4 ms·
The government can't fund everything. Too much of the budget is tied up in transfer and interest payments squeezing out other more viable research. The federal
by Blackstrat 4mo ago
The government can't fund everything. Too much of the budget is tied up in transfer and interest payments squeezing out other more viable research. The federal government doesn't have unlimited funds. Something has to give.
- Blackstrat 4mo agoDown voted, imagine that. Predictable as sunrise. So what should be cut?
- wredcoll 4mo agoTrump's ballroom. Trump's "irs lawsuit settlement fund" The salaries of all the lawyers being paid to justify illegal and discriminatory executive orders. ICE's budget. TSA's budget. "Border Wall" construction costs. Should I go on?
- stackskipton 4mo agoI agree with all of that but you don't put a dent in spending outside of tackling ICE budget. TSA is more neutral since a lot of funding from that comes from airline ticket fees. There is only 5 items that matter: Interest on Debt. Social Security Medicare. Medicaid. Defense.
- wredcoll 4mo agoI'm not trying to balance the budget here, just find a few billion for research.
- tick_tock_tick 4mo agoMost of those things a tiny rounding error. Interest and social services are the only thing the government actually spends money on.
- platevoltage 4mo agoYou left out military spending. It's kind of a big one.
- wredcoll 4mo agoI know it's fashionable to say stuff like this, but you know what's also a rounding error by that logic? THE SCIENTIFIC GRANTS WE'RE DISCUSSING. Like, sure, 600million for a ballroom is small compared to the annual interest payments but it could fund, dunno, at least a dozen scientists. Maybe even 2 dozen! Add in the 1.6 billion dollars trumo was trying to embezzle from the irs and we could get a couple dozen more studies going. If that number is too small and trifling for you, how about the $80+ billion dollar budget for ice? Think we could afford a few studies with that?
- Blackstrat 4mo agoPerhaps it could. And perhaps you think erecting tents on the White House grounds for state events, like a third world country, is okay as well. The government funds a ridiculous amount of "science", some of which has no utility. That's not the government's role. These types of projects can be funded by the university or private industry or not at all. Being a "scientist" and wanting to research some idea DOES NOT entitle you to taxpayer funding. Again, as I and others here have noted, the money is in interest, defense, and transfer payments. Personally, I'd like to see reforms on all social programs. If one is capable of working, then they work. Until you live somewhere that has a thriving economy in government money and see the abuse, you have no idea what you're talking about. Should government money be used to buy booze? Potato chips? I assure you that it happens everyday. I've seen it first hand. So fix the social programs and then we'll talk about funding fringe science research. And let's quit funding the 120+ foreign biolabs doing DOF research. We've seen that script before.
- Avshalom 4mo agoThe president said we dropped 250 million dollars worth of bombs in a single night last week.
- throwaway-11-1 4mo agoWhat’s the military budget again? How much did the war we lost in Iran cost?
- mrexroad 4mo ago> Something has to give. Just so I’m not misunderstanding, you felt that science funding should be the first thing to give? And that other recent controversial expenditures should take priority?
- chasing 4mo agoTrump's tax cut on the wealthiest 1%? $1,000,000,000,000 over ten years. Daily cost of the Iran debacle: $2,000,000,000. We sure as shit have money to fund research. We prefer to fund second yachts, third vacation homes, and bombs.
- Vaslo 4mo agoOr Europe and Asia can handle more of the cost.
- Blackstrat 4mo agoThese counter arguments would be more persuasive if they didn't sound like left wing talking points. No one on this thread nor in the media knows the reality of what happened in Iraq. That most here dislike Trump, I get it. But, to pretend that this administration is somehow behaving differently than others in the past is ahistorical and disingenuous at best.
- Vaslo 4mo agoYou’ll get downvoted to hell for this comment but it’s a legitimate concern, especially as Europe throws more of its money into socialist nonsense. It’s time for Europe to start picking up more of the tab, NATO included.
- jhbadger 4mo agoAll of Europe is capitalist since 1989. What is "socialist nonsense" according to you? Nationalized health care?