3 ms·
The article makes many good points: basic science research is immensely valuable, and society gets enormous (outsized) returns on this investment. However, I f
by LeroyRaz 2y ago
The article makes many good points: basic science research is immensely valuable, and society gets enormous (outsized) returns on this investment.
However, I feel the implied argument: DOGE investigating science funding and talking about cuts is bad seems flimsy. The system of funding and incentives is pretty broken, and not only broken, but actively decaying, you can't increase your return by increasing the funding and a lot of the money is spent on actively harming science (e.g., funding bureaucracy, or unmeritoricatic ideology rather than science).
- watwut 2y agoDOGE is not investigating science funding. They cut grants that is true, but they do not perform anything ressembling an investigation. The talking points about harming science by giving it money is triple absurd considering how you characterise doge actions. They are literally trying to stop public science, they are not removing administrative costs and they don't mind the science decaying or being broken. Their whole mission is to break it.