Mutual Fund of America

    By EmmaZahn on Sun, 02/05/2006 - 3:54am |
    And why aren't  the results of government funded research treated as valuably as private intellectual property.  We just give the stuff away.   Personally I don't have a problem with that because I think we all benefit greatly from the free flow of information.  It has created a kind of intellectual synergy that has resulted in many, many remarkable things.   But private enterprises are getting ever more brazen in wanting to take what is produced at public expense for private profit.

    Others are just flagrant giveaways like this one for $1.5 billion found by Rep. Henry Waxman.  If Halliburton and Sugar Land are short some ready cash, they can do what small businessmen have to do -- borrow it or take in other investors.  If they want to partner up with the federal government, then how much equity are we getting in return?

    There are thousands, if not millions, of public/private partnerships where government gets very little direct return on its investment and certainly none of the credit.

    It is time to turn the language and metaphors of the free marketers back on them. They don't seem to object to people pooling money to private mutual funds or pooling money to mitigate risk through private insurers.  In fact, they promote it.
     
    In this upset-down, Orwellian world, the language of liberalism has been denigrated and vilified.  So maybe should start using their own language to make our points.

    Taxes are investments. 
    Our representatives are our investment managers.
    Our government is a mutual fund
     
    -- and that is an ownership society.

    Maybe this is the strategy Matt is looking for.

    PS  David Sirota noticed Nathan's post.

    e.z.

    Latest Comments