Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: Concentration of Wealth (Was: Is this a socialist county?)
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 18:22:18 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <80346@bcsaic.boeing.com> rwojcik@snake.tc-suns writes:
>In article 92Aug13062537@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu, jturner@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Jeffrey Turner) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug10.014137.1076@access.digex.com> steve-b@access.digex.com (Steve Brinich) writes:
>>>   Er, the development of new technologies *is* part of "the market".

>>	Sure.  It's amazing how much comes out of government funded
>>research and how little out of private R&D.  What's more amazing is
>>how quickly libertarians forget or ignore this.

>I don't think that most libertarians forget or ignore the role of
>government in 
>supporting R&D.  They just never understood it in the first place.
>Other countries 
>have funding agencies that pour money into industrial R&D on the grounds that 
>market forces tend to be very shortsighted. 

Actually, Richard, if anyon doesn't understand tings I think it's you.

In particular, why do you think that market forces tend to be very
shortsighted?  

When you answer this question, please take into account the fact that
companies happily trade 30 year bonds on the world financial markets,
build office buildings that will not pay for themselves for fifty
years, plant trees that will not be harvested for thirty years, and
buy and sell 99 year leases.


>One excellent example of how governments
>can bootstrap private development is Europe's Airbus consortium,
>which has only 
>recently begun to make anything approaching a profit.  In theory, the
>subsidies should 
>lessen as Airbus grabs more market share.  Meanwhile, Airbus has
>grown to become the 
>world's second largest manufacturer of airplanes.  This never would
>have happened 
>without direct government subsidies.

True.  So what?  Airbus may be approaching profitability, but it sure
isn't profitable yet.  Meanwhile hundreds of millions of dollars have
been poured own a rat hole.

Please explain why you think it was worth it.  If you are going to
claim that the eventual ROI will be reasonable you;ll have to tel us
how long "eventual" is and explain why the same companies that happily
handle paper with maturity dates wellinto the 21st century weren't
willing to get involved.

>Japanese companies receive similar funding, but they only have to
>prove that the R&D 
>meets industry needs.

Why should industry get welfare?

>Libertarians and free traders can scream about the injustice of it
>all, but there 
>isn't a prayer that they will convince foreign governments to change
>what is obviously 
>a successful formula in world competition.

Ever hear of GATT and NAFTA?  We are convincing them.  On GATT the
remaining roadblocks are government subsidies of agriculture, not
commerical R&D.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:39810 alt.individualism:5246