The scary thing about homeland security

Within the USG, some have the responsibility for detection of nukes and chem/bio at home, others for away, still others for bits and pieces in the chain, and some bits of the chain not really covered whatsoever.

With all that, no one in our universe can really answer the question, "Okay, now that we found it, what do we do next?"

This is why Steve DeAngelis and I feel so strongly about our pilot effort on ResilienceNet in the port of Philadelphia. Until some entity forces the issue, the government, left to its own devices, will not adequately answer this crucial question.

And yes, today I'm at Oak Ridge, a national lab that worries about this sort of thing and seeks aggressively to work the issue. Bit of a "herding the cats" problem, but one that must be surmounted through public-private partnerships.

Why?

This country wasn't built by the government. It was built by American business. The government grew in response.

Comments

[zenpundit]

"This country wasn't built by the government. It was built by American business. The government grew in response."

This accounts for some of the cultural differences between Europe and even Canada and the United States ( to say nothing of much of the rest of the world). Much of continental industry, especially in Germany and France, were paternalistic enterprises of the state subsidizing, regulating and protecting favored cartels.

The easy American tolerance for the dynamism of creative destruction found in emerging industries is something outside of the EU comfort zone (except in Britain, Ireland and maybe the Czech Republic)

[Christopher Thompson]

I think it is one thing to say a slogan like business built America and the government is a response -- and it is a very different thing discuss the reality. Government creates a foundation on which business can function. It is easy to brand "government" as just bureaucrats and conveniently forget the courts, military, the R&D, educational system, infrastructure, etc. that government (meaning the People's investment) provides and pays for.

Much of continental industry, especially in Germany and France, were paternalistic enterprises of the state subsidizing, regulating and protecting favored cartels.

That sound a little like the US today.

[zenpundit]

"That sound a little like the US today. "

Yes - where the industries are rich and influential oligopolies that employ an s-load of...voters. That's been the case for the better part of the century.

But in emerging fields, we still allow that valuable, free-for-all, cowboy capitalism period until a handul of big players come to maturity. Europe, with it's layers of regs and labor market rigidities, often doesn't have the environment to encourage venture capital.

[Tom Barnett]

I like that description, Zenpundit, because there I think you locate a strange symmetry that we have with China that I think is wholly unappreciated.

You read "Good Capitalism, Bad Capitalism" and you'll see what I mean.

[zenpundit]

Thanks Tom !

Yeah, you're right. China is this weird economic combination of 1880'sAmerica ( Laissez-Faire) and 1880's Wilhelmine Germany ( state subsidized industrialization)