Creeva’s World 2.0

Elec­tion ’08: Seek­ing a ‘Tech President’

This arti­cle dis­cusses the tech strat­egy of some of our pres­i­den­tial hopefuls:

High­lights

Sen­a­tor Clin­ton has pro­posed cre­at­ing a $50 bil­lion national alternative-energy invest­ment fund and increas­ing basic research bud­gets at key fed­eral agen­cies by 50% over the next decade.

With the effects we are see­ing in pri­vate indus­try research and the preva­lence of people’s aware­ness and will­ing­ness to use alter­na­tive energy — why does this need to be a gov­ern­ment invest­ment. This should be done to allow the free mar­ket decide and inno­vate. Cur­rently in the tech sec­tor there is no stag­na­tion that gov­ern­ment needs to spend money on try­ing to get per­ceived inno­va­tion — the inno­va­tion is already happening.

Sen­a­tor Obama has posited wider broad­band pen­e­tra­tion as a way to cre­ate job oppor­tu­ni­ties for the urban poor and says he’ll over­haul fees the gov­ern­ment charges phone com­pa­nies to pay for it.

Reduc­ing fees and allow­ing the mar­ket to estab­lish the way to do this — I also find no fault on hold­ing the com­pa­nies to actu­ally do this if they want a fee reduc­tion. There should be a term limit on this fee reduc­tion with over­sight of how com­pli­ant is the com­pa­nies receiv­ing this are.

McCain favors peel­ing back lay­ers of Fed­eral Com­mu­ni­ca­tions Com­mis­sion reg­u­la­tions to pro­mote com­pe­ti­tion in Inter­net services.

The cor­rect method is always less spend­ing by the gov­ern­ment or more free­dom for com­pa­nies (as long as they are not break­ing hte law).

Edwards has pro­posed an alternative-energy fund to pro­mote wind and solar power, and bio­fuel to make cars and trucks more efficient.

We are back to spend­ing for inno­va­tion that is evo­lu­tion­ary and going to take place any­ways — there is no rea­son to have the gov­ern­ment invest in this when it is going to hap­pen anyways.

Rom­ney has said the coun­try needs to invest heav­ily in new tech­nol­ogy for power gen­er­a­tion, nan­otech­nol­ogy, and cre­at­ing new indus­trial materials.

We are back to the invest­ing — tax cred­its and fee reduc­tion are the ways to do this — reduc­ing the amount of money into the gov­ern­ment and stay­ing with the com­pa­nies reduces costs to the tax pay­ers for the bureau­crats pay­roll that would admin­is­ter this fund. Let’s please take the ini­tia­tive so the gov­ern­ment needs to have the least involve­ment and small­est pay roll pos­si­ble as it saves us all money in the long run.

Obama, Edwards, and McCain have been most explicit on patent reform. Obama’s cam­paign says such a law would pro­mote more sci­en­tific research and dis­cour­age exces­sive litigation.

There really is no way to reduce lit­i­ga­tion with­out get­ting more explicit in the patent detail­ings. While patent reform needs to take place — I feel it involves more how a nor­mal per­son can receive a patent with­out the help of big busi­ness behind them and allow them to lever­age that patent as eas­ily as big business.

Edwards’ cam­paign says he would cre­ate a national plan whereby the gov­ern­ment pays for a year of pub­lic col­lege for more than 2 mil­lion stu­dents who take college-prep courses in high school, work part-time dur­ing col­lege, and stay out of trouble.

Why are we pay­ing for this — do all of us that have fin­ished col­lege or gone int he past get a credit? There should be meth­ods in deal­ing with the col­leges — espe­cially the State schools for cost reform instead of pay­ing for stu­dents to go.

To fig­ure out the cost to tax the pay­ers — 2,000,000 x 30,000 (if they are going to a state school) 60,000,000,000 — which is 60 bil­lion dol­lars. What taxes are going to increase to pay for this? The nation is already in debt over the Iraq war — we need to decrease spend­ing until we get a bal­anced budget.

My biggest prob­lem with this piece over all is that they didn’t men­tion Ron Paul once. You can say they only did the top tier can­di­dates, but McCain looks like he doesn’t have a chance. Ron Paul is con­sid­ered the most friendly of nom­i­nees that the tech indus­try likes.