As a non-academic I have to say I didn't read it like that. I saw no outrage, and I don't see 200k over 5 years as a big number. And I didn't get the sense that

As a non-academic I have to say I didn't read it like that. I saw no outrage, and I don't see 200k over 5 years as a big number. And I didn't get the sense that the support thought it was a big number. I say this not to invalidate your reading of the article (I'm not down voting you), but merely to say that for one not invested in the area, I didn't see the emotions you see. Which speaks to me about how it's easy, and dangerous, to ascribe motivations and emotions to a piece when they may not be there. I found it interesting as a well detailed piece, I assumed most grants just went as salary to the researcher, and that cleared this up. Also, perhaps I'm more aware of what things cost running a business, and so an "overheads" cost of 30% seems reasonable. Our cost-to-salary ratio is higher than that.