Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why does the Trump administration hate science and research so much? From putting a climate change denier in charge of the EPA to essentially gutting what remains of the NIH--the key institution which funds a massive portion of US led research which creates jobs and billions of dollars worth of patented ideas--the blood bath continues for US science.
I truly never thought that I'd see the US crumble so quickly from being a world leader to destroying itself. Time to kowtow to our Chinese overlords who are spending massive amounts of money on science and engineering.
Obamacare was designed to end America's leadership in the field of drug development but you probably didn't have a problem with that did you?
If the Trump science budget passes, their advice to bright young scientists is: leave the United States, your future is brighter elsewhere.
I've heard this line so many times from PhDs. It gets trotted out every time there's a Republican administration. And I went to graduate school.
I do agree that if you want to be a scientist, you have a tough row to hoe. That's not because of an 18% cut in federal funding. It's mostly because the scientific pipeline is saturated at the graduate school level, including with many people who will probably never contribute much but are pursuing a passion or status despite signals that they're in over their heads. I dropped out of grad school for this reason, and I can also tell you that a lot of scientists work for the government because 1) they don't get tenure track jobs, 2) they don't get higher-paying corporate lab jobs, and 3) they want an easier lifestyle with fewer requirements for producing results.
Location: Foothills of Maryland Blue Ridge mountains
993 posts, read 767,151 times
Reputation: 3163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avondalist
I've heard this line so many times from PhDs. It gets trotted out every time there's a Republican administration. And I went to graduate school.
I do agree that if you want to be a scientist, you have a tough row to hoe. That's not because of an 18% cut in federal funding. It's mostly because the scientific pipeline is saturated at the graduate school level, including with many people who will probably never contribute much but are pursuing a passion or status despite signals that they're in over their heads. I dropped out of grad school for this reason, and I can also tell you that a lot of scientists work for the government because 1) they don't get tenure track jobs, 2) they don't get higher-paying corporate lab jobs, and 3) they want an easier lifestyle with fewer requirements for producing results.
Perhaps the government employed scientists you've personally known are slackers looking for an easier lifestyle.
I'm 58. I know many older career scientists and doctors at NIH...most of them distinguished in their field of study. They routinely have job offers from universities and corporations. They choose to stay at the NIH because as odd as it might sound to you, they feel they are serving our country. Not all that different from my PhD holding father....a nuclear engineer who served as a career naval officer for 30 years. He could have made much more money as a civilian.
Getting a gig at the NIH isn't a piece of cake. I don't know anyone who works there because they decided to take the easy way out.
Why does the Trump administration hate science and research so much? From putting a climate change denier in charge of the EPA to essentially gutting what remains of the NIH--the key institution which funds a massive portion of US led research which creates jobs and billions of dollars worth of patented ideas--the blood bath continues for US science.
I truly never thought that I'd see the US crumble so quickly from being a world leader to destroying itself. Time to kowtow to our Chinese overlords who are spending massive amounts of money on science and engineering.
Simple.
They can't handle truth.
They can't handle logic.
They can't handle reasoning.
Quite a bit of his supporters are in the same boat. Just look around this forum.
Why not let the pharmaceutical companies pay for research and development? Why does that need to be government sponsored? Let the NIH review and verify data then they don't have the risk.
Besides, we will probably still spend way more on R&D:
Government sponsored should mean all profits go to the government for anything developed. Does it work that way?
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
That's what happens when the government was voted in by anti-science voters from flyover country
Everyone that has worked for the federal government, if they can be honest and many can't, knows how bloated the federal government is across the board.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avondalist
Depending on the discipline, many if not most experimental results cannot be reproduced. This is the real crisis in science.
Scientists need more rigor, and funding has made them lazy and uncritical as long as they get published.
He didn't shut it down, I am sure they took a look at what could be cut and involved people in the field. Also, it always helps to motivate workers if they know some jobs may be eliminated. There tends to be a tendency to drag things out as long as the money is coming in from the government too!
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00
Because if it was up to pharmaceutical companies, there would be little to no research into drugs for rare illnesses or diseases with low-cost treatments. Not enough money.
What rare illnesses or diseases are you talking about with "low-cost treatments"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by fibonacci
Yup, as a PhD trained engineer that US taxpayers literally spent 100s and thousands of dollars on, I seriously have to consider leaving the US now. Hell, post docs in Switzerland make over $70k while they only make $45k in many places here. If the US wants to kill science and tech then I'll have to simply take my expertise somewhere else that'll actually pay and move to a country that actually invests in science.
That's the great thing about the USA, if you are pleased with the country, you can pack it up and relocate. I am sure we will be able to recruit the scientists that we need.
Most of the pharmaceuticals being developed have such devastating side effects that I think maybe we could do better recruiting some new blood to the industry.
Government sponsored should mean all profits go to the government for anything developed. Does it work that way?
Everyone that has worked for the federal government, if they can be honest and many can't, knows how bloated the federal government is across the board.
He didn't shut it down, I am sure they took a look at what could be cut and involved people in the field. Also, it always helps to motivate workers if they know some jobs may be eliminated. There tends to be a tendency to drag things out as long as the money is coming in from the government too!
What rare illnesses or diseases are you talking about with "low-cost treatments"?
That's the great thing about the USA, if you are pleased with the country, you can pack it up and relocate. I am sure we will be able to recruit the scientists that we need.
Most of the pharmaceuticals being developed have such devastating side effects that I think maybe we could do better recruiting some new blood to the industry.
If there's so much bloat in the federal government, why are we increasing defense spending? We already spend more than the next 7 countries combined. No bloat there?
We have billion dollar entities that depend on federal contracts, where do those profits come from?
Government sponsored should mean all profits go to the government for anything developed. Does it work that way?
Everyone that has worked for the federal government, if they can be honest and many can't, knows how bloated the federal government is across the board.
He didn't shut it down, I am sure they took a look at what could be cut and involved people in the field. Also, it always helps to motivate workers if they know some jobs may be eliminated. There tends to be a tendency to drag things out as long as the money is coming in from the government too!
What rare illnesses or diseases are you talking about with "low-cost treatments"?
That's the great thing about the USA, if you are pleased with the country, you can pack it up and relocate. I am sure we will be able to recruit the scientists that we need.
Most of the pharmaceuticals being developed have such devastating side effects that I think maybe we could do better recruiting some new blood to the industry.
The NIH's budget makes up 0.9% of the entire federal budget and they're cutting it even more. Yup, so much bloat.
As opposed to say that program for our 5th generation fighter planes that had massive overrun costs making the bill cost over a trillion dollars.....but we'll just increase the budget for that branch of government by another $54 billion.
America's scientific preeminence is officially on the wane.
That "wane" began when America's public education system stopped tracking and grouping students by ability/skill level. Now, everyone's dumbed down to a below average level, including our top students and most highly academically credentialed college grads. We haven't been adequately educating our best and brightest to take up the pre-eminence in science and technology reins for decades. Sad, but true.
Quote:
"This exam [OECD's PIAAC], given in 23 countries, assessed the thinking abilities and workplace skills of adults. It focused on literacy, math and technological problem-solving. The goal was to figure out how prepared people are to work in a complex, modern society...
And U.S. millennials performed horribly.
That might even be an understatement, given the extent of the American shortcomings. No matter how you sliced the data – by class, by race, by education – young Americans were laggards compared to their international peers. In every subject, U.S. millennials ranked at the bottom or very close to it
But surely America’s brightest were on top?
Nope. U.S. millennials with master’s degrees and doctorates did better than their peers in only three countries, Ireland, Poland and Spain. Those in Finland, Sweden and Japan seemed to be on a different planet.
Top-scoring U.S. millennials – the 90th percentile on the PIAAC test – were at the bottom internationally, ranking higher only than their peers in Spain. The bottom scorers (10th percentile) also lagged behind their peers.
Why does the Trump administration hate science and research so much? From putting a climate change denier in charge of the EPA to essentially gutting what remains of the NIH--the key institution which funds a massive portion of US led research which creates jobs and billions of dollars worth of patented ideas--the blood bath continues for US science.
I truly never thought that I'd see the US crumble so quickly from being a world leader to destroying itself. Time to kowtow to our Chinese overlords who are spending massive amounts of money on science and engineering.
Yeah, cuz if the federal government does not do something, it simply can't ever happen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
