Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

sensible-med.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 340 posts

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#211

Post by IAmGraydon »

btilly wrote: post #194
IAmGraydon wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FDR's order regarding gold was part of a broader effort to combat the Great Depression by stopping gold hoarding, allowing the government to inflate the money supply and stimulate the economy. It wasn’t a total seizure — people were compensated at the then-official rate of $20.67 per ounce. The comparison doesn't hold water whatsoever.

Name me 5 executive orders by Trump which, combined, disrupt normal economic affairs by as much as that single one. As for the broader efforts, the New Deal required various things like reinterpreting the Commerce Clause. Look up "the switch in time which saved nine" for why the Supreme Court went along with it. Not to mention things like the internment of Japanese-Americans during WW 2. No, FDR was the closest thing…

>Name me 5 executive orders by Trump which, combined, disrupt normal economic affairs by as much as that single one.

By the end of this year, I think you're going to look back on this comment and wonder how you ever typed it. FDR's policies are responsible for literally saving the economy and pulling the US out of the Great Depression.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#212

Post by throwaway48476 »

Jimmc414 wrote: post #72
bryant wrote: post #2

Practically speaking, when the majority of people who decided to vote voted for the person applying these policies, what mitigations are left? The courts are themselves slow and ultimately roll up to allies of the despot. People say that the midterms are crucial, but the midterms are only likely to be won if Democrats truly unify and apply winning strategies. Sadly the only winning strategies now seem to involve tell…

> Practically speaking, when the majority of people who decided to vote voted for the person applying these policies, what mitigations are left? Support candidates that appeal to the electorate. Find common ground. Resist demonizing the opposition. Moderates shouldn’t have to choose between polarized extremes. If you are intellectually honest you may see the ripple effect created by unfairly shutting Bernie Sanders o…

A lot of Bernie voters went over to trump. Of course the democrats took that to mean they were traitors all along and not a constituency.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#213

Post by energy123 »

DiscourseFan wrote: post #170

When some other state-power, perhaps the Chinese, starts sucking up American intellectual capital, then the US will collapse. So long as the US still offers the highest standard of living for high-wage workers, there won't be any sort of collapse. Grants from the NIH will presumably move to the private sector. Is this a good thing? Perhaps not, but in the eyes of our new overlords the lifeblood of the economy is not…

The federal debt is going to be a big deal for this Trump admin: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYOIGDA188S

This was last seen in the 1990s, which Clinton fixed with tax increases, fiscal austerity and a strong real economy.

It remains to be seen, but I don't trust Trump or any of his loyalist appointees to steer the ship well.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#214

Post by scarab92 »

alabastervlog wrote: post #14
bryant wrote: post #2

Practically speaking, when the majority of people who decided to vote voted for the person applying these policies, what mitigations are left? The courts are themselves slow and ultimately roll up to allies of the despot. People say that the midterms are crucial, but the midterms are only likely to be won if Democrats truly unify and apply winning strategies. Sadly the only winning strategies now seem to involve tell…

Many actions the administration has taken are illegal. Not sure if those related to NIH are, but if they’ve been firing people, odds are good, since they’ve been doing that wrong most of the time it seems like. Congress could change the laws, but they haven’t. Lots of this junk is simply against the law. The courts are moving relatively fast, as such things go, but it takes time. Congress is supposed to control spend…

To be clear, the article headline is deceptive clickbait.

NIH budgets aren't being cut. The NIH is simply requiring that at least 85% of the grant value goes to the actual grant recipients, rather than being siphoned off by the university for administration expenses.

At most universities this change has no impact, since they weren't taking more than 15% to begin with. This change mainly impacts Harvard and similar, as they were previously taking extortionate cuts. Harvard was taking 69%!

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#215

Post by llm_trw »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #108
llm_trw wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What works for a country the size of a New York neighbourhood doesn't work for a country the size of a continent.

Britain ran a global empire using this model, why wouldn't it work for the US? Maybe read up on how it works before rejecting it out of hand? Britain has a bicameral parliament, with the leader of the majority of the lower house forming the executive, but the head of state retains the constitutional ability to dissolve parliament and order new elections if the current government is unable to function. Having an apoli…

Britain had two parliaments in the home island - Scotlands and Englands.

The only people who can possibly think the British empire was centralised are those who have never opened a history book about it.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#216

Post by scarab92 »

sitkack wrote: post #74
jghn wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when the majority of people who decided to vote voted for the person You're not wrong. However the portrayal of a mandate is a bit of a media fiction. He didn't have notably more votes than any other recent president.

More people voted against Trump than voted for. • 77,302,580 voted for this administration (49.8%) • 77,935,722 voted against this administration (50.2%) From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43191410

You're being a little deceptive here, by summing votes for all candidates combined as "against".

What really matters is Trump v Harris, and Trump won that both in the electoral college and in the popular vote.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#217

Post by knowaveragejoe »

DiscourseFan wrote: post #170

When some other state-power, perhaps the Chinese, starts sucking up American intellectual capital, then the US will collapse. So long as the US still offers the highest standard of living for high-wage workers, there won't be any sort of collapse. Grants from the NIH will presumably move to the private sector. Is this a good thing? Perhaps not, but in the eyes of our new overlords the lifeblood of the economy is not…

How does this square the circle of basic research that has no clear, or at least easy, commercialization potential?

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#218

Post by DiscourseFan »

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #217
DiscourseFan wrote: post #170

When some other state-power, perhaps the Chinese, starts sucking up American intellectual capital, then the US will collapse. So long as the US still offers the highest standard of living for high-wage workers, there won't be any sort of collapse. Grants from the NIH will presumably move to the private sector. Is this a good thing? Perhaps not, but in the eyes of our new overlords the lifeblood of the economy is not…

How does this square the circle of basic research that has no clear, or at least easy, commercialization potential?

I'm sure that Magritte painting that sold for so much money not so long ago did not have the same "commercialization potential" when it was produced.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#219

Post by knowaveragejoe »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #138
D13Fd wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that, through the pardon power combined with immunity from prosecution, the president can shield the entire executive branch from any obligation to execute on the laws that congress writes. It effectively neuters congress and prevents it from making any permanently effective law. Enforcement is instead left to the whims of the current congress and president at any time (who could be highly partisan Dem…

Maybe you should have been mad about preemptive pardons with the last guy? I swear I can not prepare myself anymore for the sheer hypocrisy that is about to happen in four years! You know it’s going to happen, but my issue is the theatre of it all.

Those were a smart move on his part - they knew trump was going to actually engage in the sort of lawfare they had been crowing about for the last 4 years.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#220

Post by Ferret7446 »

scarab92 wrote: post #214
alabastervlog wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many actions the administration has taken are illegal. Not sure if those related to NIH are, but if they’ve been firing people, odds are good, since they’ve been doing that wrong most of the time it seems like. Congress could change the laws, but they haven’t. Lots of this junk is simply against the law. The courts are moving relatively fast, as such things go, but it takes time. Congress is supposed to control spend…

To be clear, the article headline is deceptive clickbait. NIH budgets aren't being cut. The NIH is simply requiring that at least 85% of the grant value goes to the actual grant recipients, rather than being siphoned off by the university for administration expenses. At most universities this change has no impact, since they weren't taking more than 15% to begin with. This change mainly impacts Harvard and similar, a…

I appreciate the facts in our current outrage and misinformation economy.
Post reply on HN