Bill Gates: Only Socialism Can Save the Climate; The Private Sector is Inept

[What Would Jesus Do?]

http://usuncut.com/climate/bill-gates-only-socialism-can-save-us-from-climate-change/

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/11/we-need-an-energy-miracle/407881/

In a recent interview with The Atlantic, billionaire tech magnate Bill Gates announced his game plan to spend $2 billion of his own wealth on green energy investments, and called on his fellow private sector billionaires to help make the U.S. fossil-free by 2050. But in doing so, Gates admitted that the private sector is too selfish and inefficient to do the work on its own, and that mitigating climate change would be impossible without the help of government research and development.

“There’s no fortune to be made. Even if you have a new energy source that costs the same as today’s and emits no CO2, it will be uncertain compared with what’s tried-and-true and already operating at unbelievable scale and has gotten through all the regulatory problems,” Gates said. “Without a substantial carbon tax, there’s no incentive for innovators or plant buyers to switch.”

Gates even tacked to the left and uttered words that few other billionaire investors would dare to say: government R&D is far more effective and efficient than anything the private sector could do.

“Since World War II, U.S.-government R&D has defined the state of the art in almost every area,” Gates said. “The private sector is in general inept.”

 

[markfromj]

“Since World War II, U.S.-government R&D has defined the state of the art in almost every area,” Gates said. “The private sector is in general inept.”

No, Bill, but the private section has to worry about how it spends money.

 

[The Tradition]

Wow, he's calling himself "inept".

 

[naturalmwa]

Wow, he's calling himself "inept".

This is what we were talking about the other day with Musk. Government is better situated to fund startups and research with long horizons.

 

[naturalmwa]

No, Bill, but the private section has to worry about how it spends money.

This is exactly the reason Bill is right. Business has to research things that can sell and be immediately profitable. Government can afford to innovate.

 

[22*43*51]

Didn't see where he said Socialism is the cure.

I did see where private business was supplying 2 Billion dollars.

 

[22*43*51]

This is what we were talking about the other day with Musk. Government is better situated to fund startups and research with long horizons.

Except that Musk is making NASA look like they're working on a High School science project.

 

[naturalmwa]

Except that Musk is making NASA look like they're working on a High School science project.

Ridiculous, NASA is funding him. There is no Musk without government policy. Musk is proof of the liberal approach to industrial policy. Government spearheads the field, lowers the risk, seeds the market and then nurtures it until it can stand on its own. Conservative economic principles would still have us on the ground wailing for our first satellite.

 

[22*43*51]

Ridiculous, NASA is funding him. There is no Musk without government policy. Musk is proof of the liberal approach to industrial policy. Government spearheads the field, lowers the risk, seeds the market and then nurtures it until it can stand on its own. Conservative economic principles would still have us on the ground wailing for our first satellite.

Need I remind you that the government has no money of it's own.

They are supporting him because he can do it cheaper than they can and his tech is better.

 

[naturalmwa]

Need I remind you that the government has no money of it's own.

They are supporting him because he can do it cheaper than they can and his tech is better.

Actually it was a policy shift. Under Bush NASA was going to develope lift tech in house. Obama chose to shift the funding to seed the market and help firms like SpaceX build a private space industry. Thanks liberals!

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Didn't see where he said Socialism is the cure.

Not if you just scanned for the word. But if you read what he had to say, you would have run across discussions like this:

When people viewed cancer as a problem, the U.S. government—and it’s a huge favor to the world—declared a war on cancer, and now we fund all health research at about $30 billion a year, of which about $5 billion goes to cancer. We got serious and did a lot of R&D, and then we got the private sector involved in taking that R&D and building breakthrough drugs.

In energy, no government—including the U.S., which is in almost every category the big R&D funder—has really made a dramatic increase. It was increased somewhat under Carter and then cut back under Reagan, and it’s now about $6 billion a year—that’s the U.S. piece, which, compared with the importance to our economy in general, is too low.

Realistically, we may not get more than a doubling in government funding of energy R&D—but I would love to see a tripling, to $18 billion a year from the U.S. government to fund basic research alone. Now, as a percentage of the government budget, that’s not gigantic. But we are at a time when the flexibility—because of health costs and other things, but primarily health costs—of the budget is very, very squeezed. But you could do a few-percent tax on all of energy consumption, or you could use the general revenue. This is not an unachievable amount of money.

 

[naturalmwa]

I wonder what would happen if the governments of the world coordinated research efforts?

 

[TexMichFan]

If the private sector is inept then shouldn't he give the money to the government?

 

[22*43*51]

Actually it was a policy shift. Under Bush NASA was going to develope lift tech in house. Obama chose to shift the funding to seed the market and help firms like SpaceX build a private space industry. Thanks liberals!

I agree. Outsourcing NASA to the private sector was one of BHO's finer accomplishments.

 

[markfromj]

This is exactly the reason Bill is right. Business has to research things that can sell and be immediately profitable. Government can afford to innovate.

He's not right, though, that business is "inept". Only that business and government have different drivers that make the latter more appropriate for research than the former.

 

[theiacowtipper]

The answer is for government and the private sector to collaborate on research. In this week's Time, there is an outstanding article on the future of fusion technology. Specifically it looks at the different paths that private researchers and government funded academics are taking. In the end, it is important for the government to fund and sponsor research into areas that don't have an immediate commercial application, then turn that research over to private businesses to develop commercial applications.

 

[naturalmwa]

He's not right, though, that business is "inept". Only that business and government have different drivers that make the latter more appropriate for research than the former.

This is why leaders always have to parse their language. He clearly isn't saying business is inept flat out, but that's it's inept at long term R&D on its own.