But from the above articles, I see two trends.
From (1) Nonmilitary science funding has been effectively flat for a decade while military research was increasing annually roughly until a year or so into the Obama administration.
From (2) and its responses, the money itself is being misallocated to the top (just like everywhere else) and also into a metastasizing tumor of administrators:
http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2012-11-21/the-troublin...
And then there are articles like this:
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/report/2014/...
http://dellweb.bfa.nsf.gov/nsffundhist_files/frame.htm
which imply the NSF is relatively OK but that the NIH is increasingly underfunded relative to GDP, no?
It's not like we've cracked mortality, figured out our own minds, or even cured a whole bunch of nasty diseases yet.
Defense R&D spending is way higher but nondefense spending is still keeping up with inflation [1]. There are some agencies who have had reduced budgets, such as National Institutes of Health, while DoE and NSF have enjoyed increased budgets. [2]
Overall I find your post hyperbolic and not consistent with the stats and figures. I'm assuming that your university's research was defunded and that's why you have adopted this world view. It's consistent with your experience but I believe that it doesn't represent funding in general.
[1] http://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/DefNon_1.jpg
[2] http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=5703