$400 million of Columbia University's federal funds canceled by Trump administration

[bbbbbbb]

Well here’s my thought, maybe there wasn’t sufficient evidence to actually punish whoever was persecuting these Jews. Maybe they couldn’t actually determine who the guilty part was. That’s why there needs to be an investigation before disciplinary actions are taken.

I agree. Despite extreme views which tend to paint things black and white, the actual reality and be very difficult to determine.

 

[Bob Crowley]

American universities aren't the only one the Trump Administration is possibly refusing to fund.

Trump administration asks Australian universities to justify US funding

The Australian government is seeking answers after universities were sent a questionnaire the tertiary education union is calling "blatant political interference".

www.abc.net.au

Australians are getting irritated with his tariff policies on everyone, particularly when we consider the blatant lies being told by some members of his administration.

We've had one surplus month of trade surplus with the USA which just happens to be due to gold exports. Other than that since 1988 (37 years) we've had a trade deficit with the USA every year always buying more from the USA than the USA buys from us.

Australia records shock trade surplus with the US

Australia’s first monthly trade surplus with the US since the 1980s may make it harder for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to secure a tariff exemption.

www.afr.com

One of Trump's cronies has accused us of "flooding the US market with aluminium", namely Peter Navarro.

Mr Trump's senior counsellor for trade and manufacturing, Peter Navarro, on Tuesday rebuked the idea of an Australian exemption.

"Australia is just killing our aluminium market," he told CNN. "President Trump says no, no, we're not, we're not doing that anymore."

He's one of Trump's "Yes Men" in my opinion whose goal in life is to lick Trump's boots. Our supply of aluminium is 2.5% of US aluminium, with Navarro saying we're "flooding the market". It's a blatant lie.

With Australian steel and aluminium set to incur US tariffs, global uncertainty will be our next challenge

The tariffs pose a fundamental challenge to Australia’s trade strategy in a protectionist world.

theconversation.com

“Unjustified” and “not the way that friends and allies should be treated”. That’s how Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong have described the latest shot in United States President Trump’s trade war.

Effective today, there is a 25% tariff on all imports of steel and aluminium into the US – including on Australian products.

Australia’s direct economic hit will be relatively small – less than A$1 billion of steel and aluminium was exported to the US in 2023, according to data from UN Comtrade.

But the tariffs pose a more fundamental challenge to Australia’s trade strategy and how we manage key alliances in an era of resurgent protectionism.

 

[bbbbbbb]

American universities aren't the only one the Trump Administration is possibly refusing to fund.

Trump administration asks Australian universities to justify US funding

The Australian government is seeking answers after universities were sent a questionnaire the tertiary education union is calling "blatant political interference".

www.abc.net.au

Australians are getting irritated with his tariff policies on everyone, particularly when we consider the blatant lies being told by some members of his administration.

We've had one surplus month of trade surplus with the USA which just happens to be due to gold exports. Other than that since 1988 (37 years) we've had a trade deficit with the USA every year always buying more from the USA than the USA buys from us.

Australia records shock trade surplus with the US

Australia’s first monthly trade surplus with the US since the 1980s may make it harder for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to secure a tariff exemption.

www.afr.com

One of Trump's cronies has accused us of "flooding the US market with aluminium", namely Peter Navarro.



He's one of Trump's "Yes Men" in my opinion whose goal in life is to lick Trump's boots. Our supply of aluminium is 2.5% of US aluminium, with Navarro saying we're "flooding the market". It's a blatant lie.

With Australian steel and aluminium set to incur US tariffs, global uncertainty will be our next challenge

The tariffs pose a fundamental challenge to Australia’s trade strategy in a protectionist world.

theconversation.com

This is an excellent example of how not to make friends and influence your allies.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Let's go back to the original question

Why does an institution running a tax-free hedge fund of 15-40 billion dollars need government money to conduct research?

Agreed. 15B will make a school $900,000,000/yr @ 6%. That's funding a lot of research. The fact is, in general any discovery's by a university from research money funded by the federal government remain the property of the university. It is a no lose scenario for the university; they'd be fools to not do it.

It would only seem fair that the feds get to recoup part/all of that money through revenue sharing with the university for marketable discoveries.

 

[Merrill]

Agreed. 15B will make a school $900,000,000/yr @ 6%. That's funding a lot of research. The fact is, in general any discovery's by a university from research money funded by the federal government remain the property of the university. It is a no lose scenario for the university; they'd be fools to not do it.

It would only seem fair that the feds get to recoup part/all of that money through revenue sharing with the university for marketable discoveries.

I am not necessarily against providing grants to universities for critical research

what I am against is waste and grift. University of Michigan employs an army of DEI officers (like 140 last I checked) costing the school tens of millions per year. Employees that do basically nothing productive, and actually hurt the functioning of the school. The university then turns around and asks for money from the goverment

(this is in addition to paying university presidents millions of dollars a year in salaries)

there needs to be oversight and regulation of this stuff. The days of grift and fraud are over

 

[bbbbbbb]

I am not necessarily against providing grants to universities for critical research

what I am against is waste and grift. University of Michigan employs an army of DEI officers (like 140 last I checked) costing the school tens of millions per year. Employees that do basically nothing productive, and actually hurt the functioning of the school. The university then turns around and asks for money from the goverment

(this is in addition to paying university presidents millions of dollars a year in salaries)

there needs to be oversight and regulation of this stuff. The days of grift and fraud are over

Taking away from Paul to afflict Peter has always been an absurd strategy. If DEI is the problem, then address the DEI issue head on. Of course, that can't be simply done with the swipe of a pen in the White House. It requires the active work of the Congress to change the underlying legislation which has resulted in this issue.

Likewise, if graft is the problem, as it is throughout the entire United States government, especially that very sacred cow known as the Department of Defense (formerly the Department of War), then marshal the necessary forces to root out the graft and don't think for a moment that using a pea gun in the White House will do anything to solve that problem. If anything, the General Services Administration ought to be seriously augmented, thus increasing the size of government. There are few things that government agencies fear more than an audit from the GSA and, believe me, these audits are very few and far between simply because there a precious few auditors working for GSA.

 

[Merrill]

Taking away from Paul to afflict Peter has always been an absurd strategy. If DEI is the problem, then address the DEI issue head on. Of course, that can't be simply done with the swipe of a pen in the White House. It requires the active work of the Congress to change the underlying legislation which has resulted in this issue.

Likewise, if graft is the problem, as it is throughout the entire United States government, especially that very sacred cow known as the Department of Defense (formerly the Department of War), then marshal the necessary forces to root out the graft and don't think for a moment that using a pea gun in the White House will do anything to solve that problem. If anything, the General Services Administration ought to be seriously augmented, thus increasing the size of government. There are few things that government agencies fear more than an audit from the GSA and, believe me, these audits are very few and far between simply because there a precious few auditors working for GSA.

I have been arguing for cleaning up the DoD forever. And calling for defense cuts

unfortunately, the minute a Republican gets into office who wants to end foreign military entanglements and get a peace treaty in a major war, the Democrats all-of-a-sudden start screaming about how we need to increase defense spending and put boots on the ground against the Russians

 

[bbbbbbb]

I have been arguing for cleaning up the DoD forever. And calling for defense cuts

unfortunately, the minute a Republican gets into office who wants to end foreign military entanglements and get a peace treaty in a major war, the Democrats all-of-a-sudden start screaming about how we need to increase defense spending and put boots on the ground against the Russians

I agree entirely with you. The DoD is massively bloated.

 

[Job 33:6]

I have been arguing for cleaning up the DoD forever. And calling for defense cuts

unfortunately, the minute a Republican gets into office who wants to end foreign military entanglements and get a peace treaty in a major war, the Democrats all-of-a-sudden start screaming about how we need to increase defense spending and put boots on the ground against the Russians

This is significant. The DoD budget is over 800 billion dollars. The EPA budget by comparison is something like 10 billion.

The real savings will only begin, when Congress can join together in reforming things like Medicaid, Medicare and of course, the DoD. And by reforming, I mean budget cuts.

The DoD administration was in the headlines last week about 500 million dollars in savings. Well that's great and all, but what about the other 835+ billion?

It would be like me having 20,000 dollars in debt on an overpriced car, and then bragging about how last Thursday I chose not to treat myself to a cup of coffee.

I keep wondering, when will the real savings actually begin?

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reveals another $580 million in DOGE savings from bloated Pentagon budget

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth unveiled another $580 million worth of cuts to programs Thursday that he claimed were either wasteful” or didn’t align with the administration’s age…

nypost.com

And I like the idea of increasing government efficiency, but if the cuts are interpreted as potentially ideological rather than actually producing tangible savings, then it wouldn't surprise me if many of the leftists may interpret doge as a farce.

 

[Merrill]

This is significant. The DoD budget is over 800 billion dollars. The EPA budget by comparison is something like 10 billion.

The real savings will only begin, when Congress can join together in reforming things like Medicaid, Medicare and of course, the DoD. And by reforming, I mean budget cuts.

The DoD administration was in the headlines last week about 500 million dollars in savings. Well that's great and all, but what about the other 835+ billion?

It would be like me having 20,000 dollars in debt on an overpriced car, and then bragging about how last Thursday I chose not to treat myself to a cup of coffee.

I keep wondering, when will the real savings actually begin?

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reveals another $580 million in DOGE savings from bloated Pentagon budget

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth unveiled another $580 million worth of cuts to programs Thursday that he claimed were either wasteful” or didn’t align with the administration’s age…

nypost.com

very true

obviously we have to start somewhere, but the big expenditures are entitlement programs and defense

politicians want to kick the can down the road and not make tough decisions. And this will be the ultimate outcome

1. The US will have to choose between maintaining its investor-grade bond rating (not AAA, I mean not-junk) or cutting entitlement programs
2. The US will have to choose between rampant inflation, currency devaluation, and a run on the dollar, or serious entitlement reform
3. And if no action is taken, the US will eventually default on its debt

for anyone with young kids, I would think about what a US debt default would look like. It would be a Great Depression (or worse)

we have a debt-to-gdp ration of 120% right now, which is emergency-level.

 

[bbbbbbb]

very true

obviously we have to start somewhere, but the big expenditures are entitlement programs and defense

politicians want to kick the can down the road and not make tough decisions. And this will be the ultimate outcome

1. The US will have to choose between maintaining its investor-grade bond rating (not AAA, I mean not-junk) or cutting entitlement programs
2. The US will have to choose between rampant inflation, currency devaluation, and a run on the dollar, or serious entitlement reform
3. And if no action is taken, the US will eventually default on its debt

for anyone with young kids, I would think about what a US debt default would look like. It would be a Great Depression (or worse)

we have a debt-to-gdp ration of 120% right now, which is emergency-level.

Absolutely. And we have a chap in the White House using his pea shooter at his ideological opponents when what we really need is a Congress with full bore cannons precisely aimed at real cuts.

 

[Merrill]

Absolutely. And we have a chap in the White House using his pea shooter at his ideological opponents when what we really need is a Congress with full bore cannons precisely aimed at real cuts.

Yes and no

we have heard this argument from neocons for decades: "we can't do anything about the federal budget until there is entitlement reform"

which is complete nonsense: you can start by going after programs and initiatives that are wasteful, fraudulent, corrupt, etc.

and then we can talk about entitlement reform

in other words, you don't get to rob public coffers non-stop just because the big ticket items aren't being dealt with

 

[bbbbbbb]

Yes and no

we have heard this argument from neocons for decades: "we can't do anything about the federal budget until there is entitlement reform"

which is complete nonsense: you can start by going after programs and initiatives that are wasteful, fraudulent, corrupt, etc.

and then we can talk about entitlement reform

in other words, you don't get to rob public coffers non-stop just because the big ticket items aren't being dealt with

I never mentioned cutting entitlement programs.

We all know that there are two methods of balancing any budget - reduce spending or increase income.

Traditionally, the Congress has preferred the latter method, but in recent years it has been extremely content to pass deficit budgets, ballooning the national debt. Mr. Trump did this famously during the COVID-19 pandemic.

If the Congress is in the least bit serious about achieving some meaningful effort to balance the national budget, they will need to do either of the above, or a combination of them. In the meantime, having a President in the White House using his peashooter at his popular targets is only stirring the political pot.

 

[zeland2236]

That is utterly pathetic. There is no particular reason, other than blatant partisan politics, to single out Columbia University. If there is an actual situation at Columbia regarding any form of discrimination (racial, religious, ethnic, or gender) there are abundant Equal Opportunity laws on the books and the case can be adjudicated accordingly and, if found guilty, Columbia would be fined accordingly. For Mr. Trump and his administration to act as prosecutor, judge, and jury for this case, is Constitutionally invalid and he and his administration ought to be held accountable.

Is there a "Law" that "requires" the government to give money to Columbia, or any other university? I think all these liberal, anti-American universities should be stripped of government grants.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Is there a "Law" that "requires" the government to give money to Columbia, or any other university? I think all these liberal, anti-American universities should be stripped of government grants.

Other basic economic sense, there is no legislation requiring government to provide any support whatsoever for education of any sort. After all, societies throughout the world have survived for millenia on the backs of impoverished and illiterate peasants. North Korea probably does it most blatantly.

The reality, since you seem to have stumbled in here just now, is that, for a wide variety of reasons, the United States government has decided not to established its own research facilities in a number of disciplines, but has decided to pay for the research to be conducted at institutions of higher education.

Just think, if only the Roosevelt administration had acted prudently in the 1940's the University of Chicago would not have been sucking federal money out of the government, researching nuclear technology with the horrid result being nuclear bombs, not to mention nuclear reactors generating the electricity which both enable you to post online as well as provides the illumination to do so at night. What a much better world we would be living in!

 

[Pommer]

Is there a "Law" that "requires" the government to give money to Columbia, or any other university? I think all these liberal, anti-American universities should be stripped of government grants.

Yes.
Congress sets up the Laws in such a way that if a university jumps through all of the hoops, then that university can get in on the gravy train of Federal monies. Adding that these universities must have the “correct” political speech allowed while suppressing “incorrect speech”, would likely be anathema to the Constitution.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Yes.
Congress sets up the Laws in such a way that if a university jumps through all of the hoops, then that university can get in on the gravy train of Federal monies. Adding that these universities must have the “correct” political speech allowed while suppressing “incorrect speech”, would likely be anathema to the Constitution.

These laws enable universities to access federal funding, but his question was "Is there a "Law" that "requires" the government to give money to Columbia, or any other university?"

One of the difficulties regarding public education is that the United States Constitution does not address it at all. It was not an issue at all when the Constitution was written simply because free public education for every child was simply unheard of. Thus, Mr. Trump and his ilk have a surprisingly strong argument for abolishing the Department of Education, based on this Constitutional absence. This is also the case with many states' constitutions which do not address education per se. Taken to its logical end, the public school system, including all public universities (which are joined at the hip to government funding) would be eliminated, thus saving untold billions of dollars of tax money.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It was not an issue at all when the Constitution was written simply because free public education for every child was simply unheard of.

That's not correct. Massachusetts and other New England colonies instituted compulsory public education for both boys and girls as far back as the 1640's.

Massachusetts School Laws - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[bbbbbbb]

That's not correct. Massachusetts and other New England colonies instituted compulsory public education for both boys and girls as far back as the 1640's.

Massachusetts School Laws - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

While that is true, the actual attendance rates in schools varied widely with many children not attending simply because they were otherwise employed on the farms or in the mills. Parents were not penalized because of this.

 

[The Liturgist]

What research is being done at Hillsdale College? They don't have graduate programs in anything related to science or engineering.

There is quite a lot of important research that does not pertain to science or engineering. For example, we urgently need more scholars who specialize in Archaeology, Near East history, Syriac studies, Kurdish studies, Coptic studies, Armenian studies, Ethiopian studies and Turkic studies due to the religious persecution, genocides and ethnic cleansing happening in territory occupied by Islamist regimes such as the new Syrian dictatorship, Turkey, and Azerbaijan, and the frequent attacks on Christian heritage in Egypt, Iraq, Palestine, and even Christian majority lands such as Ethiopia and Eritrea. Likewise, the cultural heritage of other minorities in the Middle East such as the Yazidis, Yarsanis, Alawis, Alevis, Bektasis, Mevlevis, Mandaeans and Zoroastrians is critically endangered. Some of these groups may be crypto-Christian or descended from Syrian Gnosticism in the case of the Alevis, Bektasis, Yazidis and Yarsanis, and the Mandaeans represent a non-Christian Gnostic sect whose cultural heritage is immediately in danger.

Furthermore, the heritage of the ancient Sumerian, Hittite and Akkadian civilizations is also endangered, so we need more linguists who specialize in those languages and more excavations and efforts to recover what can be recovered before someone decides it represents pagan idolatry and destroys it, as happened to the ancient synagogue and early Christian church at Dura Europos and the ruins in Palmyra.