Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

May 28 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew


New on NRO . . .
Close
Obama’s Antique Vision of Technological Progress
His vision is of a dynamic economy. His result will be a static one.

By Michael Barone


Archive Latest RSS Send
Text  

Barack Obama, like all American politicians, likes to portray himself as future-oriented and open to technological progress. Yet the vision he set out in his State of the Union address is oddly antique and disturbingly static.

“This is our generation’s Sputnik moment,” he said. But Sputnik and America’s supposedly less advanced rocket programs of 1957 were government projects, at a time when government defense spending, like the Manhattan Project that developed the atomic bomb, drove technology.

Advertisement

But today, as Obama noted a few sentences before, “our free-enterprise system is what drives innovation.” Private firms develop software faster than government can procure it.

Undaunted, Obama calls for more government spending on “biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean-energy technology.” Government has some role in biotech, though a subsidiary one, but IT development is almost exclusively a private-sector function, and clean-energy technology that is not private-sector driven is almost inevitably uneconomic.

And then there is transportation. “Within 25 years,” Obama said, “our goal is to give 80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail. This could allow you to go places in half the time it takes to travel by car. For some trips, it will be faster than flying.”

Wow! There’s some advanced technology. Except that France inaugurated service on its TGV high-speed rail from Paris to Lyon in 1981. That’s 30 years ago. It’s as if President Eisenhower were inspired by Sputnik to promote the technology of 30 years before, Charles Lindbergh’s single-engine propeller plane, the Spirit of St. Louis. It’s as antique as the Tomorrowland of the original Disneyland.

In fact, government high-speed-rail projects in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Florida would not approach the speeds of France’s TGV or Japan’s bullet train and would not beat autos in door-to-door travel. And they could never match the low fares of the free-enterprise bus lines that have competed successfully with the Acela for budget-minded travelers.

Truly high-speed rail might make sense in the Washington–New York–Boston corridor for business travelers willing to pay high fares to save precious time. But it might also prove to be a technology as commercially unprofitable and politically unfeasible as the Concorde supersonic plane that was retired from service in 2003. Northeasterners might block high-speed-rail lines in their backyards just as they blocked Concorde’s sonic booms over land.

The disturbingly static nature of Obama’s vision is apparent when one parses his comments on the bipartisan fiscal commission headed by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, and its stark description of how entitlements are on a path to consume the private economy.

“I don’t agree with all their proposals,” Obama began, on what one can hardly call a positive note. On health care, he persists in claiming that Obamacare “will slow these rising costs,” though every informed person knows that the claimed budget savings are the result of Democrats’ gaming the Congressional Budget Office’s scoring system.

To which Obama added, “I’m willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs” — which sounds a lot like, “I sure can’t think of many.”

1   2   Next >
Text  

You Might Also Like...

Malkin: Obama’s Land of the LOST

Lowry: Unleash Biden!

Charen: Obama’s Education Hypocrisy -- Again



COMMENTS   3

EXPAND  

   02/03/11 16:56

"Private firms develop software faster than government can procure it."

The crux of the problem with Government in ten simple words - brilliant!

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/04/11 13:24

"It’s a plan for a static rather than dynamic economy."

This should come as no surprise. No gaggle of central planners, regardless of pedigree, credentials, and IQ, can cope with the dynamics of a free market operating one any scale larger than a principality of a few acres, and the Pilgrims proved the results were disastrous even on that scale.

Central planners can indeed cope with still life, which is best visualized by considering a painting of a bowl of rotting fruit. The problem is that nobody outside the privileged group of central planners will enjoy the experience, provided they manage to survive.

Folks like Obama hew to the credo attributed to an infamous being: "better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven."

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Tenn Slim
   02/05/11 09:47

"It’s a plan for a static rather than dynamic economy."

This is the basic tenet of the Left. Statism, static economy, control of the minimals.

If we follow this directive, we soon end up in Maos Revolution, Lenins 1921 economic morass, Stalins purges to eliminate waste, IE People.

A dead end from a Novice Child President.
end
Semper FI

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact