Today at Rotary, we had a very entertaining presentation by fellow Rotarian Andy Witt from the Cultural Council and a cast of several. We had live performances by a barbershop quartet, ballet dancers, a violinist, and probably some other good stuff I’m forgetting, and it was quite enjoyable. It had the desired effect of making us glad such fine things are available in our community.
We also learned from Rex Wilson (who did a much better job with Health and Happiness than I ever have) that Edventure just got a grant of $1.3 million. (Catherine Horne, who runs that museum, is also a member of the club.) This was greeted with general, congratulatory applause.
Anyway, after the meeting my good friend Hal Stevenson said he’d like to see some debate on the merits of that $1.3 million grant, which — and I had missed this when the announcement was made — came from federal stimulus funds. Was this, he asked, a proper priority for spending our hard-earned tax dollars (or, in the case of stimulus funds, our future hard-earned tax dollars, and our children’s and grandchildren’s as well)?
As a conservative guy who nevertheless is a very fair-minded listener to the views of those who disagree, Hal particularly chafed at what he saw as an arrogant, triumphalist action by Democrats — you know, We won the election, so we’re going to throw money at whatever we please, no matter what YOU think…
Now on the one hand, I can see where Hal’s coming from. If you ask me to list, in order of priority, what I think government should spend money on, I would put be likely to put the arts and cultural amenities really low on the list — behind building roads, funding the military, building and operating schools, enforcing clear air and water laws, and so forth. Not that I don’t appreciate the arts and such. In fact, my youngest child is pursuing a career as a ballet dancer, and I would love it if she could make her living from that (since it takes something like 40 hours a week to take all the classes and rehearsals and such) instead of having to work a whole separate full-time job to eat.
But if you ask me to set priorities — whether for government or my own spending — as much as I appreciate the arts, they simply would not top the list. If I personally had a million dollars to give away, I’d give it to efforts that directly help the poor — Habitat for Humanity, or the local food bank — rather than to underwrite a play or fund the local philharmonic. That is, that’s what I’d do if I didn’t have a child who was a starving artist. Obviously, that personal interest would probably cause me to write a check to the ballet company, but that just muddies my argument… Where was I? I was saying, I have a really confused state of mind on this issue: I want the arts to be healthy and vibrant, and I know that ticket prices and other direct forms of funding will never be enough, and I know I’m not giving, so I hope somebody is. How’s that for ambivalence?
And if you then ask me if stimulus funds should be spent on the arts… well… to know whether I’d vote “yes” if asked, I’d have to know what those funds would be spent on if NOT on that. If the choice were high-speed rail or developing electric cars, I’d prefer those. If the choice were, I don’t know, bridges to nowhere, I’d prefer the arts.
Mind you, that’s assuming that the money is going to be spent on something, which is the idea behind stimulus spending — cranking money out into the economy. As I see it, spending on the arts and culture does that about as well as anything else. If you want to say that the money just shouldn’t be spent at all, you may be right, but that’s a separate conversation. (Just as it was a separate issue from whether South Carolina should receive stimulus funds. Obviously, if it was going to be spent anyway, South Carolina should have gotten its share.)
Anyway, as we were discussing this, Andy Witt came by (he was gathering up leftover arts brochures from the tables so they wouldn’t go to waste), and he and Hal had a little impromptu (and civil) discussion of the matter.
I urged them both to write up their thoughts and send them to me to share with y’all on the blog. I hope they will. In the meantime, if y’all have clearer views on the matter than I do (and that wouldn’t be hard; it’s a low bar), I’d love to hear them…
Let me add that Hal had another point to make that I found compelling, which was this: Where can you find a civil debate about such issues? No one at Rotary is going to say, “Catherine, I don’t think you should have gotten that funding.” We’re all too polite. In the MSM, such a grant gets no more than a few lines announcing it, if that — not a debate over the merits. Sure, he said, you could go to some right-wing blog and read reams of fulmination against the grant. But where can you find fair-minded, civil discussion over whether $1.3 million should be spent in such a manner? Certainly not in Congress, where it’s all about which party has the numbers to ram it through.
So where?
Here, I suggested…
I’m confused. The article I read in The State said the $1.3 M was for expanding diabetes education and encouraging students in the technical fields:
“EdVenture Children’s Museum received a $1.3 million federal stimulus grant to expand its health programming and encourage middle and high school students to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering and math careers….
A large part of the program would focus on educating minority students on health concerns, including diabetes, and encourage them to pursue medical careers.”
Is there another $1.3M for the arts, or is there some confusion somewhere about what this grant is for?
But if you fund primarily roads, bridges, electric cars, and such won’t you have a huge segment of the population who remain out of jobs and a drain on the economy? Not everyone can dig ditches or engineer a car. And isn’t EdVenture designed as a teaching museum for children. Where are the arts involved there?
Spending tax dollars on the arts is very much like the “Blue Laws” that are enacted. They presume to represent “community standards” and are done for the greater good, but when you dig deeper, you find that they end up going to people who are well-connected politically and make the presumption of knowing what is “best” for the community.
If the funds are truly meant to stimulate the economy, they should be spent on any of the following:
– Loans to small businessmen to help them expand and CREATE jobs
– Micro-loans to independent workers with initiative to create ongoing self-employment
– Training classes for those out of work to develop more marketable skills
Money spent on the arts has a very low rate of return – economics-wise.
It’s the age old problem of government – trying to get everyone to pay for the pet projects of the well-connected insider or someone who wants to trade other people’s money for influence and power. The less spent on those objectives, the better.
And there’s a one word answer to the question: Mapplethorpe.
If individuals want to support the arts, they are free to do so. Just don’t make everyone pay for it.
Compared to the cash for clunkers debacle, it is a wonderful idea.
Among “civilized nations,” the US pretty much comes dead last when it comes to underwriting the arts. Other countries consider the arts vital to public psychic health. Also, a ballet dancer needs a salary just like an asphalt pourer does, and the ballet dancer respends money in the community just like any other worker.
Pretty soon, given this trend, the “arts” will include things like literacy. We don’t really need citizens who know how to read, do we? As long as they take orders from corporations?
Funny, I don’t really think of Edventure as part of the arts … more as an educational play place where the twins can get their (many, many) wiggles out, especially when the weather’s bad since it’s mostly indoors. There is lots of climbing to be done there. Just in general, I think we should support places that get kids off their butts. In fact, if anyone is looking for a charitable place to stash some cash, our playgrounds in Shandon desperately need updating. It would be great to have some equipment for little tykes — the current equipment is really old and has 6 foot drops in several places — it’s dangerous for toddlers.
Is this similar to the question about funding music in our schools? To quote Richard Dreyfuss’ response in Mr. Holland’s Opus,, to the statement that all school needs to be about is reading, writing, and arithmetic: “pretty soon these kids are not going to have anything to write about.”
So I guess I want to defend the arts, but I guess that’s because I play a couple of instruments, and I would wish that more of our kids would be encouraged to do so. It would do them a lot more good, maybe, than playing the latest computer game.
Or perhaps also public funding of NPR’s programs like Performance Today, though personally I’m not sure how much of that gets federal grants, and how much is pledges, etc. I know that they often announce that “such and such a foundation” has contributed toward a program.
If some public funding isn’t undertaken, then certain art forms will be in danger. I guess Elvis has his place, but I can’t for the life of me believe that a violin virtuoso’s work shouldn’t be given much more importance and investment. It won’t however, if we just leave everything up to the free market, rather than modifying the free market with wise social investments. If we leave it to the 100% capitalists, we will end up with total rule of the majority in everything.
And as Arnold Toynbee said, the majority is seldom right. To extend that idea, I’ve always assumed that idea was somehow one of the thoughts in the minds of the founding fathers, who (as a result) gave us a republic, and not a democracy.
I have never been a fan of Edventure. The scary giant kid alone is enough to send me screaming. The grant was from some health agency, if I heard correctly. It’s kind of hard for me to justify any of that.
On the other hand, Hal may have forgotten how shortly after being re-elected by a not-so-great margin, his guy, W., announced that he was the decider.
The stimulus money is for jobs, and it’s hard to quarrel that money spent in the arts is NOT going to save or create jobs. The arts are seriously low overhead operations. They are an industry, as was pointed out, just as virtuous, if not more so, than banking (bailed out mostly by W.) and the American auto industry.
I’d rather have more arts and less advertising, frankly, but if government-funded loans go to save our advertising friends’ businesses, I’m cool with that. Same with newspapers.
If we all pull together, we can avoid a lost decade, as in Japan.If we don’t and we have a Japanese stagnation, exactly what is the impact going to be on all these children and grandchildren conservatives get all choked up about?
Doug’s comments were pretty much in line with what I expected. I am grateful for this blog, because I’ve learned that the libertarian position is based on the very questionable idea that the American individual is basically noble and good. It seems to be saying that if we just reduce government to 0, all the goodness will just flow out. If so, then its basic premise is faulty at it’s foundation,and also unbiblical. I’m surprised at the number of those who, like Doug, go to evangelical churches, profess adherence to the Scriptures, but seem to ignore the doctrine of human depravity that runs all through the Good Book.
Left to the libertarian capitalists, I think that the art forms that would be left would consist of Elvis, KISS, and American Idol. Not that these cannot be considered legitimate art forms, but our civilization has done, and can continue to do much better.
As important as helping the poor is, I would paraphrase, and perhaps re-apply Jesus’ words, “the poor you will always have with you . . . .” Admittedly the application is to a far less important aspect of human life than what Jesus was referring to, but I believe the application is legitimate, and the arts are important. Do not leave them up to individual charity, or we will have no significant art forms left, in the end. Government investment in this area is vital.
Brad: Let’s have YOUR reaction to the first Comment for this story. Namely: the grant to Edventure appears to be more about science and education than The Arts. How did you go astray?
I didn’t. I accurately represented Hal’s concerns about stimulus funds going to Edventure, which he expanded to include the arts (not precisely the same thing, but in the general realm of cultural amenities), and Andy’s defense of such expenditures.
I sort of doubt that Hal’s views about the wisdom of such grants would be affected by the fact that this one has a health goal, but I’ll ask him next time I see him.
Sorry Doug but you’re wrong on this one. Increasing the availability of small business loans will do nothing to stimulate the economy right now because demand is so weak for goods and services there just won’t be any takers. Businesses are cutting back, not expanding.
I would spend money on infrastructure needs or even infrastructure luxuries because that’s how we can create jobs quickly. I doubt spending on the arts will create a huge number of jobs for the amount of money spent but if it does then it would be ok to spend on that.
I would also look at more programs like cash for clunkers. That seemed to have a pretty good effect on the economy. It just wasn’t big enough or long enough.
… and Kathryn, I’m not at all sure that I would be cool with gummint funds going to save newspapers. Sure, employment ads or such are just as fine coming from government agencies as from private companies, but an actual SUBSIDY would seem questionable. But maybe that’s not what you meant.
I kind of agree with Herb and I kind of agree with a point I’ve read from Doug many times on this blog.
On the one hand, if we leave the arts totally up to the “free market” then the arts could suffer. Take music as an example. Popular music is very bland and all sounds the same (in my opinion, that is) because that kind of stuff appeals to the most people and thus will bring in the most dollars. Unfortunately Herb takes this to the extreme when he states “Left to the libertarian capitalists, I think that the art forms that would be left would consist of Elvis, KISS, and American Idol.” Is that to say that the other arts we have now which are unlike Elvis, American Idol, etc. only exist because of public funding? Nevertheless, I think there is a case for public funding.
But on the other hand, it’s hard for me to justify spending money on things like violin music (like the Okra Strut in some of Doug’s previous comments) when we never have enough money for schools, higher education and roads.
And as for Herb’s attack on libertarianism, I don’t believe it’s fair. And this is not a defense of libertarianism, but rather a defense of those who espouse it. I’ve never heard a libertarian-type who didn’t believe that free market capitalism was best for society. And let’s face it, it is the well-off societies where the arts flourish. Now libertarians may be dead-wrong, but I don’t think that makes them somehow unChristian. I also question whether the libertarian-types hold their position based on the idea that the individual is “noble and good.” Maybe Doug can speak to that. But if they did believe that, then I doubt they’d be as concerned about government having so much control over their lives (because of the goodness of the government officials doing the controlling).
Herb,
Thankfully I do not have to live up to your “standards” when it comes to religion.
Somehow you have been able to convince yourself that your years of religious instruction have made you the authority on what everybody else should do and how everyone else should use the government to further Christian beliefs. Although I find your “leap of faith” that somehow my opposition to using tax dollars to pay for “art” is some sort of contemptible act) — but, hey, you’re the judge, jury, and knower-of-all-things-biblical, so I must defer to your holiness.
All I can say is it really must be depressing to go through life thinking a) everybody is evil and b) the only solution is to turn your money over to the church and government.
Have a blessed day!
And here’s an idea – instead of museum’s paying millions of dollars for Jackson Pollack paint spatters or Andy Warhol soup cans, why don’t they use that money to fund a bunch of starving artists? That would be the Christian thing to do.
“bud says:
Sorry Doug but you’re wrong on this one. Increasing the availability of small business loans will do nothing to stimulate the economy right now because demand is so weak for goods and services there just won’t be any takers. Businesses are cutting back, not expanding. ”
There’s no other way to say it, Bud, except “You’re wrong”.
Businesses are cutting back BECAUSE the banks have cut off access to capital.
Obama unleased billions and billions of dollars. Remember Cash for Clunkers – the savior of the auto industry? Where are all those downstream jobs that were going to flow from that giveaway? Why hasn’t the job market improved?
Give the money to people who know how to create jobs and we’ll end the recession.
David,
Thank you for your comments. I do think that people are basically noble and good. I rarely run into people who are not. But, on the other hand, our political system allows the greedy and corrupt to bubble to the top while everyone else is worrying about their day-to-day lives. And my only solution to eliminating the greed is to remove as much money from their control. We’re almost at the tipping point in my opinion where the majority of Americans will say, “Enough”. That day can’t get here soon enough for me. America was built by hard work, innovation, and perseverance — not by government programs.
Doug, you threw me there. When you said you think people are basically noble and good, I’m thinking, Gosh, seems to me that Doug treats everybody we write about here with extreme suspicion and jaded cynicism…
Then I got to where you said, “on the other hand, our political system” and it all fell into place.
Doug, I realize I’m probably never going to change your mind on this, but there is no inherent moral difference between politicians and anyone else. They are people, just like you and me. I know this because I know these people, up close and personal. Your cynicism reminds me of a phenomenon I’ve noticed in newspapers among copy editors. They are very knowledgeable, well read people who keep up with current events and issues. But they spend all their time in the office, and never meet the people in the stories they are editing. Consequently, I’ve noted that cynicism toward public figures is much more marked among copy editors than among reporters, who actually KNOW the people.
Anyway, I’ll say again — politicians (and government workers) are people like any other. Similarly, there is no great moral advantage held by either the public or the private realm. There is just as much honesty and sincerity and good intent — and good outcomes — in government as in private life.
I have, on the other hand, seen a certain perversity creep into our politics in recent decades, and it comes from so many voters having your cynical, distrustful attitude toward government. This has caused the emergence of a new kind of politician who runs to be in government even though he doesn’t believe in government. He doesn’t want to accomplish anything, but he likes — I don’t know what (the trappings, maybe?). I wondered for years what motivated Sanford to spend his whole adult life in surroundings he despises, and I only realized what it was when he put his narcissism on display over the summer.
This new kind of politician, the indirect product of the post-Watergate adversarial relationship toward government in the media (which I always embraced, only recognizing the corrosive effect it had on our republic after the damage was done), stays in office by the simple expedient of never, ever raising taxes, and just generally runs government into the ground, which is great for him because that makes voters have even more contempt for government, which means they are more likely to elect HIM and people like him, and on and on in a downward spiral…
Simple question: give me the names of the five highest ranking members of South Carolina government who you know on a personal basis and would say are the standard bearers for honesty, ethics, and basic goodness.
I’ll make it easier. Here’s five names. Tell me which ones you would work for:
Harrell
Leatherman
McConnell
Bauer
Sanford
It’s not cynicism if you have the evidence to support your beliefs. I’m comfortable with the opinion I have formed based on decades of experience dealing with the government.
You’ve been calling for government restructuring for years. Why would you do that if the system is full of such good people?
The government already had its fingers in with the Newspaper Preservation Act that allowed publishers to collude on what would normally be antittrust violations.
Allowing newspapers to be set up as non-profit public-interest corporations might be one way to help.
Brad–
I wish newspapers could figure out how to exist and, dare I hope, thrive in the free market, w/o government subsidy. I wish…
Melissa Block, All Things Considered anchor, was a college classmate of my husband, and spoke at his reunion. ATC has been able to do wondrous things (this was in 2008, so times may have changed) b/c of a grant from, if I recall correctly, Joan (McDonald’s) Kroc. Otherwise, they get by on contributions from “listeners like you,” other big donors who get a plug at the end, and some government funds. The show, like all NPR, is hardly the mouthpiece for the government, don’t you think?
And here’s today’s example of why I see government the way that I do. I had a pipe burst in my sprinkler system at my house while we were on vacation over New Years week. Didn’t know about it until I got a bill from the water department for over $500 (ten times normal). Called the water department. Spoke to someone who was not very helpful. After getting the pipe fixed, the plumber said that if I took the bill down to the water department, they would adjust my bill (hmmm, why didn’t the guy at the water company tell me that). So I went down at lunch today, took my number, waited in line and then spoke to a woman. She was pleasant enough but all she could tell me was that she would take a copy of my bill and that I could call in after 45 (45!!!) business days to see if there was an adjustment. In the meantime, pay the $500+ dollars… and hope for the best. I then asked her if I could discuss an issue with my son’s apartment bill for an overcharge back in August. She said, “No, we changed the rules back in September so that only the primary leaseholder can discuss the bill” even though my name was on the original application.
How many private businesses would survive with that level of customer “service”? Is it cynical for me to expect good service for my money?
The approval and funding of a competitive grant from the National Institutes of Health, Science Education Partnership Award Program, is a major milestone in the life of science centers and children’s museums nationally. As the CEO of EdVenture, I am very proud of the important work our staff has done over the last TWO YEARS to research and prepare this proposal for review by the NIH. Please note this grant was submitted in September 2008!
Yes, a small portion of the stimulus dollars granted to NIH by Congress were allocated to the program that funded this grant. And it enabled the program to expand funding for grants already in the pipeline for funding.
Thanks to Brad’s readers who read the news of this grant close enough to see that this grant is about preparing youth to pursue careers in the biomedical science AND by providing important educational programs on the prevention of chronic disease for family and school audiences.
EdVenture is an educational institution devoted to inspiring the joy of learning and in response to community and state needs, is expanding our commitment to science, technology, engineering and math education. All essential areas for economic growth and educational advancement in our state.
We need to celebrate the achievement of EdVenture was one of only a handful of science center nationwide to funded by the NIH with these five year grants(with or without stimulus funding).
Stay tuned for the great things EdVenture has in store for the future of South Carolina!
Doug, of the five you offered, I’d pick Harrell or Leatherman,
If you allow me to broaden the universe of potential employers, I would give you:
— Joe Riley
— Lindsey Graham
— Inez Tenenbaum
— Converse Chellis
— Joel Lourie
I could name a bunch more, but you just asked for five. And if I went on, the names I was leaving OUT would start to stand out, and I wanted to keep this positive.
You’ll notice I didn’t mention anybody running for governor, for that very reason. I want to keep my options open on whom to endorse, etc. (assuming I do endorse as a blogger, if only out of habit). Of course, there’s not a complete correlation there. I suppose there are people I think would be good for the state for whom I would never want to work…
And besides, saying someone would be a good public servant means I would want them working for ME, not the other way around…
But I guess you can assume that if I’d work for Joel Lourie, I wouldn’t turn my back on his buddy Vincent Sheheen. They largely try to achieve a lot of the same things, and they’re both straight-shooters. And since I’ve mentioned a Democrat, I’ll also mention Henry McMaster, as a decent sort of trustworthy guy who I think would probably be a good person to work for.
There would be others who are running for governor, but I’m going to stop there…
And Catherine, thanks so much for weighing in. That adds a lot of solidity to our discussion.
Perhaps the distance that the copy editors have prevents them from being bamboozled by a charming sociopathic politician. It surely keeps them from kissing up.
Wow, Doug, I shun many a grocery store, fast food establishment, etc because of their ill-mannered, incompetent staff. Govt doesn’t have monopoly on unhelpful, rude employees. To me, it’s actually worse when private sector management can’t train their people to understand that every customer they take money from is contributing to their paychecks. That strikes me as glaringly clear; something no one should have to tell them. BTW, the businesses don’t appear to miss me and they have not improved if I give them another chance 6-12 months after a bad experience.
Ms. Horne didn’t mention if this grant meant more jobs. I hope it does, with or without stimulus funds.
Despite the fact the EdVenture grant apparently had absolutely nothing to do with the arts, I’ll put my two cents in anyway.
As we all know, FDR’s WPA did monumental (literally in some cases) work in supporting the arts that we are still benefitting from today, whether photographs, plays, architecture, paintings, etc. I don’t know that our current economic situation warrants that now.
This PM on NPR, Tom Brokaw pointed out he recently took his parents to eat at an upscale Mexican Restaurant in CA where the parking lot was full of Lexus and BMWs. He commented to his mother, “so this is the great depression?” and she laughed.
I am a great believer that WWII was the stimulus that ended the depression. By that measure, our stimulus may not be enough, but at this point, we don’t seem to need a WPA scale arts program, yet.
Well, I wrote a response to Doug and David, but it just disappeared when I hit “submit comment.” I’ll just try and summarize. Doug, I apologize; I wasn’t trying to be a know-it-all, but would have enjoyed an engagement and rebuttal, rather than a cynical put-down. I just don’t get the connect between evangelicals who claim to believe that people are sinners, but buy into the nobility of the American citizen. You don’t seem to be evangelical in your beliefs, so that explains it, though I would still wager that you lock your house and car. Maybe the belief in man’s nobility is to be qualified.
David, I think my position with regards to libertarianism being an anti-Scriptural position is logical and fair, but again there was no attempt at a rebuttal on your part.
Brad, your comment was right on, in my opinion.
Paul Krugman’s column on Europe in the paper this morning was superb. I am SOOO tired of the lazy way that Europe is put down in the right-wing media.
Here’s some examples as to why I see government the way I do:
“In those days there was no king in Israel; every person did what was right in their own eyes.” (Theme verse of the book of Judges)
“You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people” (I wonder if Rush ever read that verse?)
“Fear God, honor the king” (who happened to be Nero at the time)
“For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants . . . .” (speaking concerning Nero, and concerning the corrupt authorities in the Jerusalem establishment, or concerning the government of whatever part of the Roman empire the recipients happen to live, for example Corinth, where the apostle penned this letter)
“Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God, the things that are God’s.”
And as far as personal experience goes, it has been an eye-opening experience to come back to the US from Europe, and be rejected for health insurance because I lived abroad, or see a steady drop in law enforcement because of a lack of funding. Government exists in order to protect its people. Private interests protect, by definition the private interests of those who created them.
Martin,
“Wow, Doug, I shun many a grocery store, fast food establishment, etc because of their ill-mannered, incompetent staff. ”
How do I shun the water company or the DMV?
I do the same as you have done. When I got tired of Time Warner’s service, I switched to DirectTV. In fact, after I dropped a movie service from DirectTV last week, I got a call today offering me the same service for $5 less per month.
That’s how the free market works and forces companies to improve or die.
Now what incentive does the water company have to adjust an outrageous bill in less than 45 working days? None. How long would it really take to make that change? Five minutes?
That’s how government “works”. No incentive to improve, no accountability. Just job security.
Brad says:
“Doug, of the five you offered, I’d pick Harrell or Leatherman”
And (prior to Sanford’s Appalachian Trail problem) I would have picked 2 out of 5 as well.
So if I think 2 out of 5 are acceptable and you think 2 out of 5 are acceptable, how does that make me the cynic?
How many private businesses would survive with that level of customer “service”? Is it cynical for me to expect good service for my money?
-Doug
Plenty. I’ve had plenty of poor customer service stories from all types of businesses, most recently Best Buy. The fine print in all the agreements, false or misleading advertising and a host of obstructionism leaves me cold with capitalism. Remember the Pinto? Worst damn car ever. Corporate greed at it’s worst. How about Enron? Bilked Californians out of billions because of market manipulation. Let’s not forget about the banking debacle that resulted in the whole financial collapse. That was greed run amok. Or the whole Exxon Valdez catastrophe. Exxon never made full amends for that. Then there’s health care. Don’t even get me started on the horror stories of private health insurance.
You can’t blame government for all the faults related to capitalism. There is plenty of blame to go around.
Bud,
You answered your own question. Where is the Pinto? Gone. Where is Circuit City? Gone. Where is Sears compared to the old days? Gone. K-Mart? Nearly dead. Blockbuster – on life support. The State newspaper – saw they cut another 12 people.
Best Buy will either have to adapt or die. That’s the way it works.
It’s not a perfect system due to the cost of entry into any market, but the free market eventually sorts out the winners from the losers. Microsoft is losing its dominance. Google will as well one day. Wal-Mart will be replaced. As long as the free market is untethered from government protection, the people will decide where they want to put their money.
But the government? It’ll keep right on chugging. Sucking up as many non-productive and lobbyist-connected dollars it can until it no longer is able to. Where is the competition for the Water Department, DMV, etc. to keep them honest?
I know you are deeply concerned about the DOT and the phony restructuring that went on. Read the latest expose on that department and all the corruption and tell me the government works better than the private sector:
http://www.fitsnews.com/2010/01/12/dot-corruption-alleged-restructuring-criticized/