I'd also benefit from this, but I'm for the idea so may be biased. >And finally, capitalism: If it's really most economically efficient for tech to hyper-conce

I'd also benefit from this, but I'm for the idea so may be biased. >And finally, capitalism: If it's really most economically efficient for tech to hyper-concentrate in silicon valley, then fighting that will probably produce a whole lot of deadweight loss. If it isn't, then market forces will guide the situation toward a natural resolution. Capitalism trends toward more efficient usage of resources. But it doesn't care about humans and their quality of life. It works with that (people spend resources on their healthcare for themselves and their families), but it's perfectly "efficient" for some people to stay impoverished. The government is a great entity to cover this gap. And Brookings' proposal isn't so bad: fixed 10-year duration, cities chosen by RFP instead of by politicians, and funds focusing on R&D instead of "make money now" projects. Most R&D moves as slowly as the government, so it's not a bad target.