The irony of governmental hubris
I received a call from a colleague a few days ago about a meeting coming up over Thanksgiving. In the process of talking about said meeting, we drifted off onto other subjects relating to some decisions our county board is going to be making. One of the issues that will be coming up is whether or not the county (Walworth County, WI) should refund a development project that is nothing more than paying consultants to tell the county how to subsidize businesses they feel are the key to the long term growth in our county. The presentation that was given yesterday at Gateway College makes the following statements:
- We are living in a rapidly changing economy where industries are coming into existence which a) never existed ten years ago and b) are being valued at higher numbers than companies with greater physical assets and who have been in existence longer.
- Market driven forces have been the foundation of said changes.
Yet, in the same breath, the presentation makes the claim that local and state governments should be involved in fostering growth by:
- Researching and predicting the future industries that will bring the greatest benefit to the area being served - e.g. Walworth County.
- Provide incentives for said industries.
I argue that businesses like Google, Apple, Yahoo!, and Microsoft exist despite government interference and not because of it. Google's phenomenal growth is due to dollars and eyeballs. They built a platform on which people would be drawn to their service - i.e. search engine/search results - and in the process presented with ads that generate revenue to support further developing their search techniques. Apple has gone from a perceived second rate, second tier software and hardware developer to a class A developer of equipment, software, and ideas. Their brand is recognized on the level of a fashion icon in an industry known for beige box, bland hardware. No one could argue in any intelligent manner that the government was responsible for helping foster the growth of these two winners. There are basic infrastructure services that we have allowed the government to assume responsibility for that have helped in the growth of the companies, but I would argue that inconsistencies in policy and regulatory burden burn more human creative energy at both companies than is necessary. It is despite government that these companies exist, not because of government.
The propaganda being thrown about in Walwroth County via the new WCEDA initiative is akin to socialist market planning. If you remove subject identity indicators from their reports, you find that the goal is to research historical changes in the county and use those statistics, coupled with information on industries that have shown to be high-growth and high-paying, and mash them together to create a plan for the future. What? Historical statistics have done nothing more than show that the market changes much faster than any government could possibly react. Yet, somehow we are going to delude ourselves into believing that the government can foster growth by predicting the winners? Nonsense. The way government can assist in fostering growth is by making the rules of the game simple and easy to read. In order to enter the business market, you mustn't be required to hire lawyers and consultants to found your business. Company XYZ shouldn't be given advantages over Company ABC because they are perceived to be more vital to the growth of the County. The market will determine which provides greater benefit to the area residents and prosperity will follow. It always does. What makes us in Walworth County think that we can divine otherwise?
