Jeremy wrote:
] However, the government is also a consumer in this
] marketplace and must make choices to support its own
] operations. To the extent that the impact of this
] selection affects the marketplace, then the
] influence of the government seems unavoidable.

Well, thats pandora's box.

In general, there is a separation between policy makers and operational people, and my comments mostly reflect policy as opposed to operations. However, you raise an interesting question. What is the government's responsibility with respect to the influence of their purchasing decisions on technological direction....

There is no clear answer to this I don't think...

This has come up in a number of contexts. For example, the government hasn't invested social security funds for fear of influencing the market with their investments. On the other hand, the government tried (and failed) to promulgate clipper chips by requiring them for government contractors.

In general there is going to be little or no effect, and this shouldn't be a concern. When the purchase is extremely large and there is a significant fear that there might be a social impact, then this impact should be considered from a moral standpoint, but you really get into a space where the only reasonable place to make that kind of decision is in the legislature, as its democratically controlled. Unfortunately, there are lots of problems with doing that from a practical standpoint. Currently, that doesn't happen for the most part, and so we see situations where these concerns are taken into account, and other situations where they aren't...

This is messy....

Its possible to grab onto a purely anarchocapitalist perspective that government when purchasing is simply an actor in the marketplace and it should simply pursue its interests even in situations where the purchase is extremely large. This provides the comfort of an easy answer, but I dunno if it makes practical sense in every case...

Can we let the government make market investments if we set things up such that the people who make those investments are purely incented to make a profit?

RE: The Paradox of the Best Network