
Tesla, iPad Socialism and the Return of the Future - ddouglascarr
http://wire.novaramedia.com/2016/01/tesla-ipad-socialism-and-the-return-of-the-future/
======
zitterbewegung
What is the main idea being put forward in this article? I tried reading over
it but I don't seem to get it. It seems to put forward certain concepts but
doesn't seem to have any substance to it or even coherence.

~~~
saool
I understood it to be that seemingly Ayn-Randian heroes like Musk are standing
on the shoulders of giants, giants being the State.

Add to that the thesis that the same way Musk wants to keep SpaceX private to
focus on the long-term, states can take that same long-game stance with their
strategic economic policies.

And because of that, the author is looking forward to a more leftist current
(Sanders, Podemos) to increase and lead government spending and investment.

~~~
MCRed
Except that the state doesn't take any sort of a long term view, unless you
consider the next election a "long term". The state can't do anything to
benefit the economy- by definition all the money spent by the state was taken
via taxation or inflation, in both cases taken out of the private economy
exactly at the point where they would otherwise be invested in economic
growth... and the state is notoriously terrible at allocating that money (most
of which is spent bombing people, or preparing to bomb people.)

~~~
1stop
> exactly at the point where they would otherwise be invested in economic
> growth

That's why a tiny percentage of people hold the vast majority of wealth...
Because they "reinvest"?

Are you seriously arguing government shouldn't exist and shouldn't tax?

------
MCRed
Just because the government-- which has spent $8T over the past several years
-- spends some money on "technology", mostly aimed at better killing people
overseas, does not mean that the government is the reason that we have iPads,
etc. SpaceX in fact, shows how inefficient it is-- instead of spending $1B (at
least) per launch of the "reusable" space shuttle, SpaceX is able to put
things in orbit an order of magnitude cheaper.

If a thief steals your car and gives you a bicycle, should you thank the theif
for giving you the gift of transportation, or recognize that you would have
been better off in the first place if you could have kept the car?

This is the problem with all these "government made the internet" type
claims-- they ignore that the government spends orders of magnitude more, and
produces remarkably little ($8T during the Obama presidency, for instance. The
entire national debt accumulated to the Reagan era-- widely criticized for his
profligate spending-- was only $4T.)

~~~
1stop
You are comparing money without factoring inflation or overall GDP... So
basically you are just spreading FUD.

Is there evidence that private sector is more efficient?

Lots of companies blow money on lots of stupid shit... I guess that doesn't
fit your narrative though.

------
moneytide
The Hyperloop also can only exist with government cooperation. Stringing
together such a technology across multiple state (or nation) boundaries will
require much more collaborative effort than the Eisenhower administration's
Interstate system.

