While I support cuts and reforms, I'm a bit saddened and worried by cuts at NSF. Most of the best work I've shared here was funded by NSF. The private sector largely wasn't doing it. If they did, the deliverables weren't free but <i>sometimes</i> were when NSF funded. I'd hate to see those types of grants go.<p>That said, there is an ideological difference driving this on at least two points (if ignoring DEI etc).<p>One, taxes are taken from individuals to be spent on the government's priorities. Good, evil, or just wasteful... you have no say. If private donations, then you can fund the people and efforts you value most with <i>your</i> money. Conservatives say your money should be yours as much as possible which requires cutting NSF, etc.<p>Second, private individuals and businesses decide most of what happens in the markets. The problems in the markets are really their responsibility. If it needs NSF funding, the private parties are probably already failing to make that decision or see it as a bad one. Private, market theory says it's better to let markets run themselves with government interventions mostly blocking harmful behaviors. Ex: If nobody funds or buys secure systems, let them have the consequences of the insecure systems they want so much. Don't fund projects that nobody is buying or selling.<p>Those are two, large drivers in conservative policy that will exist regardless of other, political beliefs. Those arguing against it are saying the people running the government are more trustworthy with our money. Yet, they're crying out against what the current government is doing. Do they really trust them and want all those resources controlled by the latest administration? Or retain control of their own money to back, as liberals, what they belief in?