Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (531840)	11/23/2009 12:05:36 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575046

...that seed money may stimulate the growth of on industry, or jobs in the way of people who will design or manufacture that car you used as an example, or give rise to a new sector of the economy, as in renewable energy solutions or accelerate productivity gains as in the advent of the internet. I would even dispute that there is no return to the government...any expansion in the economy is preferred to a contraction, in terms of tax revenue. The operative term is "may". Yes, some expenditures MAY generate a return. But the vast majority of these costs are wasted. For example, the thousands of earmarks in the porkulus bill. A few of those may generate some return, but the vast majority are just wasted. Importantly, it just shouldn't be government's role. Government has never been as effective at this sort of thing, and that hasn't changed. A great example is the SSC, in which we literally threw some billions into the ground before walking away from it with not one thing in return. Why? Because government works in fits and starts. Business functions fine without government, if government will just stay out of the way.