> America is facing a multi-generational technical decline never before seen that will do irreparable harm across all fields of research

This sounds very bad! But since I'm not arguing in favor of technical decline and irreparable harm, it doesn't mean that my argument is wrong.

> let alone the human cost especially borne by young scientists who have more to lose,

I'm confused: is science funding a welfare state for people who want to be scientists, or is it a meritocracy by which we fund the development of science?

> and your grand insightful take is that well, some of it deserved to get cut,

Well...yes.

> when you're not even the one making the decisions of which ones do receive funding.

Erm, so what? I can't have an opinion on bad science?

You're not making the decision either, but apparently you're allowed to have one.