What risk?
Methinks, you embrace a very peculiar concept of risk: when the risk is risky then it is quietly underwritten by the taxpayers, but when it ceases to be risky, then it becomes a PR gimmick that neo-classical suck-ups use to rationlize fortunes that parasitic business execs are raking in for farting in their leather covered chairs.
As to alternatives - each time a bunch of overpaid fat cats were unwilling to take risky risks (not those PR stunts invented by corporate hacks), the public sector stepped in. In fact, all major industrial developments were developed with the substantial public assistance and then given out for free to parasitic 'entrepreneurs.' So it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that public investment in- and ownership of- the means of production is a more lean way of doing development - it cuts the fat cats off.
So please do not give me that 'risk' bullshit, it stinks so badly that I have to open my window and risk catching a cold.
Regards
WS
>Later, on a different subject, you wrote:
>
>> It's not Utopia, but what's better?
>
>That's more like it.
>
>/jordan
>