zlacker

>>karako+(OP)
As a taxpayer I'm tired of funding everyone's project. Especially in private institutions which have billions under management and are ran like hedge funds, and not increasing their intake. Time to fix the deficit and kill off our debt.

If the rebuttal is "yeah but advancements improve the economy" -- The private sector can fund projects which are opportunities with an economic basis, they can take the risk and they can see if it is profitable in the market (ie beneficial)

If the rebuttal is "How will America stay competitive?" We cant seem to keep trade secrets anyways. [1]

[1] - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950

Edit: Also the 4 years at a time thing is probably a better choice too, because it makes them less twitchy politically. You get your 4 years, regardless of who's team is in office. This should be a win regardless of your affiliation.

>>maerF0+ym
> We cant seem to keep trade secrets anyways.

Zero sum thinking.

It is possible that we can improve the entire world and ourselves, but for many the reasoning is "It's not enough that I should win: others must also lose."

>>mullin+ep
The problem is the competitive landscape by which other nations which are Anti- us, are taking but not giving. And are happy to see us go down the drain to their own profit.

It's less about zero sum and more about the existence of enemies in the world who are even willing to lose smally if we lose bigly. (to speak like dilbert)

>>maerF0+Rp
> who are even willing to lose smally if we lose bigly

Realistically though, this has nothing to do with geopolitics. This wouldn't be happening if the research community were driving around in trucks with MAGA flags and sleeping with Dear Leader body pillows.

This regime is entirely transactional and it's a howler to pretend otherwise. The academic research community could be dealing literal tons of hard drugs and they'd get a pass as long as they were card carrying party members.