I know what I am talking about because I am involved very closely in the high tech engineering industry.
We can play this game of "you are wrong" endlessly because you will just keep repeating the same points again and again.
There are several private initiatives, right as I am writing this, which require billions in investment, and need 20-30 years on an average to bring the final product to the market. And, even then there is no guarantee of success.
You are repeating the same points again.
I can give you an endless list of examples. But, I will stick to the example of pharmaceuticals. The average time for a drug to be developed and brought to the market is over 20 years.
Our discussion was around nuclear and space technology. you have now changed topic and jumped to pharmacauticals
If you ever took a class in supply chain management, you will learn that the average time to bring a product or service to market could be over 5 years.
if you had ever taken a class in product design and development you would have understood by now what i am trying to convey. product development essentially starts with market survey (may not be needed in some cases), concept, design, prototype, manufacture, sale, maintenance and recycling.
Supply chain management mainly comes into picture once your design has been finalised. Of course you do start scouting for suppliers when you are designing a product. Again there can be two different effects of supply chain management, when you are sourcing components and when you are sellign your products.
It may take ages for a product to be brought into the market, it all depends on the complexity and technological advances.
Since we are talkign about nuclear power, do you know what the ITER initiative is? The aim of this initiative is to develop a nuclear plant around a fusion power reactor. This is entirely funded by governments. the reason, what i have already told you before. It is an unproven technololgy. Read about it here
http://www.iter.org/ and here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER if you want to know the work involved in developing a high end technology.
In the US, the entire US military is supplied by private manufactures and suppliers. Even though there is a lot of wastage by these manufacturers, they have produced the best defense systems man has ever imagined.
The Nuclear Power sector in the US is entirely supplied by private providers like GE.
Do not tell me that the private enterprises do not have the time and patience to invest in products and services.
If you have not understood what i am trying to convey i will repeat again. When a technology is in its infant stage, in majority of the cases the involvement of private sector is miniscule. As the technology evolves and a conpet is known to work, private companies move. This is when, the prices start coming down.
What is the point of investing in something that guarantees negative returns? If there is a potential investment that comes with a guarantee that the returns will be zero, a private enterprise will never go ahead with it, because it has an obligation towards its investors. While, a government will not think twice of taking up such initiatives because they do not have an obligation towards th tax payers. When was the last time, the govenment got our permission for spending our money?
DO some reading on the ITER initiative. Mind you it might now work again. For the last 30 years they have been saying that it will be up and running within the next 20 years time. These are the aeras where government's involvement can give a headway to emerging and unproven technology.
.
Look Buddy! you are under a very big misconception that governments convince private enterprises to invest.
Dude I am not your buddy.
Why are you so inconfident about Aishwarya. Heck! shes just one woman out of a few billion. And she realizes the fact. But, people like you put her on the clouds.
You did not understand what I was trying to convey.
I think this discussion is loosing focus. You can email me at
sd02@fsu.edu
Let us discuss everything in an open forum.
Trust me you are not proving any intellect by repeating the same things over and over again. Now its getting lugubrious and redundant.
What you said applies to you.
I have never defined anything in black and white.
What I am saying is that i agree free market and private enterprise are good, but there are areas where you need to explore and implement alternative approaches.
This discussion now reminds me of the monty python dead parrot sketch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSC6RayVSqI
You are not budging from the stand you have taken.
