[alphazard]

This is an incredibly bad take on a hard social problem which is hard for reasons that are well understood.

Scientific research is often not immediately applicable, but can still be valuable. The number of people that can tell you if it's valuable are small, and as our scientific knowledge improves, the number of people who know what's going on shrinks and shrinks.

Separately, it's possible to spend many years researching something, and have very little to show for it. The scientists in that situation also want some kind of assurance that they will be able to pay their bills.

Between the high rate of failure, and conflicts of interest, and inscrutability of the research topics. It's very hard to efficiently fund science, and all the current ways of doing it are far from optimal. There is waste, there is grift, there is politics. Any improvement here is welcome, and decreasing the dollar cost per scientific discovery is more important than the research itself in any single field.