Obama: ‘Google, Facebook Would Not Exist’ Without Government Funding [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Obama: ‘Google, Facebook Would Not Exist’ Without Government Funding


snerd
04-16-2012, 11:27
I'm sorry, I thought Google and Facebook were funded by "private" enterprise?
President Barack Obama insisted Thursday that without government spending, “Google, Facebook would not exist.”

Obama made the remark at a campaign fundraiser while criticizing the budget passed by House Republicans. Obama said the Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget would, among other things, cut funding for research.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-google-facebook-would-not-exist-without-government-funding

aircarver
04-16-2012, 11:40
What's theirs is his .......:upeyes:

.

Gundude
04-16-2012, 11:51
The Internet was born from government funding, so every Internet company wouldn't exist without government funding. Google and Facebook are just examples everybody can relate to.

TBO
04-16-2012, 11:51
I believe Al Gore may have something to say about this...

QNman
04-16-2012, 12:00
The Internet was born from government funding, so every Internet company wouldn't exist without government funding. Google and Facebook are just examples everybody can relate to.

The Internet was founded to facilitate communication between researchers and colleges. I'm comfortable in the knowledge someone smart enough to come up with any number of advancements could have managed the interwebs too - without the federal teat.

Gundude
04-16-2012, 12:04
The Internet was founded to facilitate communication between researchers and colleges. I'm comfortable in the knowledge someone smart enough to come up with any number of advancements could have managed the interwebs too - without the federal teat.You'd be surprised at how little of their own money companies throw at research without government "incentives" (a.k.a. subsidies).

Numismatist
04-16-2012, 12:08
I will like to see Google and Facebook's response to his comment...

Gundude
04-16-2012, 12:14
I will like to see Google and Facebook's response to his comment...
They probably won't say anything because they understand the point he was making. They probably realize that nit-picking statements, even when the point of the statement is obvious to all, makes one look stupid, and they don't want to look stupid.

G29Reload
04-16-2012, 12:47
Barack Obama would not exist without government funding.

One more great argument against government.

snerd
04-16-2012, 12:50
Barack Obama would not exist without government funding.....
I wish I had thought of that one! Tru Dat!! :wavey:

JFrame
04-16-2012, 13:51
Barack Obama would not exist without government funding.

One more great argument against government.


:rofl::rofl::rofl:


...The best possible argument against government funding! http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/artists/just_cuz/JC_doubleup.gif


.

QNman
04-16-2012, 14:22
You'd be surprised at how little of their own money companies throw at research without government "incentives" (a.k.a. subsidies).

Actually, I believe it is you who would be surprised. My last company, we spent wheelbarrows of money on R and D and developed several unique items that made the principals wheelbarrows more.

Contrary to what you may read on the interwebs, the entrepreneurial spirit doesn't begin or end with government cash.

QNman
04-16-2012, 14:22
Barack Obama would not exist without government funding.

One more great argument against government.

:rofl:

Perfect!

mj9mm
04-16-2012, 15:21
Barack Obama would not exist without government funding.

One more great argument against government.

:rofl:best example yet :whistling:

Gundude
04-16-2012, 15:53
Actually, I believe it is you who would be surprised. My last company, we spent wheelbarrows of money on R and D and developed several unique items that made the principals wheelbarrows more.

Contrary to what you may read on the interwebs, the entrepreneurial spirit doesn't begin or end with government cash.Never said it did. Just said the Internet got developed with government cash until it reached the point where companies could see the light at the end of the tunnel. Google and Facebook wouldn't exist today without the foundations of the Internet already in place when they started.

JFrame
04-16-2012, 16:00
Never said it did. Just said the Internet got developed with government cash until it reached the point where companies could see the light at the end of the tunnel. Google and Facebook wouldn't exist today without the foundations of the Internet already in place when they started.

Well, on behalf of Q -- that's not what you said the first time:

You'd be surprised at how little of their own money companies throw at research without government "incentives" (a.k.a. subsidies).


.

Chronos
04-16-2012, 16:04
You'd be surprised at how little of their own money companies throw at research without government "incentives" (a.k.a. subsidies).

This is the statist's ancient myth that science wouldn't get done without the government. Actually, the reverse is true -- government funding of science saps the initiative for private funding of science, and the net effect of government funding is negative for science as a whole. However, the usual dynamic is at work where the average person gets to see what government paid for, but you don't get to see the vastly larger amount of research that would have been done in the government's absence.

The whole story is spelled out in great detail in "The Economic Laws of Scientific Research."

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Economic_Laws_of_Scientific_Research.html?id=tKJuIBtjpvsC

pipedreams
04-16-2012, 16:20
The Internet was founded to facilitate communication between researchers and colleges. I'm comfortable in the knowledge someone smart enough to come up with any number of advancements could have managed the interwebs too - without the federal teat.

National defense was the original reason (Gov.funding). In the days of the old Soviet Union due to the fear of atomic attack the system was build so that if one city or area was knocked out the sytem would still work for communication between military bases. The colleges and researchers got involved later about the same time UNIX was developed by Kenneth Thompson and Dennis Ritchie at Bell Labs in 1969. Since then it has made history.

Gundude
04-16-2012, 16:37
Well, on behalf of Q -- that's not what you said the first time:I was pointing out the current state of affairs at most companies, which have little incentive to sink a lot of money into ideas that could take three decades to pan out, as the Internet did. That's a far cry from stating there would be no research without the government.

JFrame
04-16-2012, 16:54
I was pointing out the current state of affairs at most companies, which have little incentive to sink a lot of money into ideas that could take three decades to pan out, as the Internet did. That's a far cry from stating there would be no research without the government.


Taking government money for research is not the same as being unwilling/unable to spend money if the federal largesse was not forthcoming. For instance, G.E. received billions of dollars from Obama's FedGov for Smart Grid research -- research that the company would have had to spend anyway in order to stay competitive with the rest of the industry.

But here's where the crony capitalism comes in -- the G.E./Jeff Immelt/President of the Obama "Jobs" commission/NBC-MSNBC Pro-Democrat propaganda circle jerk takes over. Everyone's aware of that incestuous connection, and it doesn't need to be dealt in detail here.

The question isn't whether a company had to take federal money in order to succeed. It's a case of who took the money in order to get an advantage in the market place -- and what part of its soul that company had to sell to get the bucks.


.


.

Gundude
04-16-2012, 17:20
Taking government money for research is not the same as being unwilling/unable to spend money if the federal largesse was not forthcoming. For instance, G.E. received billions of dollars from Obama's FedGov for Smart Grid research -- research that the company would have had to spend anyway in order to stay competitive with the rest of the industry.

But here's where the crony capitalism comes in -- the G.E./Jeff Immelt/President of the Obama "Jobs" commission/NBC-MSNBC Pro-Democrat propaganda circle jerk takes over. Everyone's aware of that incestuous connection, and it doesn't need to be dealt in detail here.

The question isn't whether a company had to take federal money in order to succeed. It's a case of who took the money in order to get an advantage in the market place -- and what part of its soul that company had to sell to get the bucks.


.


.I'm not disputing any of that. It's just how things are. Although you site "Obama's FedGov" in your example, surely you don't think it was any different during anybody else's "FedGov" do you?

JFrame
04-16-2012, 18:19
I'm not disputing any of that. It's just how things are. Although you site "Obama's FedGov" in your example, surely you don't think it was any different during anybody else's "FedGov" do you?

Yeah -- my reference to Obama's FedGov was regarding his relationship with G.E. (although he has certainly had many others, especially in the "green" technologies and initiatives).

But no disputing this kind of stuff has gone on before.


.

certifiedfunds
04-16-2012, 19:59
The Internet was born from government funding, so every Internet company wouldn't exist without government funding. Google and Facebook are just examples everybody can relate to.

This is just like the people who like to tout all of the technology that was spun off of NASA -- as though without NASA we wouldn't have those things.

What they never factor in is what private enterprise would have produced had those trillions of dollars been left in their hands.

It is absurd.

EDIT: Sorry Chronos. Should have read the whole thread b/c you already hit it, better:

This is the statist's ancient myth that science wouldn't get done without the government. Actually, the reverse is true -- government funding of science saps the initiative for private funding of science, and the net effect of government funding is negative for science as a whole. However, the usual dynamic is at work where the average person gets to see what government paid for, but you don't get to see the vastly larger amount of research that would have been done in the government's absence.

The whole story is spelled out in great detail in "The Economic Laws of Scientific Research."

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Economic_Laws_of_Scientific_Research.html?id=tKJuIBtjpvsC

What would undeniably happen is that private business would make much more efficient use of those resources. As someone who has one toe in the research world, billions in grant money is wasted every year and spent frivolously.

certifiedfunds
04-16-2012, 20:05
Barack Obama would not exist without government funding.

One more great argument against government.

We're talking about U.S. government funding, not Kenyan government funding.

:supergrin:

cowboywannabe
04-16-2012, 20:14
Obama: ‘Google, Facebook Would Not Exist’ Without Government Funding

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

THEY THRIVE IN SPITE OF THE GOVERMENT.