History calling
(In response to Sean McCauley’s Nov. 1 column “Inventing history.”)
"Inventing history" was aptly titled. As a naive diatribe against government involvement in the economy, it substantially misrepresented historical fact.
Mr. McCauley uses the invention of the telephone as the centerpiece of his argument, noting that it was "free market competition that led to one of the most important inventions in history, not government."
As I recall, Samuel Morse's telegraph was a private invention, too. He gave a public demonstration in 1838 that attracted no commercial funding. It was not until five years later, when Congress funded an experimental telegraph line connecting Washington to Baltimore, that the practical uses of the device finally began to be realized.
Telegraphs are nothing without the infrastructure connecting them, and the construction of telegraph lines and networks was heavily subsidized. This public network infrastructure was adapted by commercial companies when telephony came into existence.
The steam engine may have been a private invention, but railways were heavily subsidized, as Vice President [Joe] Biden correctly noted. The light bulb may have been a private invention, but the electrical grid was highly subsidized.
There's a concept that keeps popping up here: infrastructure. Every time Mr. McCauley flushes the toilet, takes a shower, turns on a tap, turns on a light switch, plugs in an appliance, drives down a highway or a public road, crosses a river using a bridge, surfs the Internet, uses a telephone (landline or satellite), flies into or out of an airport, receives goods shipped through a port and transported by truck or canal, or puts gas in his car, he's using an infrastructure that owes its initial existence and/or continuation and smooth functioning, to government investment at the federal, state, or local level — often several layers together.
Emil Pulsifer
Reader
