… Mark Levinson’s (unedited) 2020 book is on pages 61-62; Out of the box:
of [cargo-shipping] The tenure began in April 1956 ideal-X, The converted tanker, which survived the war, was carrying fifty-eight aluminum containers on a ship from Newark, New Jersey to Houston, Texas. No one thought that this concept would turn the world economy upside down. It was conceived with an entirely different purpose: to shave a few dollars off the cost of trucking between North Carolina and New York.
DBXHow is this kind of entrepreneurial experimentation and discovery addressed by industrial policy? Not well, for sure.
First, such experimentation may be encouraged or discouraged so as not to disrupt the industrial-policy agenda. Let’s say it’s a new way to move trucks between North Carolina and New York. If those jobs at risk — blue-collar truck driving jobs, for example — are the kind that industry policies say should be protected, then this experiment in a new way of moving trucks from point A to point B should be smothered in its name. Maintaining industrial policy.
Second, the experiment itself was the result of entrepreneurial vigilance (especially the vigilance of Malcolm McLean). If industrial policy is in place, entrepreneurs are less likely to express such vigilance because any new production or distribution plans will be suppressed or approved by the industrial policy mandarin less than in the free market. A long and stressful review process.
Third, even if so This particular experiment was allowed, as per industry policy, although it certainly would not have sparked the container revolution, which would have greatly reduced the cost of shipping cargo by sea. In fact, for April 1956 Fit-X To spark the container revolution, a series of entrepreneurial breakthroughs and innovations had to be made. Of these discoveries and inventions, if the US had ever since enacted a policy worthy of the name “industrial policy,” it might have been discouraged or rejected.
……..
It cannot be said more often: entrepreneurship is inseparable from capitalism and is essential not only for economic growth, but also for repairing our current standard of living (if that were our goal). (When the realities on the ground change, innovation is necessary to deal with these changes. For example, if the source of raw materials dries up, innovation is necessary to find new sources or acceptable substitutes in sufficient quantities.) However, industrial policy. It is a must. Creativity is the enemy of creativity It is a must. It is not part of the industrial-policy scheme. The fact that industrial policies ignore this fact should shame them. Well, it doesn’t seem like he did.
