4 ms·
NIST, like many government agencies, has done good things. It's just that they have not done them cost-effectively. Real businesses have to operate responsibl
by gavanwoolery 14y ago
NIST, like many government agencies, has done good things. It's just that they have not done them cost-effectively. Real businesses have to operate responsibly, fear going bankrupt, meet market demands, and so forth. That said, I would actually gladly pour money into NIST over other government transactions (i.e. bank bailouts).
- nodata 14y agoAnyone who has worked for a big business knows they are not cost effective. Also externalities don't magically make business profitable, they just move costs.
- gavanwoolery 14y agoMany big businesses are even less cost-effective than govt. departments (I used to work at AOL, don't get me started...). The difference is that they must become cost-effective, or die (assuming they do not get a govt. bailout). Some businesses are very cost-effective (love them or hate them, Wallmart has an incredible track record; Valve, despite spending pretty liberally, makes more money per employee than most companies). The worst case scenario is when a government gets involved with a private business, particularly GSEs -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac being good examples: both reaped huge profits from their risks, but when they collapsed ended up costing US tax payers billions of dollars and destroying the economy. Long story short: the government has one job: to ensure the basic functionality required to run a country. It is not the govnernment's job to distribute tax payer money as venture capital. Leave businesses and other risks to entrepreneurs and investors.