Woke up around 2 and couldn't sleep, so I came down and broke out some Ted talks. This morning, what appealed to me were the government ones that showed a view contrary to mine:
I'll grant that government funding and support has pushed advances in many fields. However, the market-shaping that government does is inappropriate, driven mainly by bureaucratic and political interests; there are only so many good examples of innovation because government has been involved in every aspect of our lives! The negatives and unintended consequences of so much intervention far outweigh the positives. I believe we would be much better off without some of our current technology (including space and medicine and computers and atomic energy), growing at a pace that is supported by voluntary investment.
I'll agree, too, with the proposition that government-funded innovations and research should yield a return. There is no excuse for privatization of resources that have been forcibly taken from taxpayers. Of course, I recommend a slightly different take: the results of these investments should be made available to all, without restriction, rather than being employed privately by anyone, neither in a company boardroom nor in a government office nor in a military base.
He's totally focused on the market of dollars and cents. That's the market I trust the least. So I guess I agree with him there! But there are other markets that make appropriate foundations for our "civic life."
I was going to add this comment, but Steve already did... and I couldn't resist the prompt to expand on it: