Success comes from APPROPRIATE gov't controls, providing an environment where the population can produce and become successful on its own; then the greedy gov't tries to control everything and decide who becomes successful and who doesn't. That's where the slippery slope begins.
I'm going to chime in with one paragraph, then allow you the last word if you want it.
I agree with the first clause of the first sentence above--"appropriate." But what is "appropriate" is the issue. The US government enabled with land grants, cheap loans and sometimes effectively free money, sweetheart contracts, wars against the Mexicans and Native Americans, and building on the taxpayer dime things like canals, railroads, telegraph, telephone, airlines, the internet, medical advances, dams and numerous other water projects, electrification, and the automobile industry, to name a few of the sectors that had extensive government help at different stages of their development, especially in the beginning. They repeatedly chose "winners" in many of those activities, and made fortunes for many people in the process. Any number of those individuals then turned around and frequently balked at paying taxes and user fees that were in any way commensurate with the profits they made. They were hard workin' "individualists," lol. Think the West would have tens of millions of people without the railroads, roads and dams that the government built? Much of it would be a large desert. Farming, ranching, timber, mining, all sorts of transportation and communication industries, energy--they all owe a great deal to Fed aid of various kinds, and not just for "enforcing the sanctity of contracts," as libertarians would often have it.
I could go on, but will stop here. I can justify posting this much on this thread because it is obvious that the alternative energy sector needs the same kind of aid in its infancy that virtually all (indeed, perhaps all) of our important industries received in the past and still receive in a variety of ways.
End rant. |
