Search Results
6/27/2025, 3:08:54 AM
>>508835068
Tbf I'm worried we might be cutting NSF too much. I say this mostly because if NSF is cut too much, it might hinder our efforts with Antarctica, space, etc. I remember some of the agencies I would've kept in Education (like the interstate statistics collection agency) were cut and it seemed like those were resources that actually helped to coordinate national education efforts without intruding on States' rights. I'm generally supportive of all the federal statistics programs, as they seem to be pretty straightforward and beneficial uses of funding which assist core faculties of society such as communications and effectively form as a sort of digital infrastructure with which non-federal entities can derive substantial benefit and might not be able to do the necessary research themselves. (For example, Louisiana could collect data on its own schools, but not those in Mississippi. A federal program for data collection is good.)
On the other hand, NSF's core without its subagencies is pretty pointless. Some of the programs it funds are honestly just weird stuff the private sector would've funded anyway, like for example POSE is a program to fund development of components of the operating system software used on servers of various database companies, so that they can access shared software components for free without paying the developers, or even using themselves as government contractors so they can reap a profit off of the employees they would've paid to do the work anyway.
NSF could be split into different agencies like USAP, NCSES, etc. to effectively cut the fat. A lot of these NSF programs are already given separate appropriations by Congress because they're vital and can't be trusted to dudes who'd bust the budget renting out casinos and sending the money to their buddies at colleges. If anything, I'd say Trump should appoint an acting director to ensure more important stuff doesn't get lumped in with corrupt degeneracy and nepotism.
Tbf I'm worried we might be cutting NSF too much. I say this mostly because if NSF is cut too much, it might hinder our efforts with Antarctica, space, etc. I remember some of the agencies I would've kept in Education (like the interstate statistics collection agency) were cut and it seemed like those were resources that actually helped to coordinate national education efforts without intruding on States' rights. I'm generally supportive of all the federal statistics programs, as they seem to be pretty straightforward and beneficial uses of funding which assist core faculties of society such as communications and effectively form as a sort of digital infrastructure with which non-federal entities can derive substantial benefit and might not be able to do the necessary research themselves. (For example, Louisiana could collect data on its own schools, but not those in Mississippi. A federal program for data collection is good.)
On the other hand, NSF's core without its subagencies is pretty pointless. Some of the programs it funds are honestly just weird stuff the private sector would've funded anyway, like for example POSE is a program to fund development of components of the operating system software used on servers of various database companies, so that they can access shared software components for free without paying the developers, or even using themselves as government contractors so they can reap a profit off of the employees they would've paid to do the work anyway.
NSF could be split into different agencies like USAP, NCSES, etc. to effectively cut the fat. A lot of these NSF programs are already given separate appropriations by Congress because they're vital and can't be trusted to dudes who'd bust the budget renting out casinos and sending the money to their buddies at colleges. If anything, I'd say Trump should appoint an acting director to ensure more important stuff doesn't get lumped in with corrupt degeneracy and nepotism.
Page 1