从整体上和中国科学家相比，美国学术界和科学家在许多方面都先进和优越，不过现在在研究经费的增长速度方面，中国肯定要远超过美国。常言说，穷人过富日子容易，富人过穷日子困难。在中国的穷日子逐渐富裕的同时，曾经富裕的美国科学家同行正在经受经费压缩的艰辛。当然我们不能因为这个而沾沾，因为在整体上我们距离美国仍有很大差距，只能在某一方面有点舒心。不过看看以下这位美国科学家描写的一些情况，特别是他提出一些如何节约开支的合理化建议，读来倍感亲切，似乎有如我们曾经经历过的提倡节约的年代。这一文章只是调侃目前美国政府削减科研预算，又似乎具有现实意义，也不失幽默。

原文地址：

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2013_09_27/caredit.a1300213

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2013_09_25/caredit.a1300209

访问你研究生期间的实验室显得有些怪异。这很类似你回忆儿时的夏令营，回想起在划船、远足以及和玩伴打闹的快乐时光。

“这里是我当年第一次作高压液相色谱实验的地方！”“这里是当年的冷藏室，我们用来存放试剂和啤酒！这个家伙是指导我做实验的师兄，现在还在这里工作。”你一定会有这类感慨。我上个月自费访问我科研成长过程的实验室就是这种感觉。但很快我发现，这些实验室的运行将会十分艰难。

当年我学习期间，20多人在这里工作，包括7个研究生、许多博士后和一个整天牢骚满腹的本科生。该本科生的典型语言是“Adam, the data are being weird!"。我相信他现在应该是一个医学生。这里曾经是是系里最大的，拥有大量研究设备和研究经费的充满生机活力的实验室。但是，现在似乎成为这个国家削减研究预算的牺牲品。许多研究计划被取消，实验仪器被搁置，20多研究人员变成可怜巴巴惶惶度日的区区5个。

前几天，CNN报道由于联邦资助机构预算削减导致大量科研职位蒸发。全国范围内的科学家们在润色他们的个人简历，乞求begging别人写推荐信，甚至考虑到恐怖的法学院深造。有的继续寻找新的实验室，有的干脆完全放弃科研工作，有的兼职从事教学工作挣点小钱。

无论你是否谴责奥巴马政府、共和党领导的众议院和靠赠送一些手电筒钥匙链和书呆子式体恤衫推销给你9万美元毫无用处的科研仪器的推销员。科研经费的好日子一去不复返了。

除非国会接受高能粒子物理的游说，否则维持你的研究持续下去的唯一出路是你必须认真考虑如何节省开支。以下是你可以尝试的十七条非常可行作法：

1.       减少参加学术会议。

2.       申请经费时，声称你需要贵重仪器。如果你是在数学领域，就说你将需要一个数学级的粒子加速器。

3.       减少研究生工资。

4.       千万记住树上不会长钱。和一个搞植物遗传学家合作例外。

5.       买一些低价股，他们信誓旦旦会爆涨。

6.       把实验室外墙卖给广告公司作广告。

7.       挖苦心思地把你新发现的物种转换成广告出售。如“精神航空公司疟原虫”和“先进.com埃希氏杆菌属”等等。

8.       把你学术论文结果部分作为广告出售。例如你可以说，“我们的研究结果证明‘清凉诚实茶’和脑电伽马慢波可以提高脑电图单次分类”

9.       把老仪器买掉。

10.  按照经费资助目录一家家叫买。我们有卷筒纸！我们有英国奶酪！等等

11.  Ask wealthy old Mrs. Teasdale. She's looking to give away millions of dollars, but only if Rufus T. Firefly is instated as president of Freedonia. (Ah, Marxist economics.)

12.  Convince the principal investigator (PI) to work part-time as a PI. Just change "principal" to "private," and … I don't know. There's a joke in there somewhere.

13.  Many crowdfunding sites will let you solicit donations in return for guaranteeing certain results for the donors. Science works awesome when you preemptively guarantee results.

14.  Hey, make a meth lab. There's nothing naïve about assuming you can produce large amounts of meth, sell it, and then get out of the game. (I'm still on season two, so don't tell me what happens.)

15.  Apply for grant money from the National Institutes of Health. Just kidding! They're poor.

16.  In these times of austerity, funding committees tend to favor realistic research with straightforward, practical applications. So you're screwed.

17.  Peering into the empty corners of my former workspace, I noticed that a dying lab looks different from any other dying business. Ninety-eight percent of the equipment, the reagents on the shelves, the Post-it notes on the refrigerator, don't change. The cabinets aren't cleaned out, the computers aren't hauled away, and the assets aren't sold as scrap. It's the people who disappear.

That's what made the lab seem so empty. The freezer from the early 1980s? Still there. The glove box in the hallway, which has sat in the hallway as long as anyone can remember, neither used nor usable but for some reason sporting a sign that reads, "NOT TRASH"? Still there. But grad students have stopped joining the lab, postdocs have stopped post-docking, and the line for the microwave in the lunch room is depressingly short.

It's that absence that kills a lab. People without equipment can only accomplish so much, but equipment without people accomplishes nothing. It's not a lab; it's a storeroom.

I understand that belt-tightening is inevitable. And there may be nothing you can do. Still, I urge all you principal—not private—investigators: As you work to cover your budget shortfall, please do anything you can to keep the people around. Labs thrive on ideas, and at least for now, only people have ideas. Times being what they are, they may not have a future in science, but for now they're science's beating heart. They're more valuable than any piece of equipment.