Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was realized some time ago that having citizens decide to "donate to the research we care about" was not the most efficient way to get the most important research done. So we switched to a system where we pool our resources (taxes), and then use a somewhat complex process (described in TFA) to decide how to allocate them to possible research.
and those taxes are distributed by our government... which is political. simple as.
WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants
501–510 of 676 posts
Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants
#502Earlier quoted context omitted.
Besides the brutal impact on those already invested in the American research community, this is one more nail in the coffin when it comes to competing for new talent. What researcher in their right mind would move their research and their future to the USA to join this clown rodeo? It is unbelievable to watch my country give up its most unfair (and yet mostly positive) advantage -- a nearly free option on the top tal…
As a Canadian on a hiring committee, it's fascinating to talk to Americans who hate the political environment but still don't want to relocate.
Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants
#503Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I mean the salary difference is a few hundred k Yes, for FAANG during Covid and now AI. But your average SWE? That's more like 130k in the US [1] vs 61k in Germany [2]. In Germany, that's about 3500€ net (after taxes, retirement and health insurance - that is deducted from gross wages here) per month, of which you spend about 1500-1800 on cost of living (in Munich, the most expensive city in Germany by far), so abo…
> 1500-1800 on cost of living (in Munich, the most expensive city in Germany by far) Care to clarify how you came up with that budget? Rent an apartment, pay amenities and buy groceries for 1500 EUR in Munich? Like, the one which is in Bavaria (just in case you have some similarly named city located somewhere in ex-GDR)? I expect some hilarious mental gymnastics TBH...
My US example only included housing as well, simply because I have zero idea how much Americans pay for food, phones and internet.
In any case, a quick search for apartments in Munich (where I lived until last year) shows you quite a bunch of options (way) below that price range [1].
[1] https://www.immobilienscout24.de/Suche/de/bayern/muenchen/wo...
Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants
#504Earlier quoted context omitted.
Complete ignorance on your part, both about the degree of sexual dimorphism, and your apparent, assumed position that gender diverse identities do not have biological origins. There is insufficient data to make firm conclusions, but I will note that brain differences are observed.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-025-03348-3
Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants
#505Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
This is so wrong-headed of a statement that I’m actually shocked. Do you even know how grants work? You’re speaking about scoring designed to ensure that all Americans (any sex, poverty level, ability, creed) benefit from the use of tax payer money. This was a metric that was well understood AND EXPLICITLY EXPLAINED. There was NO relationship between that and canceling grants. Edit: less incendiary. I am just very up…
And I didn't say it was (though, such scoring has been also a powerful weapon against certain grants being granted, the scoring criteria not always interpreted and used in a politically neutral way - that was just the marketing pitch).
I spoke about how grants were already being connected to ideological pressure, both government and organisational, private sector grands: "You mispoke on that issue? No grant. You were of the wrong political perssuassion? No grant. Hurt the feelings of X group? No grant."
That pressure was on even after they were handed. That's the same kind ideological gate-keeping, just not from an official appointee, but spread out in ideologically motivated peer review, academic acceptance mechanisms, (and going into the private grants, sponsors), etc.
Research funding has never been insulated from politics. The difference is now a part of the overall approval becomes openly and transparently political.
Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants
#506Earlier quoted context omitted.
$$$$$ > €€€ or ££ With a few exceptions like Switzerland, American levels of compensation for highly qualified people just can't be matched anywhere in the Western world. Saudi Arabia or UAE maybe, but these don't even try to pretend to be socially and politically liberal.
Academic salaries are lower in the US relative to industry salaries than in most other countries. While the nominal sums are high, the salaries are low relative to housing costs. Particularly because good universities tend to be in expensive areas. When you compare two academics in similar positions in the US and Europe, the European is more likely a homeowner.
Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants
#507Earlier quoted context omitted.
> With a few exceptions like Switzerland, American levels of compensation for highly qualified people just can't be matched anywhere in the Western world. Gross compensation yes. But if you begin deducting stuff like the absurd American housing costs, private healthcare, saving up for deductibles, the need to own, insure, fuel and maintain a car to do everything because almost nothing is accessible by public transpor…
I've done that math too and the other reality is that most of those costs are optional in the US. It is 100% possible for me to have a high salary in the US and save most of it while temporarily exposing myself to larger risks. And it is far more useful for me to be able to say and show that I have a high salary, for access to credit and resources, private investments that give me the best shot of escaping a permanen…
If you're very young, single and childless, sort of. You can pick the lowest tier of health coverage from your employer which is often fully covered by the employer and have no other major costs. If you're young and single and healthy this can work out. Of course, if you have some kind of accident or medical emergency, expect to be bankrupted, which is not how it works in other countries.
But once you have to cover childcare and school and university, and the lack of time off for parents (add expensive babysitters on top of daycare and school) and pay for good medical coverage for a whole family and of course contribute maximums towards retirement because social security won't be there and so on. Suddenly that large gross salary is mostly gone and what little is left over isn't very different from what may be left over from a much smaller salary in a different country.
And of course here in the US we get to work our nice 60 to 80 hour weeks instead of a regular 40 hours and disconnect from work. And we might two weeks vacation, if you can afford to take it, instead of 4 to 6 weeks.
Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants
#508Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure that’s fine. They funded research that you think is wasteful and you would like to have tools to provide that feedback. The issue with this OMB change is that it is not that. The OMB change is a change that allows the administration to cancel any grant for any reason without answering to citizens about it. BTW your “believe it or not” is quite condescending. Do you talk to people in real life like that?
The president is elected, the bureaucrats that were making the decisions before were not, that's the difference. >BTW your “believe it or not” is quite condescending. Do you talk to people in real life like that? Yes, especially when they're the sort of people who support taking my tax money to fund idiotic and outright racist "research".
Russ Vought was not elected either.
Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants
#509More of the same at this point. If you are politically connected, or stay in an narrow lane of approved work, you get your grant. But if you stray from the politically approved path, or appear disloyal to our First Citizen and the Party, then your grant will be canceled. The remaining supporters of the incumbent party like to claim that they aren't actually doing anything worse than in the past, and if anything they…
Besides the brutal impact on those already invested in the American research community, this is one more nail in the coffin when it comes to competing for new talent. What researcher in their right mind would move their research and their future to the USA to join this clown rodeo? It is unbelievable to watch my country give up its most unfair (and yet mostly positive) advantage -- a nearly free option on the top tal…
what about private companies making profits luring researchers?
Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants
#510Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean the salary difference is a few hundred k, so this all just reads like cope.
> I mean the salary difference is a few hundred k Yes, for FAANG during Covid and now AI. But your average SWE? That's more like 130k in the US [1] vs 61k in Germany [2]. In Germany, that's about 3500€ net (after taxes, retirement and health insurance - that is deducted from gross wages here) per month, of which you spend about 1500-1800 on cost of living (in Munich, the most expensive city in Germany by far), so abo…