Archive for October 10th, 2011

Cutting to the chase on Solyndra (again) …

October 10, 2011

Punch line: The proper role for government is to support basic research, not commercial ventures

Excerpted from the WSJ: The Solyndra Economy

“Listening to the President, Solyndra was a necessary casualty in the greater campaign to steer the U.S. economy toward Mr. Obama’s noble goals.

Private competition that winnows out losers is so yesterday.

Brad Jones of Redpoint Ventures got to the heart of the Solyndra economy in a December 2009 email to then-National Economic Council director Larry Summers:

“The allocation of spending to clean energy is haphazard; the government is just not well equipped to decide which companies should get the money and how much . . . One of our solar companies with revenues of less than $100 million (and not yet profitable) received a government loan of $580 million; while that is good for us, I can’t imagine it’s a good way for the government to use taxpayer money.”

Which is precisely the point.

The proper role for government is to support basic research, not commercial ventures that become exercises in taxpayer risk but private reward.

When government takes $535 million and invests in a loser, it not only wastes taxpayer money but it also denies that capital to some other project in the private economy that might have succeeded.

The Solyndra emails show how ill-equipped government is to predict the industries of the present, much less the future.”

Why no Occupy Wall Street placards on this one ?

>> Latest Posts

Still another “protected class” … unemployeds.

October 10, 2011

Punch line: Obama’s job bill would let unemployed folks sue an employer with an opening if they think they haven’t received due consideration in the hiring process.

Excerpted from AP: Unemployed seek protection against job bias

A growing number of unemployed or underemployed Americans are complaining that they are being screened out of job openings for the very reason they’re looking for work in the first place.

Because they’re unemployed.

Some companies and job agencies prefer applicants who already have jobs, or haven’t been jobless too long.

They may get help from a provision in President Barack Obama’s jobs bill, which would ban companies with 15 or more employees from refusing to consider — or offer a job to — someone who is unemployed.

The provision would give those claiming discrimination a right to sue, and violators would face fines of up to $1,000 per day, plus attorney fees and costs.

Let me get this straight.

So, when benefits run out after 99 weeks – almost 2 years – then companies must hire them.

Perhaps there’s a reason that the 9% who are unemployed aren’t in the group of 91% who are employed.

You think ?

>> Latest Posts

What exactly is a “flash in the pan”?

October 10, 2011

Many pundits are calling Herman Cain a “flash in the pan”.

I thought it simply meant “here today, gone tomorrow” … but got curious.

Here’s a more official reading from Phrases.org

Flash in the pan: Something which disappoints by failing to deliver anything of value, despite a showy beginning.

The origin …

One notion is that this phrase derives from the Californian Gold Rush of the mid 19th century.

Prospectors who panned for gold supposedly became excited when they saw something glint in the pan, only to have their hopes dashed when it proved not to be gold but a mere ‘flash in the pan’.

This is an attractive and plausible notion, in part because it ties in with another phrase related to disappointment – ‘it didn’t pan out’.

Nevertheless, gold prospecting isn’t the origin of ‘a flash in the pan’.

The phrase did have a literal meaning, i.e. it derives from a real flash in a real pan, but not a prospector’s pan, a musket’s pan.

Flintlock muskets used to have small pans to hold charges of gunpowder.

An attempt to fire a musket in which the gunpowder flared up without a bullet being fired was a ‘flash in the pan’.

Now we know …

>> Latest Posts