[charlie22]

I do not mean to diminish the role that the US government played in developing the first nuclear weapons. Without government funding, there would have been no nuclear bomb developed in time to use in Japan and tens if not hundreds of thousands of additional Americans would have died before Japan was subdued. My point is that without the Jewish scientists and the knowledge that they gained in European universities before Hitler began purging their ranks, the bomb might well have come to late to have been used in WW II. Our side was the beneficiary of both some excellent decisions by the US government combined with Hitler's extremely bad judgment.

I read the China Daily and South China Morning Post occasionally but I do not profess to be an expert on the Chinese economy. I agree that in certain areas - most importantly securing sources of energy, China's government maintains an iron grip. However, my understanding is that in many areas, China's economy is much freer than our own.

A few months ago, a South African owner of a large engraving and awards company spent a couple of weeks in China touring factories and warehouses in the area of China where laser engravers are manufactured. He provided a daily first hand account, complete with photos of what it is like to conduct business in China. It was a real eye opener for me. I have never believed that US companies have moved operations or farmed out their manufacturing to countries like China simply because of cheap labor but I had no idea what strides the Chinese had made in quality management and customer satisfaction. The laser engravers made in the US and western Europe are still far superior in quality to the Chinese models but they typically cost three to four times as much and the gap in quality and support is quickly narrowing. Surrendering central control over large chunks of the economy is what has fueled China's entry into the 21st century. Its government needed cash and its top heavy, centrally planned economy was not producing.

I do not agree that the federal government needs to be directly involved with building the infrastructure for a network of natural gas filling stations along the interstate. I can see where the governments' rights of eminent domain may need to be exercised in some areas but, given the right government policies, converting big rigs to run on natural gas and building the refueling network could be done with little or no taxpayer funding.

IMO, the case for having politicians decide that companies like Solyndra deserve public financing is much weaker than your proposal to fund the overhaul of freight transportation. Inevitably, federal contracts and other prizes are given to people well connected politically.

In terms of current dollars, the Manhattan Project cost roughly $24.4 billion. Compare the payoff of that expenditure to the $780 billion that our current federal government blew on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Government funding of non-military technologies should be pursued only as a last resort. Our tax and regulatory policies have made our economy increasingly less competitive - not the failure of our bloated, near bankrupt federal government to "invest" in the future.

While countries like China and India are employing the principles that gave this country its competitive advantage for decades, our own country is shackling the free market and leading us down the road to the socialist heavily bureaucratic systems that impoverished India and China for decades.

As to the bolded, I obviously agree which is why I want the R and D to be done in federally owned, managed and operated facilities (similar to the Manhattan Project concept) as opposed to investing in some private business whose owners shuck out political donations. Heck if our tax dollars are going to fund the development, I don't want some private business getting patent protection on the new developments. If anything, I want the federal govt to license the inventions to private business so the taxpayers can get a return for their risk/investment.

We're probably closer in our thinking than you think. We have some differences. I look at the race to develop effective alternative energy sources before China does as something similar in nature to the race to the Moon and as something that must have the financial backing and management of the federal govt. Not everything the federal govt touches goes to crap. Actually I view the alternative energy source race to be of more importance. Last thing we want is to have the Chinese develop the technology first. They'll patent protect it; charge a fortune for us to use it; and our court system will protect the Chinese patents at the same time the Chinese govt gives almost no protection to the patents of US companies (I know the Chinese govt says they are working hard to produce tougher legislation but I'm not a believer yet).