But the space program, and maybe the Manhattan project, actually had real, credible competition, even if it wasn't economic, so maybe were able to escape the bureaucratic trap. Something less urgent (even if it is on paper) like antibiotic resistance, I'm not convinced presents the kind of competition that would actually substitute for a competitive market.
Its a gigantic counterpoint. A large swath of the technology used today was developed by NASA and then turned over to the private corporations for them to profit. Socializing the costs. Privatizing the profits.
The Internet iself an argument. It was developed at DARPA with taxpayer money. Then turned over to the private corporations so that they could profit. Another case of socialism for the corporations.
Really. With all the tax breaks and ongoing lowering of the top tax bracked for corporate profit. Even as they offshore their legal entity to dodge taxes...
Even if the capital gains taxes were 90% like back in Eisenhower era and it was actually enforced, that still wouldn't justify handing over publicly funded research to private actors to profit. Publicly funded everything should be made publicly available and usable.
Same happened with all of those. The government created the tech, then paid private corporations to implement it, literally funding the everything from scratch while the private corps grabbed the profits.
> This sped up the process of having a viable, unified internet
That's false. Chile's Socialist president was at the point of launching their Internet in mid 70s. Which was ended by the US backed coup.