Why Private Investment Works & Govt. Investment Doesn't | 5 Minute Video

preview_player
Показать описание
From transportation to energy, and everything in between, should the government invest money in as many promising projects as possible? Or would that actually doom many of those ventures to failure? Burt Folsom, historian and professor at Hillsdale College, answers those questions by drawing on the fascinating history of the race to build America's railroads and airplanes.

Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips.

FOLLOW us!
PragerU is on Snapchat!

JOIN PragerFORCE!

Script:

In 2011, a solar power company called Solyndra declared bankruptcy. A company going bankrupt is not news. But Solyndra was not just any company. Its biggest “investor” was the federal government which had given it $500 million dollars. That was news.

But, really, it shouldn’t have been. If history is any guide, it was quite predictable. The government is a very poor investor. And always has been. There are countless examples, but two should serve our purpose here.

After the Civil War, American leaders were anxious to bind the country’s North, South, East, and West regions together with transcontinental railroads. Congress therefore gave massive federal aid to build the Union Pacific, the Central Pacific, and later the Northern Pacific Railroads. But all three of these roads had huge financial problems. The Union Pacific, for example, was mired in financial scandal from its inception, went bankrupt several times, and had to rebuild large sections of track thanks to shoddy construction practices.

At that same time, James J. Hill, with no federal aid whatsoever, built a railroad from St. Paul to Seattle -- the Great Northern. How was Hill able to do with private funds what the Union Pacific failed to do with a gift of tens of millions of federal dollars?

The starting point is incentives. The Union Pacific was paid by the government for each mile of road it built. It was in the railroad’s interest not to build the road straight. The more miles it took the UP to cross Nebraska, for example, the more money it made.
Hill, by contrast, used his own capital. To make a profit, he had to build his Great Northern Railroad sturdy and straight. Hill’s company remained in business for almost a hundred years until 1970 when it merged with other railroads. The original Union Pacific, riddled with corruption and numerous other financial misdeeds, including the wholesale bribery of public officials, went broke within ten years.

The story of the airplane is even more stark. By the opening of the twentieth century, the major nations of Europe and America were frantically at work trying to invent a flying machine. The first nation to do so would have a huge military and commercial advantage.
In fact, leading American politicians of the day, such as Teddy Roosevelt, President William McKinley, and others argued that building an airplane was a national emergency. There was no time, they argued, to wait for private industry to get the job done. The government needed to pick the best aeronautics expert and give him the money he needed.

That expert was Samuel Langley, the president of the prestigious Smithsonian Institution and holder of honorary degrees from Harvard, Yale, Oxford, and Cambridge. Langley was already an accomplished inventor and he had written a highly praised book Experiments in Aerodynamics. Federal officials gave Langley funds for two trial flights. He immediately set to work. His theory was that his plane needed to be thrust into the air from a houseboat on the Potomac River. The big engine on the plane would then propel it through air for several minutes.

Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

“There are four ways in which you can spend money. You can spend your own money on yourself. When you do that, why then you really watch out what you’re doing, and you try to get the most for your money. Then you can spend your own money on somebody else. For example, I buy a birthday present for someone. Well, then I’m not so careful about the content of the present, but I’m very careful about the cost. Then, I can spend somebody else’s money on myself. And if I spend somebody else’s money on myself, then I’m sure going to have a good lunch! Finally, I can spend somebody else’s money on somebody else. And if I spend somebody else’s money on somebody else, I’m not concerned about how much it is, and I’m not concerned about what I get. And that’s government. And that’s close to 40% of our national income.”
Milton Friedman

AktienMitKopf
Автор

Langley: "It's impossible!"


The Wright Brothers: "I'm about to end this man's whole career."

unownnnn
Автор

"Economic growth comes from Entrepreneurs risking their own money, not from govt politicians risking your money. "

Can't be more true.

paragjyotideka
Автор

The $2, 000 the Wright Brothers spent is about $50k today. Not bad for a world-changing technology!

blurglide
Автор

Good job New York Times. You nailed it as usual. I'm still waiting for that first powered human flight... another millions years im sure

falcondrvr
Автор

Entrepeneur who's funded by the government: "Who cares if our plan fails or we need to fix our mistakes, the government will bail us out"
Entrepeneur who's funded by it's own money: "We've got one chance at this, make it the best we can do"

neoxenoz
Автор

Easy enough:
private investment fails = learn from our mistakes and move on
government investment fails = we didn't spend enough money so let's try the same thing again with a bigger budget.

rhaacke
Автор

They did it wrong. They should've said "Whoever gives us the flying machine will get the prize money."

integr
Автор

"Things in our country work in spite of the government, not by aid of it." - Will Rogers.

leehuff
Автор

This is offensives, I identify as a trans-continental railroad.

mhmeekk
Автор

How about no company or industry gets a single penny from tax payers?

TickedOffPriest
Автор

This could be why spacex accomplish what some people called "impossible" and Nasa gave up on.

jeremycastro
Автор

I normally don't agree with any PragerU's videos, but I'm onboard with this one.  I work for a private contractor that hold contracts with the federal government.  You should see how they piss away your tax money everyday.

russbear
Автор

When I was in the Navy, I got laughed out of the wardroom for suggesting that captains be rewarded for operating their ships efficiently. The others thought our job was to show the flag, and cost was not a factor whatsoever.

art
Автор

America needs to return to capitalism.

Lerppunen
Автор

Thanks. I find it almost stupid that people in 2016 still believe Government can fix the energy issue.

AzureSymbiote
Автор

You’ll always appreciate it more when it’s your own money.

american
Автор

4:21 Wow, NYT was FakeNews even back then 😂😂😂

slavsquatter
Автор

The common thread isn't about investing at all....it was more about forcing the situation. In all instances where the government "invests" in an idea, they are forcing people to come up with the task itself (like research and development). Where private "investment" occurs, it's more of the fact of people trying new things with what they have available and being rewarded at the END of their accomplishment. The government can properly incentivize by simply giving a task and stating the reward of completing the task....rather than give the money in the beginning. Subsidizing (or simply giving money before effort) only leads to failure by laziness, it's not like the government will put them in jail if they don't comply, so there's no incentive for them to even try hard at all.

sabriath
Автор

Some of you guys need to realize that this is mostly to do with new technologies. Only NASA really made a difference but that was when it was being pressured heavily by the government and society to produce results, often with drastic consequences. Nowadays NASA does the safe thing and operates more like the military in how it produces new technology. Government still needs to fund basic amenities like road infrastructure. If anything the government needs to be more strict with its money and require stronger contracts to avoid another UPR situation.

froniccruxis