Chaz, I wasn't trying to hit a raw nerve with you, really. But from your response, it certainly looks like I did.
#1) We can indeed predict something about what other inventions might have been made without the government intervention in science and engineering of the 1940s to 1960s.
Maybe we can, but you didn't.
At any rate, being one myself, my point was not to impugn the intelligence or integrity of government bureaucrats, nor to say progress in science and science education are not good. Maybe a good kick in the pants from the federal government was just what the doctor ordered for our monopolistic public school system. My point was merely to point out that government is not as effective in allocating scarce resources as the free market and that maybe, absent coercion, much of the 50% plus we pay in taxes and the time we spend complying with government regulations could be put to better use.
#2) We should avoid doing anything to MSFT that results in several hundred billion dollars dissappearing from the economy. Like idealistic schemes for throwing them out to compete with each other having no proprietary products at all for the individual resulting companies, and their subsequent bankruptcy. I say this not as an ideologue but as a businessman who has had to meet a payroll.
Well, what alternative do you suggest?
You say, and Dan seems to agree, that you were the first to post some ideas about splitting the company up. What are your ideas, and why are your ideas superior to mine? |
