4 ms·

Why the US hasn't done this on a 1000x bankroll (1.2 Bill) is absolutely beyond me....

jdminhbg 15y ago
The US doesn't need to monetarily attract new startups, it just needs to get the visa/immigration nightmare the hell out of the way.
- vlokshin 15y ago
  I completely agree on your point regarding the visa/immigration BS. Some of the best talent I work with is from south america or eastern Europe. They are ALL in this boat, and it's heartbreaking to see (and makes me feel like I have something I shouldn't, when a lot of these people are just more talented than I). The US does need to monetarily attract new start-ups. Our brightest minds are still going to the IB/PE firms of NYC and sucking money out of a zero-sum system instead of creating something worthwhile. Give them incentive to create (in terms of personal cash reward) in the same way the banks do, and you have something.
  - davidw 15y ago
    Spending a few billions on startups (who would spend it?) would not alter the long term balance between startups and wall street.
prostoalex 15y ago
They have, even with equity participation. GM.com and AIG.com are all working on some cool stuff, supposedly.
- vlokshin 15y ago
  I think the "supposedly" piece here is key. Yes, plenty of companies do it -- but few have the means and liquidity to make an actual impact. If apple took half of their cash and moved it, that'd make an actual difference... but Apple's not going to do it and no one else (besides the gov't) has the power to do so.
OstiaAntica 15y ago
Because it is corporatist and corrupt and not the American tradition to have politicians usurp the role of banks and venture capitalists. Fundamentally, do we believe that government should allocate capital, or should private citizens and companies do it in the marketplace? These government startup funds are a Potemkin Village where the corrupt state mimics the healthy activity that occurs naturally in free societies.

The US doesn't need to monetarily attract new startups, it just needs to get the visa/immigration nightmare the hell out of the way.

vlokshin 15y ago
I completely agree on your point regarding the visa/immigration BS. Some of the best talent I work with is from south america or eastern Europe. They are ALL in this boat, and it's heartbreaking to see (and makes me feel like I have something I shouldn't, when a lot of these people are just more talented than I). The US does need to monetarily attract new start-ups. Our brightest minds are still going to the IB/PE firms of NYC and sucking money out of a zero-sum system instead of creating something worthwhile. Give them incentive to create (in terms of personal cash reward) in the same way the banks do, and you have something.
- davidw 15y ago
  Spending a few billions on startups (who would spend it?) would not alter the long term balance between startups and wall street.

prostoalex 15y ago

They have, even with equity participation. GM.com and AIG.com are all working on some cool stuff, supposedly.

vlokshin 15y ago
I think the "supposedly" piece here is key. Yes, plenty of companies do it -- but few have the means and liquidity to make an actual impact. If apple took half of their cash and moved it, that'd make an actual difference... but Apple's not going to do it and no one else (besides the gov't) has the power to do so.

OstiaAntica 15y ago

Because it is corporatist and corrupt and not the American tradition to have politicians usurp the role of banks and venture capitalists. Fundamentally, do we believe that government should allocate capital, or should private citizens and companies do it in the marketplace? These government startup funds are a Potemkin Village where the corrupt state mimics the healthy activity that occurs naturally in free societies.