Technology R&D Needs Unification

Now, I don't think you completely understand what it is that I propose. While it is true that a unification would eradicate capitalism, the positive consequences would far outweigh any petty price difference that would probably arise. Unification is necessary for us to make substantial leaps in science and engineering. The iPhone merely took existing technology and bettered it slightly in order to put something new on the market. My case is that companies cannot afford to put as much time into truly revolutionary technology research because they are bogged down with the need to make a consistent profit in order to keep running. Therefore, instead of working on holographic video chat, for instance, Apple just spent some time touching up touchscreen technology (sorry for the pun). Same goes for Application stores; they merely make use of existing technology, instead of being truly progressive. Your argument assumes that competition is the ONLY thing in the world that can motivate human beings to accomplish great things. No, a moral conscience is not what I have in mind, but a desire to learn and achieve has driven countless scientists in the past. Pasteur, Tesla, Mendel, Franklin, Einstein, etc. Disregarding this, would not you agree that money makes an excellent motivator of most people? You should, as you clearly know a lot about business. Why not then take all extraneous assets from the former companies and use it as incentive money for breakthroughs? That is, because advertising and sales would not longer exist, use those millions as a prize. The only difference would be that all research knowledge would be publicly available to all researchers. I will mention this again later on. Your second point is the hardest to counter. Yes, this would be an extremely large amount of power, bringing with it a certain amount of risk. But once again, I say that this move must be done for the eventual benefit of ALL HUMANITY. Perhaps a computer could run the management of all the tech companies. Perhaps a socialist democracy of all employees of the unified company could manage. Perhaps all world leaders could vote. These details do not matter; the only important thing is true progress. Though a unification would set a precedent, such a thing is hardly important. We have outlawed monopolies again and again. When Rockefeller founded Standard Oil, this set a precedent. Yet Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890, and the Clayton Antitrust Act in 1914. The government can worry about preventing more trusts from arising. . http://encarta.msn.com...(monopoly).html I say that such a move is necessary for humankind because we are facing a crisis. We have high disease rates, starvation, overpopulation, a polluted atmosphere, and we are running out of natural gas and oil. There are so many more ailments that afflict human kind that can be overcome with science. However, with the urge of making profit (capitalism) and not on making paradigm shifts, such science will take much longer to be developed. Watson and Crick took many years longer to derive the structure of DNA than they would have in Rosalind Franklin had been working with them the whole time. As it was, they only figured it out once they managed to sneak a look at her X-ray diffraction pictures. . http://en.wikipedia.org... The Manhattan Project employed 130,000 people in order to produce the most revolutionary change in energy since fire. . http://en.wikipedia.org... Humans need to work together and share information with each other in order to create the essential technology of the future. You might respond back with concerns based on economics. But we NEED to start working now on the tools that will save our race from extinction. I look forward to reading your rebuttal.