4 ms·

A government that prints money to spur innovation is merely redistributing wealth around. Arguably it does pull top talented citizens to do it's bidding in a ca

A government that prints money to spur innovation is merely redistributing wealth around. Arguably it does pull top talented citizens to do it's bidding in a captive economy. But eventually it goes down in a spiral despite more and more poured in. The govt. is an inefficient machine for such ventures as it eventually attracts scammers who systematically drain the pipe. For every 1 of successful outcome there are millions of screwed up endeavours for which it guzzles our money.

acdha 13y ago
Government investment got us the internet. Private investors and rent-seeking gave us GEnie, CompuServe, and AOL. Perhaps your binary thinking is not adequate for explaining the complexities of the modern economy.
- sunshinerag 13y ago
  And Netscape, Microsoft, Apple and Google.... why do you think it would not have happened in the absence of a bloated government?
  - acdha 13y ago
    You keep making the mistake of assuming that government only comes in one type. My point was that there are good and bad outcomes on both sides of the public / private line (not to mentioned grey areas like DARPA) and using simplistic terminology prevents you from participating in the conversation about how to use the strengths of both. Phrases like "bloated government" are intellectual junk food — not to mention amusingly blinkered in a list including Microsoft or Netscspe. Your choice in examples underscores the point: all of those companies have profited enormously by taking technology which was developed elsewhere, often on government grants at universities, and successfully commercializing it. None of them have in their combined histories funded even a fraction of what NSF / DARPA / etc. funds every year because the business model for a public company isn't really compatible with funding speculative research without a proven path to market.

acdha 13y ago

Government investment got us the internet. Private investors and rent-seeking gave us GEnie, CompuServe, and AOL. Perhaps your binary thinking is not adequate for explaining the complexities of the modern economy.

sunshinerag 13y ago
And Netscape, Microsoft, Apple and Google.... why do you think it would not have happened in the absence of a bloated government?
- acdha 13y ago
  You keep making the mistake of assuming that government only comes in one type. My point was that there are good and bad outcomes on both sides of the public / private line (not to mentioned grey areas like DARPA) and using simplistic terminology prevents you from participating in the conversation about how to use the strengths of both. Phrases like "bloated government" are intellectual junk food — not to mention amusingly blinkered in a list including Microsoft or Netscspe. Your choice in examples underscores the point: all of those companies have profited enormously by taking technology which was developed elsewhere, often on government grants at universities, and successfully commercializing it. None of them have in their combined histories funded even a fraction of what NSF / DARPA / etc. funds every year because the business model for a public company isn't really compatible with funding speculative research without a proven path to market.