[ar813]

Between NIH grant-making being slowed down and this, there is no way to interpret these moves than being an underhanded way of causing university research infrastructure to collapse. Consider also, for example, that one Friday last month there was an announcement that indirect rates being cut to 15% for Dept. of Energy grants.. but only for universities, not companies or national labs!

Just from a steady state picture there is now significantly less funding flowing to America's research institutions and institutes. At some point buildings will be shut down, infrastructure mothballed and a generation of scientists will simply not be trained.

An adversary could not ask for a better outcome.

[sseagull]

> that indirect rates being cut to 15% for Dept. of Energy grants

I've got some bad news - NSF basically announced the same thing today

https://www.nsf.gov/policies/document/indirect-cost-rate

[pphysch]

I don't think this is necessarily the right way to go about it, but there are deep issues with the incentives in the current US research system. As someone embedded in it, I would say it's highly dysfunctional and inefficient. Too much scientific fraud (hard and soft) and too many sinecures.

Our adversaries are happy either way.

[brnaftr361]

What do you think the consequences of a shake-out like this will be? Asking as a prospective grad student nearing the end of my BS.

I've heard locally we're cutting graduate programs down and similarly from other institutions.

[20after4]

You have to question whether it’s a favor to a certain adversary. Or, you know, paying off a certain “obligation”