Public sector rent-seeking could be prevented in large measure by simply following the original intent of the US Constitution to a very limited Federal government role. Ultimately, you want to remove discretion from the appropriations process entirely with a CItizen's Dividend aka a non-means-tested Basic Income so that there is no chunk of money sitting around waiting to be stolen by people who have the resources to steal it by virtue of having stolen it before (lobbyists/special interests/etc.).
This, of course, opens up the door to private sector rent-seeking (monopolistic investment, etc.) which could be dealt with at the State level if the full powers attributable to the States had been left them as was intended by the US Constitution originally. Reinterpretation of the Commerce Clause, the 14th Amendment, 16th Amendment etc. has rendered States virtually powerless to conduct the kinds of experiments the laboratory of the States was intended to conduct. On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Alain Sepeda <[email protected]>wrote: > I don't disagree with the power of lobbies. > > In fact the expert I talk to said thay they will try to oppose to the > transition to maintain te problem they are the solution of. > They will learn the new technology, while blocking it, until they can > compete and establish a monopoly again. > > the way to get around is (non-crony) capitalism, or citizen organisation, > users union/syndicate. > > The idea can be to find middle sized industrial who are desperate to find > an innovation (the one that don't own an economic rent, and yet can move). > then you find users/consumers that also desperately need a revolution, and > are are enough autonomous in a niche market, a niche territory to accept > this new technology... > > make one find the other, through a citizen organization, a business > syndicate... > and you will make the industry grow from the bottom. > > It will look small at the beginning from the point of view of the big > incumbent... > soon they will feel endangered, but it will be too late to oppose. > > Only those "business syndicates" can save the grid from shutting down at > the end. > Without those syndicate who can launch local smart grid, it will finish > with home only generator like in Jed Book. > > > > 2012/11/8 Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> > >> Alain Sepeda <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> However as soon as we have a machine on the client table, and that the >>> advantages for the client are clear, nothing can block people to use it... >>> no lobbies, no regulation, no fear... >>> >> >> I think that's incorrect. Here in the U.S. we have powerful lobbies and >> corporations that can delay or possibly prevent useful technology for a >> long time. I will give some examples below, but first let me say this >> discussion has gone off the tracks. You, Mark Gibbs and others >> misunderstand what I had in mind. >> >> >
