• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Innovation In America is declinging

JP Hochbaum

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
4,456
Reaction score
2,549
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Countries that invest more in research, education and have lower inequality are catching us, and our progress is now second to last:

"The U.S. used to be the envy of the world when it came to innovation, making things that dazzled the world and enhanced the lives of millions. But the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a bipartisan think-tank that ranks 36 countries according to innovation-based competitiveness, tells us we’re getting pushed aside on the global innovation stage. In 2009, to the surprise of those conducting the study, the U.S. ranked #4 in innovation, behind Finland, Sweden and Singapore. In 2011, the U.S. ranking was unchanged. Worse, the U.S. ranked second to last in terms of progress over the last decade.

Research by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also shows that the U.S. is not making as many cutting-edge products as it used to, and that other countries with strong investment in the foundations of innovation, like education and research and development, and fewer of the things that hinder it, like income inequality, are making greater strides than we are."

Lynn Parramore: The Depressing Tale of How Greedy Financial Titans Crushed Innovation and Destroyed Our Economy « naked capitalism


"Lazonick thinks what we really need is a whole new mindset about the economy. He recommends several things that would help get us back on track:

• Understand that markets don’t create value, but that organizations investing in productive capabilities, like business, governments, and households do.

• Ban stock repurchases by U.S. corporations so corporate financial resources can be channeled to innovation and job creation instead of wasted for the purpose of jacking up companies’ stock prices.

• Realize that the shareholder value ideology is destructive and will cause us to lag behind other countries that don’t subscribe to it.

• Regulate employment contracts to ensure that workers who contribute to the innovation process get to share in the gains from innovation.

• Create work programs that make use of and enhance the productive capabilities of educated and experienced workers whose human capital would otherwise deteriorate through lack of other relevant employment.

• Move toward a tax system that channels some of the money made on the gains from innovation toward government agencies that can invest in the public knowledge base needed for the next round of innovation."
 

Kushinator

I'm not-low all the time
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
21,820
Reaction score
8,606
Location
Venice Beach, FL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
A few points

• Understand that markets don’t create value, but that organizations investing in productive capabilities, like business, governments, and households do.

Markets monetize the value created by organizations, businesses, governments and households. A more focused discussion is needed to dispute the contribution to economic growth capital and asset markets provide.

• Ban stock repurchases by U.S. corporations so corporate financial resources can be channeled to innovation and job creation instead of wasted for the purpose of jacking up companies’ stock prices.

This point does not make much sense. A "jacked up stock price" will fundamentally boost the amount of credit a firm can take on. In many situations, it is actually more efficient to finance expansion with debt, than with cash. And of course there are unintended consequences; such a policy could induce dividend issuance financed by debt (while holding cash in investment accounts). That is what Apple is doing currently.

• Realize that the shareholder value ideology is destructive and will cause us to lag behind other countries that don’t subscribe to it.

A larger ownership representation by labor will likely be considered in the coming decade. Of course, it would require a restructuring of the management mentality due to a new pressures in the form of principal-agent conflict (principal-principal problem).

• Regulate employment contracts to ensure that workers who contribute to the innovation process get to share in the gains from innovation.

Rather difficult without pushing for greater ownership among labor.


• Create work programs that make use of and enhance the productive capabilities of educated and experienced workers whose human capital would otherwise deteriorate through lack of other relevant employment.

Many new companies already engage in such investment. Passing specific actuarial examinations and obtaining more advanced certification/licensing lead to significant increases in salary/bonus potential.

• Move toward a tax system that channels some of the money made on the gains from innovation toward government agencies that can invest in the public knowledge base needed for the next round of innovation."

Too vague to comment on.
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Other countries catching is does mean we are declining except in terms relative to them. It means more of the rest of the world is progressing at a faster rate.
 

Smeagol

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
4,147
Reaction score
1,694
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Countries that invest more in research, education and have lower inequality are catching us, and our progress is now second to last:

"The U.S. used to be the envy of the world when it came to innovation, making things that dazzled the world and enhanced the lives of millions. But the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a bipartisan think-tank that ranks 36 countries according to innovation-based competitiveness, tells us we’re getting pushed aside on the global innovation stage. In 2009, to the surprise of those conducting the study, the U.S. ranked #4 in innovation, behind Finland, Sweden and Singapore. In 2011, the U.S. ranking was unchanged. Worse, the U.S. ranked second to last in terms of progress over the last decade.

Research by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also shows that the U.S. is not making as many cutting-edge products as it used to, and that other countries with strong investment in the foundations of innovation, like education and research and development, and fewer of the things that hinder it, like income inequality, are making greater strides than we are."

Lynn Parramore: The Depressing Tale of How Greedy Financial Titans Crushed Innovation and Destroyed Our Economy « naked capitalism


"Lazonick thinks what we really need is a whole new mindset about the economy. He recommends several things that would help get us back on track:

• Understand that markets don’t create value, but that organizations investing in productive capabilities, like business, governments, and households do.

• Ban stock repurchases by U.S. corporations so corporate financial resources can be channeled to innovation and job creation instead of wasted for the purpose of jacking up companies’ stock prices.

• Realize that the shareholder value ideology is destructive and will cause us to lag behind other countries that don’t subscribe to it.

• Regulate employment contracts to ensure that workers who contribute to the innovation process get to share in the gains from innovation.

• Create work programs that make use of and enhance the productive capabilities of educated and experienced workers whose human capital would otherwise deteriorate through lack of other relevant employment.

• Move toward a tax system that channels some of the money made on the gains from innovation toward government agencies that can invest in the public knowledge base needed for the next round of innovation."

Bravo!

I think one solution would be to make the patent process easier, more affordable and more fair to the inventor as opposed to giving all of their patent rights to their employer in a society where in 2013 the vast majority people work for someone else.
 

shlunka

Fourum Addmean
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 18, 2012
Messages
1,758
Reaction score
1,110
Location
Land of the sodomizers
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Patent rights should perhaps be changed. My father invented dozens of mechanical devices for the company he worked for... and while they make large sums of money, he didn't even get a raise. In a sense, he lost the will to create, and now does nothing but fix things.
 

RDS

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Messages
5,398
Reaction score
1,323
Location
Singapore
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
US was ranked behind Finland, Sweden and Singapore? That is ridiculous. Finland population = 6 million. Sweden population = 10 million. Singapore population = 5 million. US population = 320 Million.
 

JP Hochbaum

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
4,456
Reaction score
2,549
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
US was ranked behind Finland, Sweden and Singapore? That is ridiculous. Finland population = 6 million. Sweden population = 10 million. Singapore population = 5 million. US population = 320 Million.

I agree it is quite ridiculous, this is not good news.
 

Smeagol

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
4,147
Reaction score
1,694
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Patent rights should perhaps be changed. My father invented dozens of mechanical devices for the company he worked for... and while they make large sums of money, he didn't even get a raise. In a sense, he lost the will to create, and now does nothing but fix things.

Totally unfair and hurts the ability or everyone to enjoy a better quality of life due to taking the inspiration away from would be innovators....all so really rich people get to keep every possible penny for themselves.
 

austrianecon

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
7,347
Reaction score
1,342
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Patent rights should perhaps be changed. My father invented dozens of mechanical devices for the company he worked for... and while they make large sums of money, he didn't even get a raise. In a sense, he lost the will to create, and now does nothing but fix things.

Or perhaps he should have invented on his own dime. Never mind R&D costs, right?
 

ChunkySalsa

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
497
Reaction score
362
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Or perhaps he should have invented on his own dime. Never mind R&D costs, right?

Or perhaps the company ate their seed crop by appropriating every last penny of profit from his inventions. Now that he's got absolutely no incentive to innovate, he isn't inventing anything and nobody has to mind his R&D costs.

And so American innovation continues to fall further behind countries that allow inventors a fraction of the profit...while libertarians defend a system that's manifestly failing by shifting the blame to people who stopped doing extra work they weren't getting paid for.
 

austrianecon

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
7,347
Reaction score
1,342
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Or perhaps the company ate their seed crop by appropriating every last penny of profit from his inventions. Now that he's got absolutely no incentive to innovate, he isn't inventing anything and nobody has to mind his R&D costs.

And so American innovation continues to fall further behind countries that allow inventors a fraction of the profit...while libertarians defend a system that's manifestly failing by shifting the blame to people who stopped doing extra work they weren't getting paid for.

He's absolutely got an incentive.. it's called keeping his damn job. What you fail to understand is the company hires him to work in R&D thus add something to creating or improving current company knowledge. It's not his invention, it's the companies because the company pays for his salary, all the gadgets who uses and the workspace.

US isn't "falling" behind. Rest of the world is catching up. The previous 6 decades the US had no real competition in anything but each country over the last 2 or 3 decades have found their niche. Being 4th is actually really good considering China "steals" tech and US companies tend to ship R&D overseas, like Intel and AMD. Hell, Intel has 10% of it's R&D in China. So people have to have reasonable expectations of the 21st century.
 
Last edited:

austrianecon

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
7,347
Reaction score
1,342
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I agree it is quite ridiculous, this is not good news.

And the US (and it's companies) outspent those countries by hundreds of billions.

Problem with this article is it doesn't understand reality. They use GE as example (what GE product did you recently purchase that enhanced your life?).. and I will answer what have GE produced lately.

GE Wind: is the second largest wind manufacture in the world.
GE Healthcare: it's Life Sciences section inn Sweden GE produces technology for drug discovery, biopharmaceutical manufacturing and cellular technologies. Another R&D center is in Salt Lake, they provide tools and technologies for cardiac, surgical and interventional care. It's largest R&D facility is in India. (Side note: Obamacare)
GE Aviation: Odds are when you fly, it's on a GE engine. Over the last few years they created the GEnex engine for the 787 and the 747-8 (both new planes by Boeing).
GE Global Research: Whatever is in the works, but odds are everything started there in someway.

GE does alot of research in other countries. But GE is a US Company, it's US dollars going towards that research. So when you look at Finland, Sweden and Singapore on that list, realize those are US companies doing that R&D. Finland, Sweden and Singapore get credit cause it happen in those countries which is the way of the world. This is a byproduct of Free Trade agreements. So stop crying over spilled milk.
 

ChunkySalsa

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
497
Reaction score
362
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
He's absolutely got an incentive.. it's called keeping his damn job. What you fail to understand is the company hires him to work in R&D thus add something to creating or improving current company knowledge. It's not his invention, it's the companies because the company pays for his salary, all the gadgets who uses and the workspace.

US isn't "falling" behind. Rest of the world is catching up. The previous 6 decades the US had no real competition in anything but each country over the last 2 or 3 decades have found their niche. Being 4th is actually really good considering China "steals" tech and US companies tend to ship R&D overseas, like Intel and AMD. Hell, Intel has 10% of it's R&D in China. So people have to have reasonable expectations of the 21st century.

Providing the tools and materials he used to invent certainly entitles them to a cut of the profit, but taking all of it has killed this man's innovation. That company's greed ate their seed crop and now that man is no longer producing new inventions.

I feel that companies should definitely be able to recoup the R&D costs (for the one product and all the others that failed to make it to market), but allowing them to accrue limitless profit without a penny of it trickling down the inventor is immoral. (and in this one case, it has killed American innovation)
 
Last edited:

austrianecon

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
7,347
Reaction score
1,342
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Providing the tools and materials he used to invent certainly entitles them to a cut of the profit, but taking all of it has killed this man's innovation. That company's greed ate their seed crop and now that man is no longer producing new inventions.

If he works for the company, the company is entitled to it all as the company is paying him and that is his compensation. Their seed crop is replaced with younger workers. It's the way of the world once again. Unproductive workers are replaced with non-jaded youth who think they are gonna change the world. Think about it this way.. the major innovations (from Companies) of the last 30 years came from either college drop outs or newly graduated college students.. Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter and so on as they are the forefront of the technology. It's not the 40 year old who's grasp on the changes of technology is learned via the 2nd generation teaching it.

I feel that companies should definitely be able to recoup the R&D costs (for the one product and all the others that failed to make it to market), but allowing them to accrue limitless profit without a penny of it trickling down the inventor is immoral. (and in this one case, it has killed American innovation)

They aren't accruing limitless profit. There is a limit to that profit, there is always market saturation or market cap you reach. That profit is passed on to the worker (any worker really) that works for company that provides benefits (retirement plans). The company is putting funds towards that person retirement that they legally don't have to do. So it doesn't matter if you are a steel worker or work R&D, you are getting a share of the "profits" when they put money in your 401k or your pension plan.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
68,520
Reaction score
38,819
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Countries that invest more in research, education and have lower inequality are catching us, and our progress is now second to last:

"The U.S. used to be the envy of the world when it came to innovation, making things that dazzled the world and enhanced the lives of millions. But the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a bipartisan think-tank that ranks 36 countries according to innovation-based competitiveness, tells us we’re getting pushed aside on the global innovation stage. In 2009, to the surprise of those conducting the study, the U.S. ranked #4 in innovation, behind Finland, Sweden and Singapore. In 2011, the U.S. ranking was unchanged. Worse, the U.S. ranked second to last in terms of progress over the last decade.

Research by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also shows that the U.S. is not making as many cutting-edge products as it used to, and that other countries with strong investment in the foundations of innovation, like education and research and development, and fewer of the things that hinder it, like income inequality, are making greater strides than we are."

Lynn Parramore: The Depressing Tale of How Greedy Financial Titans Crushed Innovation and Destroyed Our Economy « naked capitalism


"Lazonick thinks what we really need is a whole new mindset about the economy. He recommends several things that would help get us back on track:

• Understand that markets don’t create value, but that organizations investing in productive capabilities, like business, governments, and households do.

• Ban stock repurchases by U.S. corporations so corporate financial resources can be channeled to innovation and job creation instead of wasted for the purpose of jacking up companies’ stock prices.

• Realize that the shareholder value ideology is destructive and will cause us to lag behind other countries that don’t subscribe to it.

• Regulate employment contracts to ensure that workers who contribute to the innovation process get to share in the gains from innovation.

• Create work programs that make use of and enhance the productive capabilities of educated and experienced workers whose human capital would otherwise deteriorate through lack of other relevant employment.

• Move toward a tax system that channels some of the money made on the gains from innovation toward government agencies that can invest in the public knowledge base needed for the next round of innovation."

You had me almost convinced until I saw your last bullet. Inventing an innovation tax will not "help" innovation, that is simply more goofy income redistribution. Perhaps simply changing our current gov't "public knowedge agencies" to target STEM education instead of treating underwater basketweaving or media studies as wise investments.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,987
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Countries that invest more in research, education and have lower inequality are catching us, and our progress is now second to last:

"The U.S. used to be the envy of the world when it came to innovation, making things that dazzled the world and enhanced the lives of millions. But the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a bipartisan think-tank that ranks 36 countries according to innovation-based competitiveness, tells us we’re getting pushed aside on the global innovation stage. In 2009, to the surprise of those conducting the study, the U.S. ranked #4 in innovation, behind Finland, Sweden and Singapore. In 2011, the U.S. ranking was unchanged. Worse, the U.S. ranked second to last in terms of progress over the last decade.

Research by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also shows that the U.S. is not making as many cutting-edge products as it used to, and that other countries with strong investment in the foundations of innovation, like education and research and development, and fewer of the things that hinder it, like income inequality, are making greater strides than we are."

Lynn Parramore: The Depressing Tale of How Greedy Financial Titans Crushed Innovation and Destroyed Our Economy « naked capitalism


"Lazonick thinks what we really need is a whole new mindset about the economy. He recommends several things that would help get us back on track:

• Understand that markets don’t create value, but that organizations investing in productive capabilities, like business, governments, and households do.

• Ban stock repurchases by U.S. corporations so corporate financial resources can be channeled to innovation and job creation instead of wasted for the purpose of jacking up companies’ stock prices.

• Realize that the shareholder value ideology is destructive and will cause us to lag behind other countries that don’t subscribe to it.

• Regulate employment contracts to ensure that workers who contribute to the innovation process get to share in the gains from innovation.

• Create work programs that make use of and enhance the productive capabilities of educated and experienced workers whose human capital would otherwise deteriorate through lack of other relevant employment.

• Move toward a tax system that channels some of the money made on the gains from innovation toward government agencies that can invest in the public knowledge base needed for the next round of innovation."

Well - unfortunately, after reading that entire article, I know nothing more of what is considered 'another countries better innovation techniques' . . . As in: why do we rank lower than the other 3 (and that's it? We're #4 - not all that dramatic, really)

I can't think of anything worldwide that's been at our former level of innovative since I was born - to the point where the entire world takes a step up? . . . I see that we've been so innovative that the well is tapping out. What else is there to do . . . for us to rank #1, what would need to be done instead?
 

imagep

Villiage Idiot
DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
24,399
Reaction score
10,426
Location
Upstate SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Providing the tools and materials he used to invent certainly entitles them to a cut of the profit, but taking all of it has killed this man's innovation. That company's greed ate their seed crop and now that man is no longer producing new inventions.

I feel that companies should definitely be able to recoup the R&D costs (for the one product and all the others that failed to make it to market), but allowing them to accrue limitless profit without a penny of it trickling down the inventor is immoral. (and in this one case, it has killed American innovation)

I think thats more of an example of really piss poor management than anything else, and fortunately not all companies are like that.
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I would drastically reduce patent and copyrights time if I had my druthers. People talk about how evil companies stiffle creativity, but I think, particularly in music, copyrights allow people to live decently off one good Top 40 hit or album for decades, thereby taking the motivation away for them to continue to be productive.
 

ChuckBerry

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
2,546
Location
Lafayette, Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Patent rights should perhaps be changed. My father invented dozens of mechanical devices for the company he worked for... and while they make large sums of money, he didn't even get a raise. In a sense, he lost the will to create, and now does nothing but fix things.
Perhaps he should have gone into business for himself. It's not cheap to make prototypes, design manufacturing processes for new inventions and take the financial risk of the new product being successful...or not. Your father didn't have to deal with the money or logistical headaches of any of those things.
 

ChuckBerry

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
2,546
Location
Lafayette, Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Or perhaps the company ate their seed crop by appropriating every last penny of profit from his inventions. Now that he's got absolutely no incentive to innovate, he isn't inventing anything and nobody has to mind his R&D costs.

And so American innovation continues to fall further behind countries that allow inventors a fraction of the profit...while libertarians defend a system that's manifestly failing by shifting the blame to people who stopped doing extra work they weren't getting paid for.

Whether anyone likes it or not, inventiveness ≠ great reward. Many people are inventive, but take no risk to develop their ideas and get them to market. I would wager that shlunka's father was probably earning a pretty reasonable engineer's salary if he was bright enough to invent not one but many mechanical devices. Someone with as much demonstrable talent as he might have marketed his big ideas to other companies and had them compete to pay him a salary he thought was more in keeping with his creativity.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
52,352
Reaction score
33,849
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Countries that invest more in research, education and have lower inequality are catching us, and our progress is now second to last:

"The U.S. used to be the envy of the world when it came to innovation, making things that dazzled the world and enhanced the lives of millions. But the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a bipartisan think-tank that ranks 36 countries according to innovation-based competitiveness, tells us we’re getting pushed aside on the global innovation stage. In 2009, to the surprise of those conducting the study, the U.S. ranked #4 in innovation, behind Finland, Sweden and Singapore. In 2011, the U.S. ranking was unchanged. Worse, the U.S. ranked second to last in terms of progress over the last decade.

Research by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also shows that the U.S. is not making as many cutting-edge products as it used to, and that other countries with strong investment in the foundations of innovation, like education and research and development, and fewer of the things that hinder it, like income inequality, are making greater strides than we are."

Lynn Parramore: The Depressing Tale of How Greedy Financial Titans Crushed Innovation and Destroyed Our Economy « naked capitalism


"Lazonick thinks what we really need is a whole new mindset about the economy. He recommends several things that would help get us back on track:

• Understand that markets don’t create value, but that organizations investing in productive capabilities, like business, governments, and households do
that investment sum you used to buy equities will have increased because you selected desirable stocks
your investment account would reflect the increased value that resulted
not a product made or consumed, but your asset was enhanced only because you anticipated desirability by others and acted to make it available to them - but at a greater amount than what you paid
buy low, sell high is far from a new concept. and it is not one which should be cavalierly abandoned

put that same amount into building a state of the art buggy whip manufacturing plant and making such investment in productive capabilities will drastically diminish the value of the holdings

what you and your identified author fail to understand is that the allocation of capital determines whether it will increase in value, whether the investment is in manufacturing or speculation. what is critical is that the investment be placed into an asset which will be desirable at the time you decide to sell

• Ban stock repurchases by U.S. corporations so corporate financial resources can be channeled to innovation and job creation instead of wasted for the purpose of jacking up companies’ stock prices.

why would an entity choose to place its capital at risk in another business when its own business offers the best prospects for enhancing the value of that investment capital?

and the premise is very flawed. how are we certain that the corporation's investment elsewhere would result in either innovation or job creation?

and why is the escalation of the value of equities for the investors deemed "wasted" purpose? if i am an investor, that is exactly the purpose. make more money with my money. that is a very desirable purpose

• Realize that the shareholder value ideology is destructive and will cause us to lag behind other countries that don’t subscribe to it.

what other countries do not subscribe to it?

why should shareholder value - assuming the enhancement of it - be found destructive?

• Regulate employment contracts to ensure that workers who contribute to the innovation process get to share in the gains from innovation.
really? regulate employment contracts. so, everyone is going to have their employment contract in writing, and each contract is going to be reviewed, and each change to each contract is going to be reviewed by a government regulator. and that massive bureaucracy is going to then spawn increases in innovation?

here's a clue. employees already have the option to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment. that includes negotiating for a share of the proceeds of their innovations

notice that no one is prohibiting them from doing so

and then the fault for not negotiating for a portion of proceeds of their developments on the job lies with which party, the employer or employee?


• Create work programs that make use of and enhance the productive capabilities of educated and experienced workers whose human capital would otherwise deteriorate through lack of other relevant employment
.

i like the idea of putting people to work. by the government, if not by the private sector. labor - time - is a perishable commodity. and if we fail to use it when it is available, then the opportunity to realize something USEFUL from that labor/employment during that otherwise idle time has been wasted and can never again be recovered

but i emphasized the word "USEFUL" because your proposal does not. under the plan you advocate, we could have people stacking greasy bb's - or trying to. while i would want 'make work' before 'no work' policies, it only makes sense that the work programs should be expected to generate purposeful outcomes

and the experienced and educated workers you identified are those who are going to be least in need of such programs. the more education one has, the less likelihood they are of being unemployed. so, while those with skills and education should be allowed to participate in a government works program, the focus should be on those without adequate education and work/life skills


• Move toward a tax system that channels some of the money made on the gains from innovation toward government agencies that can invest in the public knowledge base needed for the next round of innovation."

or existing, awful and complex, tax system already does this
you make gains - from innovation or otherwise - and you pay taxes, assuming the available tax loopholes are so not so massive as to eliminate the business' tax obligation otherwise due. [but that is fodder for another thread]
and those taxes are made available for more R&D programs funded by the government
 

austrianecon

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
7,347
Reaction score
1,342
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
He did not have access to hundred thousand dollar machines in his private garage.

Which is my point. He did it on company time and money so the company owned the rights. Money backing (Seed Capital) is 90% of all innovation. Even if he did it out of his own garage he'd have to get money from somewhere, that person who gives him money wants a stake in the invention and not a little one. They'll literally take up to 80% of all profits in the future.
 
Top Bottom