Started By
Message

re: Trump budget: 20% cut to NIH

Posted on 3/17/17 at 12:16 pm to
Posted by Dale51
Member since Oct 2016
32378 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 12:16 pm to
quote:

Those vaccines are getting in the way of like 1/4 of an F-35

What vaccines are being cut? I missed that part of the article.
Posted by Erin Go Bragh
Beyond the Pale
Member since Dec 2007
14916 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 12:19 pm to
quote:

“It is pretty terrifying.”

Belt tightening is something all federal agencies should get used to. It's not terrifying it's reality.
Posted by Sidicous
Middle of Nowhere
Member since Aug 2015
17531 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 12:22 pm to
quote:

Where does it say the 20% come off of research? Trim the fat.


That was another answer from Mulkavey.

The money is to be allocated to the Directors of the departments. The WH is NOT micro-managing how the funds are used within each department.

Just a bunch of whining over fiscal responsibility from the left going on. If the budget cut corn subsidies by 20% they'd claim POTUS was trying to starve the entire world.
Posted by Dale51
Member since Oct 2016
32378 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 12:22 pm to
quote:

oh NIH does vaccines?

He does most of the vaccines. I read that he started a vaccine shop back in the day when he and Lonald Vertage-Schwitzer were back at university. It was almost a "Tony Stark" kinda thing...huge advancements with basic tools.
Posted by Dale51
Member since Oct 2016
32378 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 12:23 pm to
quote:

the acceleration in drug discoveries disease treatemtn will slow down tremendously.


What are you basing that claim on?
Posted by member12
Bob's Country Bunker
Member since May 2008
32145 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 12:39 pm to
quote:

Are you slow?

You will have research, the acceleration in drug discoveries disease treatemtn will slow down tremendously. 20% cut means no new grant funding. This is barely enough to keep old grants going.


You seem to think that the federal government not paying legal fees for private citizens meant that people wouldn't have access to legal services.....so naturally I assumed that you'd think that a 20% cut to NIH would mean the END OF MANKIND AS WE KNOW IT.


Posted by 90proofprofessional
Member since Mar 2004
24445 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 12:40 pm to
quote:

He does most of the vaccines. I read that he started a vaccine shop back in the day when he and Lonald Vertage-Schwitzer were back at university. It was almost a "Tony Stark" kinda thing...huge advancements with basic tools.


is it also true that his avatar pic is actually him though
Posted by narddogg81
Vancouver
Member since Jan 2012
19750 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 1:18 pm to
Do you think the nih doesn't waste at least 20% of their budget? It's probably higher. Stop being a hysterical little snowflake bitch.
Posted by LSURussian
Member since Feb 2005
127265 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 1:34 pm to
quote:

Now he is slashing Biomedical Research by 20%.
If you would just be honest when you post a thread maybe, just maybe, other posters might have more respect for you.

Your own link says it is an 18% cut, not 20%, and the cut is for all of NIH funding, not just biomedical research funding.

As your own links explains much of the reduced funding is from consolidating the 27 (27!!!!) locations and institutes of the NIH and by reducing the funding for training people FROM OTHER COUNTRIES (!!!!) on how to do research. So research is not being cut on that part, just teaching citizens of other countries HOW TO DO RESEARCH.

Why can't those countries PAY the NIH for the training their people are receiving?
quote:

The Trump administration is not the first to propose an NIH reorganization—in the late 1990s, former NIH Director Harold Varmus decried its sprawling array of disease-oriented institutes and called for a more streamlined structure.
Try being truthful for a change.
This post was edited on 3/17/17 at 1:43 pm
Posted by Winkface
Member since Jul 2010
34377 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 2:07 pm to
Most people in research will agree that the NIH could stand some shakeup and reorganization. With that, a $6 billion cut will absolutely affect biomedical research funding. The NIH had to cut 5% or 1.5 billion in 2013. It absolutely had an affect on funding. FYI, in their 2016FY report $130 million was spent on buildings.
Posted by HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Member since Feb 2017
12458 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 2:12 pm to
It's like some of you never heard of negotiating.

This is right up Trump's alley. Ask for way more than you are willing to settle for , and get way more than the other side was originally wanting to give up.

That is in fact the entire point of a negotiation, neither side leaves completely happy nor completely unhappy

Posted by CoachChappy
Member since May 2013
32684 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 2:13 pm to
quote:

by reducing the funding for training people FROM OTHER COUNTRIES (!!!!) on how to do research. So research is not being cut on that part, just teaching citizens of other countries HOW TO DO RESEARCH.


My cousin actually does this for a living. She even tells us that much of what she does should be being taught at the university level. People are coming in from other countries with "college degrees" from their home countries and still don't know how to perform basic research in their own field. She even admits that it's a bullshite job.
Posted by Vastmind
B Ara
Member since Sep 2013
4992 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 3:14 pm to
Let's just add another 10 trillion to the national debt like Barry did!!!
Posted by Lou Pai
Member since Dec 2014
28196 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 3:17 pm to
quote:

NIH


Melt bitch
Posted by tiderider
Member since Nov 2012
7703 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 3:29 pm to
WashPo article
The federal government spent millions of dollars in recent years researching why lesbians have a higher obesity rate than heterosexual women and gay men, according to funding records.

Posted by Aristo
Colorado
Member since Jan 2007
13292 posts
Posted on 3/17/17 at 3:45 pm to
So, they have to learn how to budget like every working class American household not supported by the federal government?
Posted by Aristo
Colorado
Member since Jan 2007
13292 posts
Posted on 3/18/17 at 1:38 pm to
quote:

The federal government spent millions of dollars in recent years researching why lesbians have a higher obesity rate than heterosexual women and gay men, according to funding records.


This is pathetic.
Posted by Superior Pariah
Member since Jun 2009
8457 posts
Posted on 3/18/17 at 1:43 pm to
Who needs it. It's just a bunch of leftist doctors wasting grant money on abortion research! Amirite!?!
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 3Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram