PJ Media’s Tom Blumer makes an interesting point about Hotcoldwetdry
Tuesday afternoon, as I was reading Barack Obama’s Georgetown University speech on “climate change,” it occurred to me that the biggest and perhaps most consequential difference between the government and the private sector is how each reacts when reality doesn’t behave as expected.
The public sector does not have a monopoly on people who become irrationally wedded to ideas and programs which have become outmoded, obsolete, redundant, or worthless. The difference is what happens to such people — and in some cases, their firms — in the private sector when they stubbornly stick to their guns.
At a private firm, if a new product or idea loses — or is on track to lose — serious amounts of money, or if a research project is going nowhere, it gets killed (see: the Ford Edsel, New Coke, Apple Newton). Those who fall in love with these flame-outs and blindly defend them even when the handwriting is on the wall get fired. If a bad product or idea isn’t terminated quickly enough, it has the potential to jeopardize entire companies, even large ones (see JCPenney’s three-tier pricing plan and HP’s 2011 Touchpad debacle).
But within government?
If a new idea or product is failing or initially seems destined to fail, bureaucrats, their corporate beneficiaries, and their cronies work to get them underwritten or subsidized. The fact that the government is even involved likely indicates that the private sector knows better than to touch it without putting taxpayers on the hook. This explains why the Obama administration has had losers like Solyndra, A123 Battery, Beacon Power, and so many others in its energy “loan” portfolio.
Heck of a point. The private sector on its own would abandon so many of these hotcoldwetdry projects in a heartbeat. However, when government is throwing money around, they’re more than happy to take the money. Most of the pro-AGW research and findings comes at the hands of government grants, not solely private sector cash (except for few that have deep pockets donors such as George Soros, who fails to practice what he preaches).
Make sure to read the whole thing.
Meanwhile, Obama is flogging his “climate change” announcement during this week’s Weekly Address, which is funny considering that he is in the midst of a massive fossil fueled trip to Africa, putting out more “carbon pollution” during this trip than some countries put out in a year. I’m not going to excerpt it, because there is simply just way too much stupidity.
Also, I hate defending Obama, but there’s a meme going around that he said not to vote for anyone who doesn’t believe in Hotcoldwetdry
President Barack Obama is trying to frame climate change as a make-or-break political issue, urging Americans to vote only for those who will protect the country from environmental harm.
I’m sure he feels that way, but that is NOT what he said during the Weekly Address, but simply wishful thinking, and, let’s face it, biased and shoddy journalism by the AP and Washington Post.