Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cluelessness and stupidity on display in this thread makes it quite clear how we ended up with a low-IQ troll for a president.

Nah! Smugness exactly like you exhibited is what got us Trump. So, thank you for your contribution!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/01/opinion/paul-weiss-columbia-dei.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c&pvid=2B8B82FC-13A6-4415-9C13-ACED357EEEE3

NY Times today. And no, I don’t have a gift link

and this very insightful comment made by a reader who is a professor —

‘I am a university professor, I voted Harris, and I wish Trump would order my place to lower tuition across the board 25% or lose access to the federal loan system. The response would be to cut services, jobs, offices, etc that had nothing to do with research or student success/learning - in other words, precisely what my institution needs to do to survive. Such an order is unimaginable under a Democrat President. I am quite familiar with Columbia: cutting tuition 25% could be done immediately, and easily, and the entire issue goes away. Public opinion is against Columbia not because it peddles pro-Hamas nonsense, it’s because it became the symbol of popular, wide spread disdain for universities that harvest the wealth of families who committed the grave sin of raising children smart enough to go to college. Universities have lost their way, completely bloated with non-essential jobs that boost tuition. Both the Right and Left are aware of it, but no one does anything about it. No sector needs a “DOGE solution” more than higher education.’

This I agree with.

So you think the government should be able dictate the cost of tuition?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I could not agree more

Well, that professor is right up until the last sentence. He or she has fundamentally misunderstood the goal of DOGE and Trump. It’s not to help the middle class voter.

You’re missing the point. Obviously the writer doesn’t like Trump or his tactics. But she/he is saying there’s too much blout in colleges right now which should be obvious to all of us.

Yes. But the Trump solution is not at all tailored to address that problem. And it’s really weird for the federal government to be involved in minimizing bloat at a private entity. Private industry has a million boondoggles, but the federal government doesn’t cut contracts because corporate CEOs are overpaid and go to conferences in Hawaii.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/01/opinion/paul-weiss-columbia-dei.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c&pvid=2B8B82FC-13A6-4415-9C13-ACED357EEEE3

NY Times today. And no, I don’t have a gift link

and this very insightful comment made by a reader who is a professor —

‘I am a university professor, I voted Harris, and I wish Trump would order my place to lower tuition across the board 25% or lose access to the federal loan system. The response would be to cut services, jobs, offices, etc that had nothing to do with research or student success/learning - in other words, precisely what my institution needs to do to survive. Such an order is unimaginable under a Democrat President. I am quite familiar with Columbia: cutting tuition 25% could be done immediately, and easily, and the entire issue goes away. Public opinion is against Columbia not because it peddles pro-Hamas nonsense, it’s because it became the symbol of popular, wide spread disdain for universities that harvest the wealth of families who committed the grave sin of raising children smart enough to go to college. Universities have lost their way, completely bloated with non-essential jobs that boost tuition. Both the Right and Left are aware of it, but no one does anything about it. No sector needs a “DOGE solution” more than higher education.’

This I agree with.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/01/opinion/paul-weiss-columbia-dei.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c&pvid=2B8B82FC-13A6-4415-9C13-ACED357EEEE3

NY Times today. And no, I don’t have a gift link

and this very insightful comment made by a reader who is a professor —

‘I am a university professor, I voted Harris, and I wish Trump would order my place to lower tuition across the board 25% or lose access to the federal loan system. The response would be to cut services, jobs, offices, etc that had nothing to do with research or student success/learning - in other words, precisely what my institution needs to do to survive. Such an order is unimaginable under a Democrat President. I am quite familiar with Columbia: cutting tuition 25% could be done immediately, and easily, and the entire issue goes away. Public opinion is against Columbia not because it peddles pro-Hamas nonsense, it’s because it became the symbol of popular, wide spread disdain for universities that harvest the wealth of families who committed the grave sin of raising children smart enough to go to college. Universities have lost their way, completely bloated with non-essential jobs that boost tuition. Both the Right and Left are aware of it, but no one does anything about it. No sector needs a “DOGE solution” more than higher education.’

Anonymous wrote:A recent paper published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas found that government investments in [R&D] accounted for at least a fifth of U.S. productivity growth since World War II.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All Americans - liberal, conservative, and apolitical - should be very concerned about the future of college given how Trump & Vance are attacking it. It is arson with no architecture. They don't have a vision for fixing it, they just want it to die.

I am paying careful attention and am very happy with the changes. These are much needed.

The people who are unhappy are those who are content to receive funds without needing to demonstrate any results.

Now the fun part - the supposed liberals who are "open" to new ideas and alternative viewpoints, think none of the above is an "acceptable" viewpoint. Because the above must have been written by a MAGA advocate and therefore not a valid view.

-A moderate democrat who voted for Kamala

Researchers have to demonstrate results. Often they are contractually obligated to publish their results no matter what. They don’t have to demonstrate success. That is an important concept in science and engineering. You can’t guarantee success, nor should you, when trialing new concepts in basic and applied research.

An epic cope!

So many jackasses on this thread who understand nothing about doing research just yelling nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I could not agree more

Well, that professor is right up until the last sentence. He or she has fundamentally misunderstood the goal of DOGE and Trump. It’s not to help the middle class voter.

You’re missing the point. Obviously the writer doesn’t like Trump or his tactics. But she/he is saying there’s too much blout in colleges right now which should be obvious to all of us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What you don’t get is that this will just kill off most schools.

It won't kill off most schools, but it will force them to cut the flab and make choices on how to spend limited money. It will kill some schools, that is a much needed Darwinian fitness test.

They are cutting research, not “flab”.

MAGAs are dumb AF.

Look beneath the surface & see what this “research” is focused on, moron.

I have a relative whose research is focused on treatment of diabetes whose lab is affected. The research affected is focused on issues that affect millions of ordinary Americans. Another relative is in a cancer drug trial at one of the affected institutions. This just really stinks — why we want to attack what is America’s best industry is beyond me. I love America. I want it to thrive.

All of a sudden EVERYBODY is a cancer researcher. And nobody knows someone getting millions to investigate the patriarchy’s impact on 17th century Hungarian undergarments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What you don’t get is that this will just kill off most schools.

It won't kill off most schools, but it will force them to cut the flab and make choices on how to spend limited money. It will kill some schools, that is a much needed Darwinian fitness test.

They are cutting research, not “flab”.

MAGAs are dumb AF.

Look beneath the surface & see what this “research” is focused on, moron.

I have a relative whose research is focused on treatment of diabetes whose lab is affected. The research affected is focused on issues that affect millions of ordinary Americans. Another relative is in a cancer drug trial at one of the affected institutions. This just really stinks — why we want to attack what is America’s best industry is beyond me. I love America. I want it to thrive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ I could not agree more

Well, that professor is right up until the last sentence. He or she has fundamentally misunderstood the goal of DOGE and Trump. It’s not to help the middle class voter.

Anonymous wrote:^ I could not agree more

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What you don’t get is that this will just kill off most schools.

It won't kill off most schools, but it will force them to cut the flab and make choices on how to spend limited money. It will kill some schools, that is a much needed Darwinian fitness test.

They are cutting research, not “flab”.

MAGAs are dumb AF.

Look beneath the surface & see what this “research” is focused on, moron.