@ChrisMurphyCT Might not be. But since everything you say is a lie, including the words "and" and "but," we'll never know from your words.

@TristanSnell Why would Musk give a shit? USAID is a bunch of bureaucrats who hand out grants. They have no police powers, so the only "investigation" they can do is google stuff. They have no prosecutorial powers, so all they can do when they're done is write a memo.

@mattyglesias Sure do. We just don't believe it's actual racism when a lefty or media whore uses the word.

@JohnArnoldFndtn Well, had they jumped up and said so right away, that might've worked. But so far as I can tell, the go-to response is to shriek about the end times and rain contempt on the notion that anything less than 1:1 research:overhead means you're stupid poopyhead.

@mattyglesias If you're trying to argue one should be considerate and thoughtful to strangers as if they were your own family, this is an unintentionally ironic demonstration of hypocrisy on the point.

@markets So you're saying ordinary people will get to keep $5 trillion to $11 trillion more of the money they earn? Wow, that sounds fabulous! Pretty sure I use my share better than a USAID bureaucrat funding rainbow flags in Malaysia.

@ElxMapping You're confused. The precedent was set 4 years ago. You're enjoying the fruits of your own precedent right now.

@Conblob Well they're a lot harder to find. Every Trump voter I know is jubilant at what's happening. There might be someone who's regretful somewhere, though.

@minilek @davidgobaud Who just elected those who are in charge now? If you don't think academia's tin ear and snobbery aren't a significant reason for this harsh move (and it's definitely that), then you are not thinking clearly. Reflection and reform are strongly indicated.

@minilek @davidgobaud I think you're confused about who's in charge. It's you that now needs to make the case for the much higher rate. Let me suggest raining contempt on the people who are going to judge the persuasiveness of your argument is not a promising start.

@darbysaxbe If you think coming out strongly against that proposition is going to garner massive support, you are just not thinking clearly. If you don't want this to end badly, you need a much more reflective take.

@labonnelab Because you realize the proposition here is not to spend fewer dollars, but to shift the dollars from overhead to actual research. To raise the amount the researcher actually gets from 50% to 85% of the grant. And you think this will *reduce* the quantity of science?

@The_Gilp Well imagine what it will be when half of all those dollars are not siphoned off by university administration to fund a new diversity dean.

@ATabarrok Furthermore, I've never heard of a university replacing lab equipment out of overhead money. They'll just tell the PI to write another grant. I've never heard of a university just giving general budget money directly to a PI because he's a little short under any circumstances.

@ATabarrok The only thing written quite specifically is big capital-cost items, like a $1 million custom-built vacuum chamber. But those weigh tons and you're not likely to accidentally lose it and need to quick get another.

@krassenstein Why the fuck do any these fools *have* security clearances in the first place?

@jkagan1 Meh. They can all trace their origins to Paracelsus and Isaac Newton, too.