

Start Up the Risk-Takers - asnyder
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/22/opinion/22friedman.html

======
sam_in_nyc
Try pitching this idea ($20b to VC's instead of detroit) to the public. I
can't help but postulate their response: "So my tax dollars go to some yuppie
25 year olds making some website with cute icons... meanwhile my buddy in
Detroit is out a job! He's got a family to feed... a family!!! These people
must _hate_ America, and everything she stands for!"

My point is the majority of people do not have any vision. They do and think
whatever everyone around them does, which comes from TV or their parents. If
anything you pitch to them requires an explanation, you've already lost.

------
sachinag
Honestly, the VCs would just throw the money at their existing portfolio
companies.

If you were going to give away $20 billion, you'd be better off at doing it
through SBA grants. You'd be a lot closer to the proverbial Main Street
nationally, not concentrated on the coasts.

~~~
iamelgringo
There's no reason why you couldn't put stipulations on a plan like that. Just
make the money go to new green tech ventures.

I'd also venture a guess that after Manhattan, So Cal has lost more money per
capita in the real estate bubble than many other places in the country. So Cal
is where that investment and research is needed. There's already a lot of
Solar and Wind power projects down there. It would be a great idea to invest
green tech VC money down there. So Cal _is_ "Main Street" for millions of
people that are hurting right now.

------
iamelgringo
There's been a lot of VC money flowing to green-tech projects, and I'm sure
there's going to be more. Those projects are capital intensive, and have the
potential for VC profitable exits.

Software projects don't really need money on a VC scale any more. They need
angel level investment.

Silicon Valley is going to start needing a lot more EE's with a specialization
in Green tech, and few and fewer software engineers.

------
swombat
Better solution: do both.

