5 ms·

Study finds that budget cuts to public R&D would significantly hurt the economy

68 points by geox 2y ago

luotuoshangdui 2y ago
As expected.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  Espected that a university would find that federal funding cuts have a negative impact?
  - iFire 2y ago
    In the same way the government agency saying that removing budget for doing lab work on viruses and bateria has a negative impact? https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nih-layoffs-budget-cuts-medical-research-60-minutes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nih-layoffs-budget-cuts-medical... https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-proposes-massive-nih-budget-cut-and-reorganization https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-proposes-massi...
  - markhahn 2y ago
    having motive doesn't mean it's not also true. or do you believe that universities should not do research?
  - bilbo0s 2y ago
    Please fix your comment. The error in it is just.. yeah.. it's not shining a good light on you or the position you're taking. Especially in light of the subject being discussed.
- markhahn 2y ago
  Yes: the US administration is infested with anti-intellectuals who falsely believe that they're self-made ubermensch. So anyone else is obviously beta or worse.
  - fifteen1506 2y ago
    Funniest thing I found out recently: the whole debacle of beta vs alphas was based on studies on wolfs on stressful conditions (i.e., cages). Second funniest thing I found out not so recently: the whole debacle, which I believed and hurt me personally, in hindsight, is the whole study about "kids who wait for candies instead of eating it right away fare better in life" failed to take into account kids' social-economical status. This, plus the no doubt institutionalization of Scientific Studies (tm) (e.g., salt causes cardio problems, as a way to steer focus away from sugar), makes me apply 50% in the doubt scale for every study less than 50 years old. Additionally, I'm told the waterfall model was never prescribed as a good method, but it was the most prominent picture of a old study which affirmed waterfall as very flawed, and people failed to properly read the text. PS: on topic, everyone believes that of the opposite team; I found very enlightening an article which said "Find allies in unlikely places. One of my most surprising sources of support during my trial(s) was hard-right Brexiter (...). Find threads of connection and work from there", by a Remain person. Let's hope that may break the cycle of default (a few times undeserved) mistrust.
    - mattgreenrocks 2y ago
      > the whole debacle of beta vs alphas was based on studies on wolfs on stressful conditions (i.e., cages). The whole alpha/beta meme is a perfect microcosm of what we see today: ardent denial of the complexities of reality. It is a half-truth (some people fare better in the sexual marketplace) that gets elevated to the status of belief. When it becomes a belief, then intellectual heels are dug in. Conflicting information is downplayed, and no amount of reality seems to shift opinions. Perception is twisted to confirm pre-existing beliefs. The belief must be held. It has been made to serve some psychological purpose for the holder, even if it just a subconscious justification for their own behavior. You need humility to transcend the local maxima that every human falls into. It's the only way to counterbalance the prone-to-flaws hardware our brains run on. But a lot of our society tries to beat it out of people.
      - spacemadness 2y ago
        That’s because no amount of reality can make its way into someone’s algorithmic feed. On every social media platform I’ve been on with engagement algorithms, the algorithm creates an intellectual prison where bad ideas that speak to our emotions get reinforced. I see this in my own feeds where it decides, since I like video games and fitness, that I probably should check out these alt-right grifters and the manosphere. Once you click on one of those videos, you quickly get locked in to that content. And unfortunately, I don’t think people have a clue that it’s happening as it speaks to their pain, delusions, what have you.
minecraft001 2y ago
[dead]
- markhahn 2y ago
  I'm just curious: you really believe that all academic R&D is wasteful and non-productive?
- xhkkffbf 2y ago
  People who get contracts for doing R&D say that the R&D calls for more funding.
  - soco 2y ago
    I'm not sure where all of us would be without R&D - no mobile phones, no internet, no... unless the plan is to stay forever where we are today, then yes R&D needs funding.
Herring 2y ago
Vote for republicans, get red state policies. Trump won the popular vote. America is trying very hard to become one big red state. Red states have had the worst outcomes for generations but they keep going back to republicans. The reasons escape me. Maybe China will motivate them to get their act together.
- ujkhsjkdhf234 2y ago
  Trump won the popular vote because people were nostalgic for Obama's economy that Trump got credit for which is what always happens when a Republican follows a Dem into office.
  - tokai 2y ago
    Its not even Obamas economy. A lot of people unironically thought they would get another stimulus check if Trump won.
    - spencerflem 2y ago
      Its crazy that Dems don't run on policies like these. Imagine if instead of an 80+ geezer or the most corporate woman in the world, they had someone credibly promising stimulus checks !! They'd win in a landslide. Obama won huge on promising universal healthcare and then every dem after that decided to promise nothing.
      - Herring 2y ago
        It doesn’t work for Democrats. They were punished hard for that healthcare bill > According to a report from the National Conference of State Legislatures, the Democratic Party has lost a net total of 13 Governorships and 816 state legislative seats since President Obama entered office, the most of any president since Dwight Eisenhower. https://www.quorum.us/data-driven-insights/under-obama-democrats-suffer-largest-loss-in-power-since-eisenhower/ https://www.quorum.us/data-driven-insights/under-obama-democ... Kamala had a good platform - voters still think she “didnt promise anything” https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx924r4d5yno https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx924r4d5yno
readthenotes1 2y ago
I wonder how the budget cuts to R&D will affect the replication crisis? It's not like all this money was going to authentic, well-intentioned pursuers of the truth. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01266-x https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01266-x
- almosthere 2y ago
  The reality is that US AID money went to any NGO that had mechanisms to pipe some percentage back to Act Blue as cash and hidden through donors like my mom that donated once and had her record in there 20 times. Mostly facilitated by corrupt lawyers there.
  - lolcatzlulz 2y ago
    Interesting. Any source beyond the EO? Can't find anything about this.
    - j_walter 2y ago
      Not sure about the USAID part, but ActBlue has been suspected of illegal fundrasing activities for a long time. Googling will find a lot of stories similar to the one above. "Mark Block, former chief of staff to Republican 2012 presidential candidate Herman Cain, alleges that a total of $884.38 given in his name and without his knowledge between May and October was designed to circumvent federal election law and may be part of a larger scam involving tens of thousands of unwitting donors." https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/is-actblue-in-legal-peril https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/is-actblue-in-lega... "An 88-year-old retired Yale University professor, for example, supposedly made 7,539 donations for a total of $213,163, according to FEC records." https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/01/08/elderly-democrats-say-thousands-donations-actblue-were-made-fraudulently-their-names/ https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/01/08/elderly-democrats-say...
      - acdha 2y ago
        Your first quote isn’t on the page you referenced but the New York Post’s coverage of a lawsuit brought by a Republican activist – not exactly a neutral party – and he didn’t include ActBlue in his lawsuit which is going after a specific person identified only by their American Express card number, no doubt recognizing that the burden would be much higher to prove that ActBlue was colluding with rather than being victimized by whoever that was. Similarly, your second quote is from a different Republican activist. His data and methodology don't appear to have been independently reviewed, and it doesn’t sound like there’s been any independent review of what he told people to get them to sign affidavits or verification of their claims, all but the first of which are small (it would not be the first someone elderly forgot about clicking on a link or signing up for a recurring charge), much less establishing that ActBlue condoned that activity. The underlying problem here is that there aren’t higher standards for donations and because we don’t have a national digital identity system and the super court has found that political spending is close to speech in terms of the protections it deserves, it’s not clear how much more could even possibly be required.
zmibes 2y ago
Just musing don't be angry with me, but seems rather circular that R&D needs public money in order to benefit the economy. Over-simplistic I suppose, but I'd think if it were economically productive it would be able to make a self-sustaining feedback loop. edit: ideologues already attaK! sad to see ><
- teraflop 2y ago
  It's no more circular than spending money on education to get a high-paying job, or spending money on changing your A/C filters so that your air conditioner doesn't prematurely fail. > but I'd think if it were economically productive it would be able to make a self-sustaining feedback loop. A "self-sustaining" feedback loop still has humans in the loop, deciding to reinvest money in future improvements. If those humans decide to shut the loop down then obviously the benefits will stop being realized.
  - zmibes 2y ago
    why do we need the state in the loop?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - connor4312 2y ago
      For the same reason government in general (e.g. the US military) isn't funded by one big GoFundMe. The marginal value any individual actor gains from their investment in public research or services is almost zero. It only works when it's prescriptive on a large scale. See: the tragedy of the commons.
    - myrmidon 2y ago
      Because collective well-being/improvements to the nation as a whole is literally its purpose. Unlike companies, whose purpose is to earn profits for owners and shareholders.
    - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
knowitnone 2y ago
Not really. We'll just steal from the Chinese
- 1234letshaveatw 2y ago
  turnabout is fair play?
mattgreenrocks 2y ago
I have friends that work in scientific agencies (NIH, etc), as well as for government contractors doing science stuff. Am I correct to be worried for the sector? The best that can be hoped for is that the sector is simply ignored. The budget for it isn't even very large compared to DoD, but it is very hard to draw a line from R&D to profit. But we've seen with other agencies the violence is the point, and I don't expect them to treat Big Science any differently.
- Joel_Mckay 2y ago
  Most academics have the option of studying abroad for awhile if desired. And yes, people should be worried. =3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23X14HS4gLk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23X14HS4gLk
- thehoff 2y ago
  I'm in this space. Where I work we've already lost 10% of our staff with senior management looking for an additional 15% in budget cuts (anything else we can cut). So this sector may be "ignored" so to speak (though I'm not even sure what that means). I also have a number of friends at agencies and government contractors that all think they will "feel" these possibly large federal budget cuts. They are all on edge, especially with eyes towards the end of summer and early fall.
olalonde 2y ago
I'm no fan of Trump, but it's important to approach studies like this with a healthy dose of skepticism. Macroeconomics isn’t an exact science, and studies like these often rely on dubious assumptions and extrapolations. For example, what are the odds that current public R&D spending is really at an optimal theoretical level? Do these models account for potential substitution by private industry if government funding is reduced? etc.
- ctkhn 2y ago
  We probably want even more R&D than we have now. Private companies frequently spend much less than the optimal level because it's a tossup on whether it will amount to anything, government can fund a wide range of R&D and society picks up the benefits of it even if half the projects don't turn out.
- justsocrateasin 2y ago
  Private industries are not incentivized to pursue the same kind of research as the public sector. An excellent example of this is antibiotics (or antifungal drugs). Pharma companies do not put forth a large budget for research like this, because it isn't profitable. But, if we were to see a super bug crop up in the next 10 years (unfortunately this is not a crazy "if" due to trends in antibiotic resistance), then you would quickly see the public sector's research paying enormous dividends in terms of missed economic hardship. These economic benefits would not affect the private sector in the same way, because a pharma company would not see, let's say, $50b in profits from helping ease an equivalent $50b in economic hardship caused by hospital bills/suffering/lost productivity. On top of this, let's just look at the current private sector and what they spend R&D dollars in: can you really say that $1b spent by Google, Meta, Amazon etc. actually ends up being better worthwhile than $1b spent by NASA? see this list of inventions NASA has inadvertently created: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/infographics/20-inventions-we-wouldnt-have-without-space-travel/ https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/infographics/20-inventions-we-would... In general, public sector research is already so strapped for cash. Their budgets are not large. Their salaries are lower than the private sector. I agree that public R&D spending is likely not at a "theoretical optimal level", but would you argue that private sector R&D spending is?
- 2y ago

68 points by geox 2y ago

luotuoshangdui 2y ago

As expected.

SoftTalker 2y ago
Espected that a university would find that federal funding cuts have a negative impact?
- iFire 2y ago
  In the same way the government agency saying that removing budget for doing lab work on viruses and bateria has a negative impact? https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nih-layoffs-budget-cuts-medical-research-60-minutes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nih-layoffs-budget-cuts-medical... https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-proposes-massive-nih-budget-cut-and-reorganization https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-proposes-massi...
- markhahn 2y ago
  having motive doesn't mean it's not also true. or do you believe that universities should not do research?
- bilbo0s 2y ago
  Please fix your comment. The error in it is just.. yeah.. it's not shining a good light on you or the position you're taking. Especially in light of the subject being discussed.
markhahn 2y ago
Yes: the US administration is infested with anti-intellectuals who falsely believe that they're self-made ubermensch. So anyone else is obviously beta or worse.
- fifteen1506 2y ago
  Funniest thing I found out recently: the whole debacle of beta vs alphas was based on studies on wolfs on stressful conditions (i.e., cages). Second funniest thing I found out not so recently: the whole debacle, which I believed and hurt me personally, in hindsight, is the whole study about "kids who wait for candies instead of eating it right away fare better in life" failed to take into account kids' social-economical status. This, plus the no doubt institutionalization of Scientific Studies (tm) (e.g., salt causes cardio problems, as a way to steer focus away from sugar), makes me apply 50% in the doubt scale for every study less than 50 years old. Additionally, I'm told the waterfall model was never prescribed as a good method, but it was the most prominent picture of a old study which affirmed waterfall as very flawed, and people failed to properly read the text. PS: on topic, everyone believes that of the opposite team; I found very enlightening an article which said "Find allies in unlikely places. One of my most surprising sources of support during my trial(s) was hard-right Brexiter (...). Find threads of connection and work from there", by a Remain person. Let's hope that may break the cycle of default (a few times undeserved) mistrust.
  - mattgreenrocks 2y ago
    > the whole debacle of beta vs alphas was based on studies on wolfs on stressful conditions (i.e., cages). The whole alpha/beta meme is a perfect microcosm of what we see today: ardent denial of the complexities of reality. It is a half-truth (some people fare better in the sexual marketplace) that gets elevated to the status of belief. When it becomes a belief, then intellectual heels are dug in. Conflicting information is downplayed, and no amount of reality seems to shift opinions. Perception is twisted to confirm pre-existing beliefs. The belief must be held. It has been made to serve some psychological purpose for the holder, even if it just a subconscious justification for their own behavior. You need humility to transcend the local maxima that every human falls into. It's the only way to counterbalance the prone-to-flaws hardware our brains run on. But a lot of our society tries to beat it out of people.
    - spacemadness 2y ago
      That’s because no amount of reality can make its way into someone’s algorithmic feed. On every social media platform I’ve been on with engagement algorithms, the algorithm creates an intellectual prison where bad ideas that speak to our emotions get reinforced. I see this in my own feeds where it decides, since I like video games and fitness, that I probably should check out these alt-right grifters and the manosphere. Once you click on one of those videos, you quickly get locked in to that content. And unfortunately, I don’t think people have a clue that it’s happening as it speaks to their pain, delusions, what have you.

minecraft001 2y ago

[dead]

markhahn 2y ago
I'm just curious: you really believe that all academic R&D is wasteful and non-productive?
xhkkffbf 2y ago
People who get contracts for doing R&D say that the R&D calls for more funding.
- soco 2y ago
  I'm not sure where all of us would be without R&D - no mobile phones, no internet, no... unless the plan is to stay forever where we are today, then yes R&D needs funding.

Herring 2y ago

Vote for republicans, get red state policies. Trump won the popular vote. America is trying very hard to become one big red state. Red states have had the worst outcomes for generations but they keep going back to republicans. The reasons escape me. Maybe China will motivate them to get their act together.

ujkhsjkdhf234 2y ago
Trump won the popular vote because people were nostalgic for Obama's economy that Trump got credit for which is what always happens when a Republican follows a Dem into office.
- tokai 2y ago
  Its not even Obamas economy. A lot of people unironically thought they would get another stimulus check if Trump won.
  - spencerflem 2y ago
    Its crazy that Dems don't run on policies like these. Imagine if instead of an 80+ geezer or the most corporate woman in the world, they had someone credibly promising stimulus checks !! They'd win in a landslide. Obama won huge on promising universal healthcare and then every dem after that decided to promise nothing.
    - Herring 2y ago
      It doesn’t work for Democrats. They were punished hard for that healthcare bill > According to a report from the National Conference of State Legislatures, the Democratic Party has lost a net total of 13 Governorships and 816 state legislative seats since President Obama entered office, the most of any president since Dwight Eisenhower. https://www.quorum.us/data-driven-insights/under-obama-democrats-suffer-largest-loss-in-power-since-eisenhower/ https://www.quorum.us/data-driven-insights/under-obama-democ... Kamala had a good platform - voters still think she “didnt promise anything” https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx924r4d5yno https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx924r4d5yno

readthenotes1 2y ago

I wonder how the budget cuts to R&D will affect the replication crisis? It's not like all this money was going to authentic, well-intentioned pursuers of the truth. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01266-x https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01266-x

almosthere 2y ago
The reality is that US AID money went to any NGO that had mechanisms to pipe some percentage back to Act Blue as cash and hidden through donors like my mom that donated once and had her record in there 20 times. Mostly facilitated by corrupt lawyers there.
- lolcatzlulz 2y ago
  Interesting. Any source beyond the EO? Can't find anything about this.
  - j_walter 2y ago
    Not sure about the USAID part, but ActBlue has been suspected of illegal fundrasing activities for a long time. Googling will find a lot of stories similar to the one above. "Mark Block, former chief of staff to Republican 2012 presidential candidate Herman Cain, alleges that a total of $884.38 given in his name and without his knowledge between May and October was designed to circumvent federal election law and may be part of a larger scam involving tens of thousands of unwitting donors." https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/is-actblue-in-legal-peril https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/is-actblue-in-lega... "An 88-year-old retired Yale University professor, for example, supposedly made 7,539 donations for a total of $213,163, according to FEC records." https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/01/08/elderly-democrats-say-thousands-donations-actblue-were-made-fraudulently-their-names/ https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/01/08/elderly-democrats-say...
    - acdha 2y ago
      Your first quote isn’t on the page you referenced but the New York Post’s coverage of a lawsuit brought by a Republican activist – not exactly a neutral party – and he didn’t include ActBlue in his lawsuit which is going after a specific person identified only by their American Express card number, no doubt recognizing that the burden would be much higher to prove that ActBlue was colluding with rather than being victimized by whoever that was. Similarly, your second quote is from a different Republican activist. His data and methodology don't appear to have been independently reviewed, and it doesn’t sound like there’s been any independent review of what he told people to get them to sign affidavits or verification of their claims, all but the first of which are small (it would not be the first someone elderly forgot about clicking on a link or signing up for a recurring charge), much less establishing that ActBlue condoned that activity. The underlying problem here is that there aren’t higher standards for donations and because we don’t have a national digital identity system and the super court has found that political spending is close to speech in terms of the protections it deserves, it’s not clear how much more could even possibly be required.

zmibes 2y ago

Just musing don't be angry with me, but seems rather circular that R&D needs public money in order to benefit the economy. Over-simplistic I suppose, but I'd think if it were economically productive it would be able to make a self-sustaining feedback loop. edit: ideologues already attaK! sad to see ><

teraflop 2y ago
It's no more circular than spending money on education to get a high-paying job, or spending money on changing your A/C filters so that your air conditioner doesn't prematurely fail. > but I'd think if it were economically productive it would be able to make a self-sustaining feedback loop. A "self-sustaining" feedback loop still has humans in the loop, deciding to reinvest money in future improvements. If those humans decide to shut the loop down then obviously the benefits will stop being realized.
- zmibes 2y ago
  why do we need the state in the loop?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - connor4312 2y ago
    For the same reason government in general (e.g. the US military) isn't funded by one big GoFundMe. The marginal value any individual actor gains from their investment in public research or services is almost zero. It only works when it's prescriptive on a large scale. See: the tragedy of the commons.
  - myrmidon 2y ago
    Because collective well-being/improvements to the nation as a whole is literally its purpose. Unlike companies, whose purpose is to earn profits for owners and shareholders.
  - Joel_Mckay 2y ago

knowitnone 2y ago

Not really. We'll just steal from the Chinese

1234letshaveatw 2y ago
turnabout is fair play?

mattgreenrocks 2y ago

I have friends that work in scientific agencies (NIH, etc), as well as for government contractors doing science stuff. Am I correct to be worried for the sector? The best that can be hoped for is that the sector is simply ignored. The budget for it isn't even very large compared to DoD, but it is very hard to draw a line from R&D to profit. But we've seen with other agencies the violence is the point, and I don't expect them to treat Big Science any differently.

Joel_Mckay 2y ago
Most academics have the option of studying abroad for awhile if desired. And yes, people should be worried. =3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23X14HS4gLk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23X14HS4gLk
thehoff 2y ago
I'm in this space. Where I work we've already lost 10% of our staff with senior management looking for an additional 15% in budget cuts (anything else we can cut). So this sector may be "ignored" so to speak (though I'm not even sure what that means). I also have a number of friends at agencies and government contractors that all think they will "feel" these possibly large federal budget cuts. They are all on edge, especially with eyes towards the end of summer and early fall.

olalonde 2y ago

I'm no fan of Trump, but it's important to approach studies like this with a healthy dose of skepticism. Macroeconomics isn’t an exact science, and studies like these often rely on dubious assumptions and extrapolations. For example, what are the odds that current public R&D spending is really at an optimal theoretical level? Do these models account for potential substitution by private industry if government funding is reduced? etc.

ctkhn 2y ago
We probably want even more R&D than we have now. Private companies frequently spend much less than the optimal level because it's a tossup on whether it will amount to anything, government can fund a wide range of R&D and society picks up the benefits of it even if half the projects don't turn out.
justsocrateasin 2y ago
Private industries are not incentivized to pursue the same kind of research as the public sector. An excellent example of this is antibiotics (or antifungal drugs). Pharma companies do not put forth a large budget for research like this, because it isn't profitable. But, if we were to see a super bug crop up in the next 10 years (unfortunately this is not a crazy "if" due to trends in antibiotic resistance), then you would quickly see the public sector's research paying enormous dividends in terms of missed economic hardship. These economic benefits would not affect the private sector in the same way, because a pharma company would not see, let's say, $50b in profits from helping ease an equivalent $50b in economic hardship caused by hospital bills/suffering/lost productivity. On top of this, let's just look at the current private sector and what they spend R&D dollars in: can you really say that $1b spent by Google, Meta, Amazon etc. actually ends up being better worthwhile than $1b spent by NASA? see this list of inventions NASA has inadvertently created: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/infographics/20-inventions-we-wouldnt-have-without-space-travel/ https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/infographics/20-inventions-we-would... In general, public sector research is already so strapped for cash. Their budgets are not large. Their salaries are lower than the private sector. I agree that public R&D spending is likely not at a "theoretical optimal level", but would you argue that private sector R&D spending is?
2y ago