5 ms·

"In the long term, then, an economy that lacks an infrastructure for advanced process engineering and manufacturing will lose its ability to innovate.” Yeah, l

by logjam 15y ago

"In the long term, then, an economy that lacks an infrastructure for advanced process engineering and manufacturing will lose its ability to innovate.” Yeah, lack of infrastructure. In my opinion that's true of every facet of the worthwhile goals of our national (U.S.) life, from good healthcare to cutting edge science to excellence in education. Somewhere along the way that same short-sightedness the author discusses of mis-emphasizing short-term profit (e.g. "tax cuts") started bankrupting our future. Now we're reaping what we sowed. Practically every revolutionary advantage we gained over the last century at least (e.g., public health initiatives and sanitation, public education in the early 20th century; establishment of publicly funded research; the space program, the internet) were all collectively funded programs by government - by us - the collective will of a people not held hostage by short-sighted "anti-government" rhetoric.

anamax 15y ago
> Somewhere along the way that same short-sightedness the author discusses of mis-emphasizing short-term profit (e.g. "tax cuts") started bankrupting our future. Now we're reaping what we sowed. Practically every revolutionary advantage we gained over the last century at least (e.g., public health initiatives and sanitation, public education in the early 20th century; establishment of publicly funded research; the space program, the internet) were all collectively funded programs by government - by us - the collective will of a people not held hostage by short-sighted "anti-government" rhetoric. The existence of good govt spending does not imply that govt spending is good. Right now, the potential good spending is being crowded out by a lot of dumb spending. (That's nothing new - we blew hundreds of billions on Carter's synfuels project.) That's why public employee pension reform in San Francisco is being driven by folks who like govt. They realize that you can't do good govt spending when 20% of your budget goes to pensions. The same is true of SS (which is bigger) and ordinary healthcare.
- joe_the_user 15y ago
  The existence of good govt spending does not imply that govt spending is good. Of course, government spending is neither inherently good nor bad. But the thing to watch is how same cable of rent-seeking corporations that suck-up a good portion of what you aptly-label bad government spending also whips-up the "anti-government" mob when threatened (or simply greedy). Why is it that an honest-to-God investor in productive enterprises like Warren Buffet can call for higher taxes on the super-rich but the criminal Koch brothers bend all their effort to oppose this? Well, lower taxes for these new American oligarchs is just one piece of their entire campaign of state capture.
  - bennesvig 15y ago
    "Of course, government spending is neither inherently good nor bad." True, but it tilts heavily toward waste. You're never as careful with someone else's money as you are with your own.
    - mcantelon 15y ago
      Corporations also have executives that drive companies to the ground and yet get handsome bonuses for it. Both government and private enterprise can fall prey to problems of corruption and incompetence.
      - pjscott 15y ago
        That problem is self-correcting as long as it's possible for the company to actually die. It's the governments, heavily entrenched mega-companies, and companies that are "too big to fail" that I'm more worried about.
        davidw 15y ago
        It's self correcting in the individual company, but does it at a systematic level? It seems (although this is a case where data would be a lot better than a 'gut feeling') that there are more, and more egregious cases of "executives gone wild" in recent history as compared to, say, the 50ies. In economics, "other people's money" is called the principal-agent problem, and it's an interesting one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal-agent_problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal-agent_problem
      - anonymoushn 15y ago
        Corporations (other than large investment banks) aren't able to force taxpayers at gunpoint to continue to finance them when they are corrupt or incompetent, so it seems like that might be a less severe problem. ooh, ninja downvotes!
        mkr-hn 15y ago
wpietri 15y ago
> held hostage by short-sighted "anti-government" rhetoric. I think that's part of it, but it's not all of it. There is a business philosophy in America, so pervasive that most people aren't even aware that there are alternatives. It's the reigning dogma of every MBA program, and the Dell story is a fine example of it. Another example is the decades-long failure of American car companies. Bob Lutz, who spent decades in the auto industry, tells of fixing a manufacturing defect that was causing a lot of cars to break spectacularly right after the warranty (then 12,000 miles). Not only did he get in trouble for spending a lot on fixing the problem, people were furious that he blew a $50m hole in their expected revenue forecast. Almost any engineer could tell what's wrong with profiting from fixing a problem that you have created. But apparently, surprisingly few American executives can.
joshcrews 15y ago
Regarding tax cuts, I recommending taking another look at the history of American innovation and taxes. When I overview American history I see great innovation and economic growth from 1800 to 1930's, a period of low taxes. I see 1940's to 2010's as beneficiaries of earlier innovations and incremental improvements (but less innovation and growth compared to earlier period) and a time of high taxes.
forgottenpaswrd 15y ago
"Practically every revolutionary advantage we gained over the last century at least (e.g., public health initiatives and sanitation, public education in the early 20th century; establishment of publicly funded research; the space program, the internet) were all collectively funded programs by government - by us - the collective will of a people not held hostage by short-sighted "anti-government" rhetoric." Yeah, like the Wright brothers, Edison, Tesla and Ford discoveries. Public health has nothing to do with some specific men that wanted to put filters on water pipes, like the space program has nothing to do with people that started playing with rockets when they were kids like Von Braun. The same could be said about education, no private institution has made US better, everything of value has been created from central planning. And never ever consider Ethernet invention having ANY role whatsoever over Internet. Let say it clear: Everything of value is created by central planning and monopoly and despotic power over economy!! The economy is failing because of the evil, the private and evil corporations, because the gov spending near 60% of the money that exist on developed countries, the central banks having a monopoly over the money and gov spending more money on killing that in public services has nothing to do with that. Because we know politicians have not short term profit mindset like winning elections on a four years basis, they only have our best interest in mind.
- wazoox 15y ago
  > Yeah, like the Wright brothers, Edison, Tesla and Ford discoveries. Amusingly enough (or sadly, depending on your perspective), the Wright brothers and Edison are particularly known for their counter-productive attempts at locking their respective markets by unfair practices that badly harmed their businesses in the long term (airplanes, DC power, cinema...). You're pushing forward the false idea that progress depends on some great spirits. Fortunately this is untrue; weren't it for the Wright brothers and Edison, someone else would have made the very same discoveries at about the same time. In fact it's exactly what actually happened; the airplane, the phonograph, etc. were all invented independently at several places around the world at about the same time (give or leave a few months).

by logjam 15y ago

anamax 15y ago

> Somewhere along the way that same short-sightedness the author discusses of mis-emphasizing short-term profit (e.g. "tax cuts") started bankrupting our future. Now we're reaping what we sowed. Practically every revolutionary advantage we gained over the last century at least (e.g., public health initiatives and sanitation, public education in the early 20th century; establishment of publicly funded research; the space program, the internet) were all collectively funded programs by government - by us - the collective will of a people not held hostage by short-sighted "anti-government" rhetoric. The existence of good govt spending does not imply that govt spending is good. Right now, the potential good spending is being crowded out by a lot of dumb spending. (That's nothing new - we blew hundreds of billions on Carter's synfuels project.) That's why public employee pension reform in San Francisco is being driven by folks who like govt. They realize that you can't do good govt spending when 20% of your budget goes to pensions. The same is true of SS (which is bigger) and ordinary healthcare.

joe_the_user 15y ago
The existence of good govt spending does not imply that govt spending is good. Of course, government spending is neither inherently good nor bad. But the thing to watch is how same cable of rent-seeking corporations that suck-up a good portion of what you aptly-label bad government spending also whips-up the "anti-government" mob when threatened (or simply greedy). Why is it that an honest-to-God investor in productive enterprises like Warren Buffet can call for higher taxes on the super-rich but the criminal Koch brothers bend all their effort to oppose this? Well, lower taxes for these new American oligarchs is just one piece of their entire campaign of state capture.
- bennesvig 15y ago
  "Of course, government spending is neither inherently good nor bad." True, but it tilts heavily toward waste. You're never as careful with someone else's money as you are with your own.
  - mcantelon 15y ago
    Corporations also have executives that drive companies to the ground and yet get handsome bonuses for it. Both government and private enterprise can fall prey to problems of corruption and incompetence.
    - pjscott 15y ago
      That problem is self-correcting as long as it's possible for the company to actually die. It's the governments, heavily entrenched mega-companies, and companies that are "too big to fail" that I'm more worried about.
      - davidw 15y ago
        It's self correcting in the individual company, but does it at a systematic level? It seems (although this is a case where data would be a lot better than a 'gut feeling') that there are more, and more egregious cases of "executives gone wild" in recent history as compared to, say, the 50ies. In economics, "other people's money" is called the principal-agent problem, and it's an interesting one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal-agent_problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal-agent_problem
    - anonymoushn 15y ago
      Corporations (other than large investment banks) aren't able to force taxpayers at gunpoint to continue to finance them when they are corrupt or incompetent, so it seems like that might be a less severe problem. ooh, ninja downvotes!
      - mkr-hn 15y ago

wpietri 15y ago

> held hostage by short-sighted "anti-government" rhetoric. I think that's part of it, but it's not all of it. There is a business philosophy in America, so pervasive that most people aren't even aware that there are alternatives. It's the reigning dogma of every MBA program, and the Dell story is a fine example of it. Another example is the decades-long failure of American car companies. Bob Lutz, who spent decades in the auto industry, tells of fixing a manufacturing defect that was causing a lot of cars to break spectacularly right after the warranty (then 12,000 miles). Not only did he get in trouble for spending a lot on fixing the problem, people were furious that he blew a $50m hole in their expected revenue forecast. Almost any engineer could tell what's wrong with profiting from fixing a problem that you have created. But apparently, surprisingly few American executives can.

joshcrews 15y ago

Regarding tax cuts, I recommending taking another look at the history of American innovation and taxes. When I overview American history I see great innovation and economic growth from 1800 to 1930's, a period of low taxes. I see 1940's to 2010's as beneficiaries of earlier innovations and incremental improvements (but less innovation and growth compared to earlier period) and a time of high taxes.

forgottenpaswrd 15y ago

"Practically every revolutionary advantage we gained over the last century at least (e.g., public health initiatives and sanitation, public education in the early 20th century; establishment of publicly funded research; the space program, the internet) were all collectively funded programs by government - by us - the collective will of a people not held hostage by short-sighted "anti-government" rhetoric." Yeah, like the Wright brothers, Edison, Tesla and Ford discoveries. Public health has nothing to do with some specific men that wanted to put filters on water pipes, like the space program has nothing to do with people that started playing with rockets when they were kids like Von Braun. The same could be said about education, no private institution has made US better, everything of value has been created from central planning. And never ever consider Ethernet invention having ANY role whatsoever over Internet. Let say it clear: Everything of value is created by central planning and monopoly and despotic power over economy!! The economy is failing because of the evil, the private and evil corporations, because the gov spending near 60% of the money that exist on developed countries, the central banks having a monopoly over the money and gov spending more money on killing that in public services has nothing to do with that. Because we know politicians have not short term profit mindset like winning elections on a four years basis, they only have our best interest in mind.

wazoox 15y ago
> Yeah, like the Wright brothers, Edison, Tesla and Ford discoveries. Amusingly enough (or sadly, depending on your perspective), the Wright brothers and Edison are particularly known for their counter-productive attempts at locking their respective markets by unfair practices that badly harmed their businesses in the long term (airplanes, DC power, cinema...). You're pushing forward the false idea that progress depends on some great spirits. Fortunately this is untrue; weren't it for the Wright brothers and Edison, someone else would have made the very same discoveries at about the same time. In fact it's exactly what actually happened; the airplane, the phonograph, etc. were all invented independently at several places around the world at about the same time (give or leave a few months).