Slashdot Mirror
Science Programs Hit Hard By Proposed Budget
BJ_Covert_Action writes "The House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations has released a list of proposed spending cuts for the US Federal Government. The proposed cuts include reductions in spending on many science organizations and funds such as NASA, NOAA, nuclear energy research, fossil fuel energy research, clean coal research, the CDC, the NIH, and numerous EPA programs. There are also quite a few cuts proposed on domestic services, such as Americorps and high speed rail research. The House Appropriations Chairman, Hal Rogers, acknowledges that the cuts go deep, and would hurt every district across the country. But they are still deemed necessary to rein in Congressional spending. Notoriously absent from the proposed budget cuts are two of the largest spending sinks in the federal budget: the Department of Defense and Social Security."
The DoD is the sacred cow to end all sacred cows, the only way it's ever going to get budget cut is if there is nothing else left to cut.
To paraphrase, "If you think knowledge is expensive, try ignorance!"
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
constitutionality has jack-all to do with defense spending not being cut... simply imagine: if, for some reason, our current military were unconstitutional, do you really think anyone in power would give a damn?
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
Some of that is obviously ideological (EPA, Clean *, etc.), but the rest is just stupid.
In addition to the long-term hazards of cutting back science (and education), austerity programs are exactly what government's *shouldnt* do when the economy sags. Every dollar they cut from a program is a dollar someone isn't going to be spending next year, so tax revenues will drop even further.
A government with any sense would establish a sustainable cost of operations, borrow money when times are bad, and pay off the loans when times are good.
Unfortunately, a republic (representative democracy) tends to become a 'politicianocracy', and politicians buy votes by spending money on stuff their supporters want. So nobody wants to pay down debt when times are good; they just want to take the opportunity to spend more.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Yes, when those post-docs lose their research funding they'll just keep researching in their garage at their own expense. There they will join the mass ranks of other volunteer scientists making new and groundbreaking discoveries every day.
We're talking about cutting well over $5 billion from science spending. Anyone that wants to pretend that won't destroy much of 'the media good science grows on' is delusional.
Well, we could start by closing the majority of our bases around the world. I mean, do we really need such a presence in Europe? I'm not seriously worried about the Germans taking over again, nor of the Soviet Union crossing through Berlin.
Heck..we could still keep military superiority...but quit trying to defend the rest of the free world.
Hmm...hell, one of the reasons so many of the countries in the EU can have all that 'free healthcare' and other entitlements, is because they don't have to pay much for their military defense...the US does.
We should pull out of all those countries...and let them worry about defending themselves. I'm not just picking on Europe...but pretty much all of our bases that really aren't that strategic to the US.
I'd think that would take a healthy chunk out of defense spending?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
That's the sales pitch friend. That's not the reality - if you're young you're never getting that money back (and chances are you don't expect to). The SS system is and was designed to be a direct transfer of income from the young to the old. Not in and of itself a terrible idea, but due to changes in life expectancy and demographics it just doesn't work any more. We need to change to a program that does.
Look at the budget in terms of revenue (where 100 is total federal revenue):
100 - Money given to the old and poor (SS, medi*, federal pensions, welfare)
30 - defense
10 - income on the debt
20 - everything else
We need to cut spending across the board by almost half to get to where we're repaying the debt. Everthing has to be cut, and cut by nearly half. Cutting science and other useful programs is barely going to make an impact, but it's a needed prerequisite to cutting retirement programs. People aren't going to accept that they aren't going to get their "entitlement" before it's clear that everyone everywhere is sharing the pain, with no exemptions or sacred cows.
But there's no other option. We're spending 160% of what we take in, and that's just insane.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Hmm...hell, one of the reasons so many of the countries in the EU can have all that 'free healthcare' and other entitlements, is because they don't have to pay much for their military defense...the US does.
That may be part of it, but the US still pays vast amounts of money for health care... it's just going to the insurance companies via premiums instead of the government via taxes.
The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
Part of the problem is that anybody who proposes DoD cuts is immediately labeled a dangerous agitator who wants to embolden our enemies and put American lives at risk. There's a large and well-funded industry that's dedicated to perpetuating this myth, and they're frighteningly effective at their job. If we're to ever get the deficit situation under control, it will require a certain degree of maturity from the electorate -- along with the realization that there's enough pork in the defense budget to make a bacon replica of the Hoover Dam.
We also need a certain degree of maturity and a solidly-grounded perspective on taxes, as well -- but that's neither here nor there.
We're going down, in a spiral to the ground
When you talk about sharing the pain, realize that part of the reason for that large deficit is the rate of taxation as a percentage of GDP is at historic lows.
Simply reverting that rate to historical averages would cut the deficit in half. In fact increasing the US tax rate to what Canadians pay would wipe out the deficit completely.
Ultimately the resolution for this is going to require both reductions in benefits as well as increases in taxes.
Anything else would not represent in sharing the pain equitably.
Social Security is not a Constitutional function. The wage tax was deemed Constitutional after the then FDR administration argued that it was just another income tax and not a set aside for retirement. The general welfare clause refers to the general welfare of the States, and not the general welfare of the old farts that just lost all of their savings from the stock market bubble that collapsed to bring on the Great Depression. Sort of like the recent collapse. Another disaster brought to you courtesy of the Federal Reserve and other central banks.
Social Security is also funded like MLMs or Ponzi schemes, except it can use force to compel doing business with it. While adjustments to the funding and eligibility can make it appear to be solvent over time, the reality has been that the Federal government, with the complicity of Congress and the Executive and the voters from the "greatest generation", have looted the funds so that all that remains are Federal IOUs. Over the years, additional payouts have been added in the form of SSI and Survivors' Benefits without properly funding them. Like all institutions spending some one else's money, the government is ever more corrupt and inefficient.
Just because you bought a stupid con does not mean you are going to get your money back. The actuarials are increasingly unfavorable, and without considerable reform, the system will go bankrupt. Money printed by the Federal Reserve and loaned to the government will only make things worse. So you probably want to raise taxes on all the rich people you think have stolen from you. But there aren't enough of them around to make that much of a difference, and with the current global economies, they will just leave and set up shop somewhere else. Like NY found when it raised the tax on their richest and highest earners. You are not going to be able to fund these sorts of social programs on the salaries of burger flippers. And the government has not taken the steps to revitalize our economy during the last several years. The last four years have been spent in a grand theater of finger pointing and name calling, while the banks made off with damn near everything.
Instead of building 70 nuclear reactors and investing in coal-liquification and gasification plants, and opening up the energy resources that we do have, the stimulus was spent on mostly crap with nothing to show over time. We need to get off of foreign oil, so that we can repudiate our Federal Reserve currency. That is really the only way out of the fiscal mess the US Government has been lead into by the globalists and banking elite. Having done so, the country can re-industrialize and once again provide good union jobs for those with little prospect of jobs at the professional level.
Those who think the Republigoons and the Demonrats are on opposite sides have not been paying attention. Both of the main line party participants have been on the side of the wealthy, and just take turns taking the blame for things that go wrong. We have been systematically looted, saddled with a Federally regulated and stupified education system, and set up for the slaughter. Face reality and do something about it, very, very soon. You are not guaranteed to get your Social Security - it is a compact between generations to coin a phrase, but the generations that have to pay for it now were not of legal age to enter into a contract. Newborns arrive owing $35,000 to $100,000 at birth, depending on whose numbers you use (whether unfunded liabilities are included or not, mostly). How are they morally obligated to pay us Social Security? We are the ones who were too stupid to remove the corrupt and greedy from office, not them. We are the ones that fell for the free lunch promises of our political class, not them. We are the ones that let absolute morons take over our schools. I wouldn't blame the next generations if they just decided to put a bullet in grandpa's head, given our poor stewardship beginning in the 20th century.