First, America is still the greatest nation on earth. We've been falling behind for so long and yet we still manage to have the rest of the world jealous out of their minds and banging down our doors to live, work, and study here.
Second, the people and private industry spend money much more efficiently and effectively than government (that's why those deficit hawks weren't whining about the extension of the Bush tax rates).
Third, it's freedom that creates jobs. The more unnecessary regulation and stifling taxation that is placed upon individuals and businesses the harder it is for startups to thrive and businesses to grow and thus create jobs. I'm not revealing any secrets here.
Fourth, conservatives were just as angry and vocal about Republicans out of control spending as they are about Democrats out of control spending. The mistake was thinking the Democrats couldn't possibly outspend the Republicans.
Obama calls for a 'sputnik' moment one moment and casually speaks of this nation's best days being behind it while praising the ascendancy of China. This double-talking rhetorician couldn't run a lemonade stand much less lead a nation on scientific/economic challenge. After 2 years of saying one thing and doing the opposite, it's sad to see people (like George Leopold) holding out hope for this guy. Stockholm syndrome, perhaps?
The first thing that any big idea has to do is to survive the naysayers. Go to the moon? That's crazy talk! We can't afford that! Tablet computers? We tried that before and it failed! Why do you think it will work now? Getting past that step with anything significant is getting more difficult with risk aversion on the rise. The only good thing about the recession is that unemployed engineers have less to lose, so why not take a chance on that crazy idea?
Amen to that! But, we need a more holistic view of such projects. For example,
1) Improve transportation systems(road, rail, air, space) through use of intelligent systems with the goal of making the US the most efficient logistics hub in the world for the next 2 centuries.
2) Develop infrastructure for space transportation and exploration with the goal of opening new habitation and economic regions in outer space in the next 2 centuries.
Yes, its thinking in the LARGE. But, that's makes progress, revives manufacturing, and creates a thriving economy.
... and that's the kind of thinking that built the US. So, I am waiting to hear from the sources of public and private capital .....
Here's a crazy idea for the next big thing: build out the intelligent interstate transportation system with sensors and controls in very major highway. America built out the interstate road system in Eisenhower's presidency to move nuclear armament in case of war with another nuclear power. 'Smart' roads technology in those days wasn't very intelligent. Today we can put a lot of people to work designing the electronics, installing the gear in the roads and cars. Again it seems European and Asian city hubs seem to be ahead of American ingenuity. Let's get to work!
To fish in a water that fish stock/population was wiped out is not going to yield any catch. To retool the sources of power and transportation is akin to retool the fishing gear, it is not going to work. Fishes only go after a water with plenty of food and oxygen. Why not to give fishes tax incentives (or punitive disincentives for outsourcing)as a starter.
My wife is a psychologist (counselor) and frequently says: trust only the movement. What that statement basically says is that no matter what the patient says you have to follow his actions...in engineering we say talk is cheap... In finances they say "show me the money"...it all boils down to the same: action. I will see what's in the budget...Kris
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.