Does that chart account for partial cuts that destroy ongoing studies? The kind that would have to be completely scrapped because one element is lost. Even worse, if all replication or even repetition were cut, then we are throwing out all of science.

I hope Europe is able to step up like they were talking a couple weeks ago.

[–] noctivius@lemm.ee 9 points 12 hours ago

Sure, Not

[–] SolidShake@lemmy.world 13 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I think it's a little bit humorous that republicans think we'll actually get some of that money via no taxes at all or stimulus checks lmao.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 1 points 5 hours ago

They don't think that, but they think it's humorous that you still believe that.

The politicians, anyway. The voters are probably still fooled.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 10 points 14 hours ago

Kakistocracy at its finest.

[–] JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org -2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

NYT, wtf is this shite infographic? Just use pie charts, they're so much simpler to parse.

[–] beeng@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Pie charts suck too.

[–] JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

True, the bar chart is probably the best, but both pie and bar outperform, by a wide margin, whatever NYT's chart is. With this many categories, I feel a pie chart will handle this info better than a bar chart.

[–] nekusoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de 2 points 5 hours ago

From a pure functional perspective, probably. Maybe.

Personally, I look at this more as a piece of art, as the chart was most likely picked because the visuals replicate what its describing: Science funding was shattered and is now in pieces.