Las Vegas Sun

March 4, 2015

Currently: 57° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account


Government is the problem … or not

Another view?

View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:

Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.

Columnists - local and syndicated writers.

Letters to the editor - readers' views.

Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.

The U.S. government can’t get anything right.

If a speaker wants to bring a business audience to its feet, declare that the government is the problem: The government takes good money in taxes and spends it frivolously on pet projects.

The speaker can make this point by citing any obscure line of research, such as chaos theory or the mating habits of snails.

The line about government incompetence suggests that whatever the government has done that works could have been done better and cheaper in the free market.

Now comes an American-educated European economist and business professor who says forcefully and elegantly: “It ain’t necessarily so.” Not by a long shot.

Mariana Mazzucato, who was born in Italy and graduated from Tufts University and the New School for Social Research, is a professor of business and economics at the University of Sussex in England.

In an article published in the Harvard Business Review and republished in the Globalist, a daily online magazine, Mazzucato takes Apple as an example of a company that not only got early stage funding from the government’s Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) program but also incorporated many government-funded innovations into its products. She writes: “In fact, many of the revolutionary technologies that make the iPhone and other products and services ‘smart’ were funded by the U.S. government. Take, for instance, the Internet, GPS, touchscreen display as well as its voice-activated personal assistant, Siri.”

Apple hasn’t been the only company that has benefited hugely from government investment in innovative technologies. Mazzucato lists other Silicon Valley companies, “such as Google, whose search algorithm was funded by the National Science Foundation,” as being similarly assisted and immensely enriched by the government.

“In fact, many new economy-type companies that like to portray themselves as the heart of U.S. ‘entrepreneurship’ have very successfully surfed the wave of U.S. government-funded investments,” she writes.

Hence, she argues, the secret to Silicon Valley’s success was the government’s “active and visible hand in stark contrast to the Ayn Rand/Adam Smith folklore often bandied about.”

Mazzucato says that in energy and elsewhere, the government has proved to be less risk-averse than venture capitalists. She cites the government role in the 1970s in advancing energy technologies in oil and gas recovery that has changed the energy supply equation.

But Mazzucato’s real message is not that the government can get it right, and in a big way sometimes, but that the corporations — and Apple is her example — grow fat on technologies developed with public money. And the providers of that money — we the taxpayers — get no dividend, no return on our investment, and, as with Apple until recently, no jobs when these grand American-invented technological products are manufactured in Asia.

(Apple is making a small effort to make some products in America.)

Worse, not only do the investors, in this case the U.S. taxpayers, get no return on their dollars, but these companies, again Apple is cited, are masterful at avoiding taxes by keeping profits overseas and seeking every loophole in the code.

I can vouch that it is not just Silicon Valley corporations that are making out magnificently with government-funded technologies. Civilian aircraft are loaded with technology and improvements funded or invented by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the military. Boeing’s new Dreamliner is positively bristling with these inventions, from wingtip devices to navigation systems. But there is only one U.S. maker of large airframes: Boeing. So NASA has become a private lab for Boeing.

This isn’t the way it’s supposed to work.

A similar imbalance exists in the pharmaceuticals industry, where public risk leads to private profit. The government funds research to the tune of $31 billion a year, but it sells no drugs. The drug companies are the beneficiaries.

When the government does get it right, it gets robbed.

Llewellyn King is executive producer and host of “White House Chronicle” on PBS.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 5 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. Here's what Future fails to understand......the content of this article.

  2. Then it would be reasonable to ask the government to make communications as the telephone, video, and internet FREE to all Americans. There is actually a movement by Susan Crawford towards that end.

    You may be interested in exploring her blog at:

    Only by public awareness and pressure, will we ever see fairness prevail in our land.

    Blessings and Peace,

  3. The best government is the least government.

    Carmine D

  4. @Carmine...and just how many years did you work for government?

  5. Pat:

    Recall before and during my government job I was the owner operator of a family business that spanned over 40 years. I know the public [government] and private sector [business] first hand. The former got bigger during my 33 year career, the latter [small business owners] got smaller. In large part, the small businesses got squeezed out of business by big government. I had a sign that hung on the wall of my business that read: "We collect Federal, State, and local taxes and do a little business on the side."

    Carmine D