it does not do good, it does, but because there is so much waste. I had a front row seat to this waste.

This is where many of you are exact carbon copies of MAGA. You are just 100% convinced you are right and that this funding is absolutely needed and anyone who questions this must be most charitably called "un-educated".

You know the thing is I don’t have to defend every $ spent by a university because there is a right way to make cuts and a wrong way.

You want to debate what the proper overhead % is, that’s fine. Let’s have that discussion and maybe we’ll end up with a different one after airing all the viewpoints.

But right now Congress has specified the overhead % and those grants have been awarded and no ahole gets to come along and announce that as of tomorrow the % is being cut down to 15% because project 2025 or whatever

This is precisely why Musk is doing what he is doing. There is no incentive for anyone in the system to agree to anything but the barest of bare minimum cuts.

Swamp would never agree to drain itself.

That is literally an argument for replacing our constitutional democracy with dictatorship

Just disgusting how many of you are willing to walk away from democracy because someone told you lies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those having a breakdown over the protection funding cuts-
why doesn’t Harvard and others open up their coffers? Harvard has how much? $53 BILLION??? Maybe it’s time these greedy institutions start using their money to offset possible increases in tuition?

For every 1 letter you send to Congress, send 20 to Harvard and the others.

Thinly veiled MAGA attack on the universities. Existing system works well, no reason to change except your irrational hatred for excellence.

If you asked Syria's ex-president Assad he would have said the same thing "Existing system works well, no reason to change except your irrational hatred for..."

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. I think the question is who is responsible for “keeping the lights on” and other such overhead costs. Seems like the institutions should be responsible for most of this. It’s worth noting that most private foundations limit their overhead payments to 15%. Grants are for the actual research. Institutions have responsibilities for overhead and can’t put it all on the grantor.

I seriously question your assumption that “most” private foundations limit to 15%. Also you seem wildly unfamiliar with the federal regulations that explicitly describe the criteria for and related federal commitments to pay grant indirect costs.

I know of exactly one US foundation that has a 15% indirect cost but they would describe many of the items the federal government considers “indirect” as direct costs, so the comparison makes no sense anyway.

It’s like saying Northrop Grumman should pay for security, utilities, buildings, payroll, bank fees, compliance, audits, etc because that is their responsibility and the government only wants to pay for the materials and labor for the actual airplane. I think Northrop Grumman would politely decline. What makes university research so different?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those having a breakdown over the protection funding cuts-
why doesn’t Harvard and others open up their coffers? Harvard has how much? $53 BILLION??? Maybe it’s time these greedy institutions start using their money to offset possible increases in tuition?

For every 1 letter you send to Congress, send 20 to Harvard and the others.

Thinly veiled MAGA attack on the universities. Existing system works well, no reason to change except your irrational hatred for excellence.

Yep. We're going to have an efficient country with 0 innovation. Sounds great for our competitiveness on the global stage.

I suppose that is what T is selling, but what he's really angling for is a country efficiently designed to feed his greed. So, the net result would be an inefficient country with 0 innovation and a highly enriched Trump from his tax cuts for the wealthy and violations of emoluments clause with his properties, merch and crypto. His greed will crush his own followers who will give him every last dollar then try to blame Biden or Obama (or Hillary 's emails) for lack of SS or Medicaid or whatever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But it is a MAGA talking point to yell about Harvard's endowment. Slashing NIH funding will hurt West Virginia University, Pitt, University of Maryland, and so on. And you didn't give those as an example. You picked the instituion in the BEST position to weather this storm.

Also, if you were genuinely asking, when you ask schools to dig in to their endowments to fund research, you're asking universities to pay for the research the public needs. University of Maryland doesn't need us to cure lukemia, the public does. Which is why the public invests in research. Universities won't see it as their jobs to cover the public need for health research.

I'm in research, and every biomedical health researcher I know thinks this is going to drastically impact our progress. People who are actually in the field and know how things work. It's astounding to me that either people outside of the system think they know better - either that of they don't even care that health innovations will be drastically cut. Clinical trials won't be funded at anywhere near the same pace.

Those of you in red states, please call your congressional representatives. PLEASE.

I would love to know if anyone is reading these well reasoned arguments about NIH funding and listening. Are any folks who have digested MAGA talking points open enough to say "Oh I didn't think of it that way. Geez I guess this is a big deal." I would feel so much better if I heard of ONE person who approached this with humility and didn't blindly accept right wing rhetoric (rhetoric offered mostly by people who have spent no time understanding the complex issues here).

Would you grant the same courtesy and justify all the funding and not just listen to the left-wing propaganda?

Of course, every researcher whose income is in some way tied to this funding has a massive incentive to say the sky is falling if not funded. You know, it is like asking a barber if you need a haircut. You know what the answer is going to be.

I voted for Hillary, Biden, and Kamala. Cannot get myself to vote for someone who instigated Jan 6th and many such atrocious behaviors. So, not MAGA at all.

But I fully support these cuts.

Not because it does not do good, it does, but because there is so much waste. I had a front row seat to this waste.

This is where many of you are exact carbon copies of MAGA. You are just 100% convinced you are right and that this funding is absolutely needed and anyone who questions this must be most charitably called "un-educated".

You know the thing is I don’t have to defend every $ spent by a university because there is a right way to make cuts and a wrong way.

You want to debate what the proper overhead % is, that’s fine. Let’s have that discussion and maybe we’ll end up with a different one after airing all the viewpoints.

But right now Congress has specified the overhead % and those grants have been awarded and no ahole gets to come along and announce that as of tomorrow the % is being cut down to 15% because project 2025 or whatever

This is precisely why Musk is doing what he is doing. There is no incentive for anyone in the system to agree to anything but the barest of bare minimum cuts.

Swamp would never agree to drain itself.

That is literally an argument for replacing our constitutional democracy with dictatorship

Just disgusting how many of you are willing to walk away from democracy because someone told you lies

Yes. Trump has effectively divorced a large chunk of people from viable reporting and actual facts. A combination of denigrating legitimate news outlets, promoting biased propaganda factories and controlling social media through his tech bro buddies. When confronted with facts, they just double down on cult like insanity. Watch any Jordan Klepper segment. The best is during the inauguration when he showed a guy pics of violent criminals in action on 1/6 that Trump pardoned, and the guy finally said "Maybe I've been watching the wrong news" after seeing what they had actually done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But it is a MAGA talking point to yell about Harvard's endowment. Slashing NIH funding will hurt West Virginia University, Pitt, University of Maryland, and so on. And you didn't give those as an example. You picked the instituion in the BEST position to weather this storm.

Also, if you were genuinely asking, when you ask schools to dig in to their endowments to fund research, you're asking universities to pay for the research the public needs. University of Maryland doesn't need us to cure lukemia, the public does. Which is why the public invests in research. Universities won't see it as their jobs to cover the public need for health research.

I'm in research, and every biomedical health researcher I know thinks this is going to drastically impact our progress. People who are actually in the field and know how things work. It's astounding to me that either people outside of the system think they know better - either that of they don't even care that health innovations will be drastically cut. Clinical trials won't be funded at anywhere near the same pace.

Those of you in red states, please call your congressional representatives. PLEASE.

I would love to know if anyone is reading these well reasoned arguments about NIH funding and listening. Are any folks who have digested MAGA talking points open enough to say "Oh I didn't think of it that way. Geez I guess this is a big deal." I would feel so much better if I heard of ONE person who approached this with humility and didn't blindly accept right wing rhetoric (rhetoric offered mostly by people who have spent no time understanding the complex issues here).

Would you grant the same courtesy and justify all the funding and not just listen to the left-wing propaganda?

Of course, every researcher whose income is in some way tied to this funding has a massive incentive to say the sky is falling if not funded. You know, it is like asking a barber if you need a haircut. You know what the answer is going to be.

I voted for Hillary, Biden, and Kamala. Cannot get myself to vote for someone who instigated Jan 6th and many such atrocious behaviors. So, not MAGA at all.

But I fully support these cuts.

Not because it does not do good, it does, but because there is so much waste. I had a front row seat to this waste.

This is where many of you are exact carbon copies of MAGA. You are just 100% convinced you are right and that this funding is absolutely needed and anyone who questions this must be most charitably called "un-educated".

You’ve shown throughout this thread that you have no clue about NIH research.

[Anonymous]

The bottom line is - for those in the back - WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS ILLEGAL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But it is a MAGA talking point to yell about Harvard's endowment. Slashing NIH funding will hurt West Virginia University, Pitt, University of Maryland, and so on. And you didn't give those as an example. You picked the instituion in the BEST position to weather this storm.

Also, if you were genuinely asking, when you ask schools to dig in to their endowments to fund research, you're asking universities to pay for the research the public needs. University of Maryland doesn't need us to cure lukemia, the public does. Which is why the public invests in research. Universities won't see it as their jobs to cover the public need for health research.

I'm in research, and every biomedical health researcher I know thinks this is going to drastically impact our progress. People who are actually in the field and know how things work. It's astounding to me that either people outside of the system think they know better - either that of they don't even care that health innovations will be drastically cut. Clinical trials won't be funded at anywhere near the same pace.

Those of you in red states, please call your congressional representatives. PLEASE.

I would love to know if anyone is reading these well reasoned arguments about NIH funding and listening. Are any folks who have digested MAGA talking points open enough to say "Oh I didn't think of it that way. Geez I guess this is a big deal." I would feel so much better if I heard of ONE person who approached this with humility and didn't blindly accept right wing rhetoric (rhetoric offered mostly by people who have spent no time understanding the complex issues here).

Would you grant the same courtesy and justify all the funding and not just listen to the left-wing propaganda?

Of course, every researcher whose income is in some way tied to this funding has a massive incentive to say the sky is falling if not funded. You know, it is like asking a barber if you need a haircut. You know what the answer is going to be.

I voted for Hillary, Biden, and Kamala. Cannot get myself to vote for someone who instigated Jan 6th and many such atrocious behaviors. So, not MAGA at all.

But I fully support these cuts.

Not because it does not do good, it does, but because there is so much waste. I had a front row seat to this waste.

This is where many of you are exact carbon copies of MAGA. You are just 100% convinced you are right and that this funding is absolutely needed and anyone who questions this must be most charitably called "un-educated".

You know the thing is I don’t have to defend every $ spent by a university because there is a right way to make cuts and a wrong way.

You want to debate what the proper overhead % is, that’s fine. Let’s have that discussion and maybe we’ll end up with a different one after airing all the viewpoints.

But right now Congress has specified the overhead % and those grants have been awarded and no ahole gets to come along and announce that as of tomorrow the % is being cut down to 15% because project 2025 or whatever

This is precisely why Musk is doing what he is doing. There is no incentive for anyone in the system to agree to anything but the barest of bare minimum cuts.

Swamp would never agree to drain itself.

That is literally an argument for replacing our constitutional democracy with dictatorship

Just disgusting how many of you are willing to walk away from democracy because someone told you lies

Yes. Trump has effectively divorced a large chunk of people from viable reporting and actual facts.

You know who divorced the majority of the people from "viable reporting and actual facts"? The media. After decades of them lying and shilling for the Democrats, nobody trusts them, and they have nobody but themselves to blame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the research cuts are horrible but why does an institution need an untouchable endowment in the billions?

did anyone reply?

[Anonymous]

So please tell me what incentive a university has to fund their own cancer research which is to the benefit of the public as a whole? There is none. That's the point of using govt dollars to fund public research and places where it actually costs them LESS money to do so.

So sure, let the govt do it, and when they have to build new labs, pay benefits, pay people other than research assistants, etc it will all still be cut.

Hopefully you don't even have the displeasure of watching someone you love die of cancer in a slow and painful way. Maybe then you'll understand why the US puts so much funding into the second largest killer in the country.

[Anonymous]

And no one is saying these charges shouldn't be investigated or explored, but a unilateral cut without a discussion or exploration is bad policy, always. Have the discussion, understand what these costs are.

Instead they point to Harvard and prey upon everyone's elite hatred and then everything is like YEAH screw Harvard! Come on people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those having a breakdown over the protection funding cuts-
why doesn’t Harvard and others open up their coffers? Harvard has how much? $53 BILLION??? Maybe it’s time these greedy institutions start using their money to offset possible increases in tuition?

For every 1 letter you send to Congress, send 20 to Harvard and the others.

You don't seem to understand how endowments work. Go read up on them and come back when you actually know what you're talking about.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the research cuts are horrible but why does an institution need an untouchable endowment in the billions?

did anyone reply?

Because that’s not how endowments work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those having a breakdown over the protection funding cuts-
why doesn’t Harvard and others open up their coffers? Harvard has how much? $53 BILLION??? Maybe it’s time these greedy institutions start using their money to offset possible increases in tuition?

For every 1 letter you send to Congress, send 20 to Harvard and the others.

So you want more aid for students and for your bad example you pick a college that is one of the top 2 most generous with aid already?

You are bad at arguing!

[Anonymous]

Let’s tax any endowment amount over $1.5B at 50% and earmark those funds for research.