Lol! Because you're claim is false. "Internet pioneers Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf (the latter often referred to as the "father of the Internet") in 2000 noted that "Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development" and that "No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution [to the Internet] over a longer period of time": Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development. No one person or even small group of persons exclusively "invented" the Internet. It is the result of many years of ongoing collaboration among people in government and the university community. But as the two people who designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Internet work, we would like to acknowledge VP Gore's contributions as a Congressman, Senator and as Vice President. No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time. Last year the Vice President made a straightforward statement on his role. He said: "During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet." We don't think, as some people have argued, that Gore intended to claim he "invented" the Internet. Moreover, there is no question in our minds that while serving as Senator, Gore's initiatives had a significant and beneficial effect on the still-evolving Internet. The fact of the matter is that Gore was talking about and promoting the Internet long before most people were listening. We feel it is timely to offer our perspective. As far back as the 1970s Congressman Gore promoted the idea of high speed telecommunications as an engine for both economic growth and the improvement of our educational system. He was the first elected official to grasp the potential of computer communications to have a broader impact than just improving the conduct of science and scholarship. Though easily forgotten, now, at the time this was an unproven and controversial concept. Our work on the Internet started in 1973 and was based on even earlier work that took place in the mid-late 1960s. But the Internet, as we know it today, was not deployed until 1983. When the Internet was still in the early stages of its deployment, Congressman Gore provided intellectual leadership by helping create the vision of the potential benefits of high speed computing and communication. As an example, he sponsored hearings on how advanced technologies might be put to use in areas like coordinating the response of government agencies to natural disasters and other crises. As a Senator in the 1980s Gore urged government agencies to consolidate what at the time were several dozen different and unconnected networks into an "Interagency Network." Working in a bi-partisan manner with officials in Ronald Reagan and George Bush's administrations, Gore secured the passage of the High Performance Computing and Communications Act in 1991. This "Gore Act" supported the National Research and Education Network (NREN) initiative that became one of the major vehicles for the spread of the Internet beyond the field of computer science. As Vice President Gore promoted building the Internet both up and out, as well as releasing the Internet from the control of the government agencies that spawned it. He served as the major administration proponent for continued investment in advanced computing and networking and private sector initiatives such as Net Day. He was and is a strong proponent of extending access to the network to schools and libraries. Today, approximately 95% of our nation's schools are on the Internet. Gore provided much-needed political support for the speedy privatization of the Internet when the time arrived for it to become a commercially-driven operation. There are many factors that have contributed to the Internet's rapid growth since the later 1980s, not the least of which has been political support for its privatization and continued support for research in advanced networking technology. No one in public life has been more intellectually engaged in helping to create the climate for a thriving Internet than the Vice President. Gore has been a clear champion of this effort, both in the councils of government and with the public at large. The Vice President deserves credit for his early recognition of the value of high speed computing and communication and for his long-term and consistent articulation of the potential value of the Internet to American citizens and industry and, indeed, to the rest of the world. It is certainly true that Gore was popularizing the term "information superhighway" in the early 1990s (although he did not, as is often claimed by others, coin the phrase himself) when few people outside academia or the computer/defense industries had heard of the Internet, and he sponsored legislation that included efforts to establish a national computing plan, to help link universities and libraries via a shared network, and to open the Internet to commercial traffic. In May 2005, the organizers of the Webby Awards for online achievements honored Al Gore with a lifetime achievement award for three decades of contributions to the Internet. "He is indeed due some thanks and consideration for his early contributions," said Vint Cerf. Read more at http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp#EMACCtMd3ZXKkMcx.99
innovation The Silent Partner Behind the Shale Energy Boom – Taxpayers By Andrew C. Revkin July 31, 2013 4:45 pm July 31, 2013 4:45 pm Since 2011, Alex Trembath, a tireless and talented energy analyst at nonprofit The Breakthrough Institute, has been digging into the complicated history of public and private initiatives and investments that unlocked the vast gas and oil resource contained in layers of shale rock. He charted evidence that investments in basic research, testing and development by the federal government lay behind the private-sector initiatives that have since fundamentally reshaped global forecasts for energy, economies and geopolitics. After I ran Daniel Yergin’s reflection on the pivotal role played in the shale boom by George P. Mitchell, the Texas energy entrepreneur and philanthropist who died last Friday, Trembath and the leaders of Breakthrough, Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus, sent a reaction focused on the silent partner in this energy revolution — the American taxpayer. Here’s their post: George Mitchell, Champion of Public-Private Innovation Alex Trembath, Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus George Mitchell, celebrated father of the American shale fracking revolution, died last week, leaving behind a strong reputation as innovator-philanthropist and the legacy of cheap and abundant energy in the United States. His vision and persistence are not to be understated. But some admirers, who paint George Mitchell as a lone innovator experimenting in his backyard, do him a disservice by ignoring the full history of the shale gas revolution. The richer and more complete story reveals that George Mitchell did not act alone, but rather was the beneficiary of decades of U.S. federal investments in fossil energy innovation. The U.S. federal government spent billions of dollars over three decades to make today’s shale gas revolution a reality. Our investigations and interviews at the Breakthrough Institute made this history abundantly clear, and the story has been underscored by independent reports by the American Energy Innovation Council, Resources for the Future, the New York Times, and the Associated Press. More >>
"Govt picking winners", eh? North Carolina has well over 50 tax credits targeted at industries. Everything from Tobacco farming to Optometrists. Tax Credits make sense when they stimulate economic activity so that the additional total state tax revenue taken in due to the credit is greater than the sum of the credit to the industry. This is normally only true for industries where the tax credit attracts people from out of state (the tobacco farmers & optometrists are not going anywhere else if they don't have a tax credit) -- normally only tourism, film/tv, and sports are the only industries which fit the definition of a viable industry-wide continuing state tax credit where the additional state tax revenue is greater than the tax credit. And I will note the issue with professional sports is that the demanded amounts are way to high to the point of being not economically sound to grant financial support to team owners (note amateur sports have the best payback).
This is the study that the state government legislative committee "approved for reference" after the NC revenue department presented it. Unless you have any other numbers, these are the accepted numbers by the North Carolina state government - feel free to go to Raleigh and present your numbers. Nobody in the legislature disagreed with the numbers in this report. The only thing I see that is absurd about the NC Film and Preservation Tax Credits is that they were cut for Religious Reasons not for creditable economic reasons. The Republicans cut the Preservation tax credit because the Christian religious fanatics demanded that it be cut after funds were used to restore a former Masonic temple in Wilmington into a theater and bar. The religious right demanded that this evil Masonic building be bulldozed instead. This led to the Christian zealots supporting Republican legislators who ran for state office committed to eliminating the historic preservation tax credit that has been used in 90 of North Carolina's 100 counties and has generated $1.6 billion of private investment since 1998. The Film tax credit was cut due to controversy over the "Hounddog" movie (which I outlined above). If these two tax credits were removed for sound economic reasons then I would support their elimination, but these are two of the few state tax credits that actually make economic sense for North Carolina. It is absurd that the Republican legislature removed these two tax credits due to the rantings of the religious nut cases who backed them.... and now only two months after their elimination the government clowns have discovered what a huge disaster elimination has caused and all the worst projections about mass layouts, all film production leaving that state, and local governments left with no means to renovate their downtowns have come true in an absurdly short period of time. So how dire is the situation... so dire that Republican Governor McCrory spent the entire month of January on the road across the state with his Secretary of Cultural Resources Susan Kluttz campaigning for the return of the preservation and film tax credits. The elimination of these two tax credits means a minimum loss of $100M in state tax revenue in 2015.
The stupidity in attacking university education is not confined to Kansas. Op-Ed in liberal rag Forbes notes that Scott Walker's attack on the University of Wisconsin system is "epically stupid". Scott Walker's Plans For University Of Wisconsin Are Epically Stupid http://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinomarah/2015/02/22/the-epic-stupidity-of-scott-walker/
"Tax Credits make sense when they stimulate economic activity so that the additional total state tax revenue taken in due to the credit is greater than the sum of the credit to the industry." Spin it any way you like. My point still stands and is valid. Please tell me HOW it's not. These policies favor one or more industries over others. That's not fair.
So you don't support policies that allow states to drive their own economic development. I see an issue when a state chooses one company over another by providing incentives and grants to one company (say Google) but not another (say Apple) - this is picking "winners" and "losers". Tax Credit policy that is common for every company in an industry is not selecting winners & losers, it is attracting the best economic development to a state when applied properly.
%%%%%%%%%%% LOL but good max points,Max. Like Pres Ronald Reagan[NRA LIFE member] said, higher taxes just causes a bigger deficit, because they spend more. Pres Reagan has an all time US electorial vote record win in 1984 ,that stands to this day in 2015.Thank you + NRA..........................................................................
Here is the author's connection to U of Wisconsion I sit on the Executive Advisory Board of the University of Wisconsin’s Grainger Center for Supply Chain Management within the Business School. I have lectured students at the University on a number of occasions and have a daughter in the freshman class right now. I love the University of Wisconsin and admire its breadth of thinking, depth of teaching and commitment to developing young people who can reason and lead.