An "Abundance" of Hubris
Chapter 4: Invent
In March 2025, New York Times opinion columnist Ezra Klein and Atlantic staff writer Derek Thompson published their #1 NYT Bestseller Abundance. This essay is the fifth of seven that evaluates the book’s premises and prescriptions for facts, fallacies and falsehoods.
This installment will focus on Chapter Four – Invent. And a book titled Abundance could very well begin with a chapter about invention. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, to invent is: “to produce (something, such as a useful device or process) for the first time through the use of the imagination or of ingenious thinking and experiment.”
In all cases, an individual mind must come up with the goal and process, imagine the possibilities - and that does not happen without the freedom to think and act.
But Klein and Thompson do not acknowledge the fundamental premise of sound economic science: supply creates demand. But it does tell stories of people who were extraordinarily productive with political liberty. In particular, the biological research scientist who pioneered messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) for vaccine delivery, “I wanted more than anything else to understand how the world works.”
Much of the rest of the chapter is devoted to stories about the arbitrary complexity of government funding for scientific and high-tech research. It then demands more State funding with the arbitrary complexity miraculously solved. But with any goods or services subject to regulatory bureaucracy, there is a supply problem. And as before, I will divide my analysis into themes: Economics, History, Ethics and Reality.
Economics
It bears repeating, economics is about cause and effect. Production creates wealth. Wealth creates demand. Supply lowers prices. Markets create information. Markets reward efficiency. Efficiency creates profit. Profit attracts capital. Capital finds talent. Talent obeys reality. Accordingly, these five excerpts from chapter four are its useful ideas about economic consequences:
1. “It would be a kind of generational theft. When we claim the world cannot improve, we are stealing from the future something invaluable.” (This is true of nearly all government spending)
2. “America has allowed wait times for green cards to lengthen, while the number of applicants stuck in immigration backlogs has gotten so large.” (As economist Julian Simon proved, the only scarce resource is productive minds)
3. “Too many papers are essentially worthless . . . Scientists feel pressured to herd around the same few safe ideas.” (The natural consequence of political influence)
4. “Washington played almost no role in supporting innovation before the 1900s.” (Which explains the incredible scientific, economic, social and artistic progress of the previous few decades)
5. “The country emerged from World War II with a new way of thinking about science and innovation: this is a job for government.” (It really began with World War I)
But like the previous chapter, the strong ideas are contradicted with fallacies:
1. “Modern liberal politics is made possible by invention.” (Klein and Thompson are admitting their goal is to loot economic power to gain political power)
2. “The most important idea that emerged from the (Vannevar) Bush report was the primacy of basic research . . . without thought of practical ends.” (Without objective values and goals, malevolent forces will fill the void)
3. “Bush saw the future of science as a kind of hub and spoke system, with the federal government directing funds to the most deserving university researchers.” (It is impossible for any bureaucrat or committee to make this judgment)
4. “To make these things possible and useful in our lifetime requires a political movement that takes invention more seriously.” (Government is force, politics is pressure groups, and creative minds suffer in that milieu)
5. “Government-funded research and development have been responsible for 25 percent of productivity growth in the US since the end of World War II.” (That massive confiscation of wealth would have been geometrically more productive in the hands of those who earned it)
So, how does Abundance solve the contradictions in the list above? It’s a clever trick. First, explain that its different this time, “The unsolved problems are typically harder than the solved ones.” No kidding. Solved problems always seem easy. Solved problems always lead to new opportunities. And with new knowledge, the next set of challenges are not more difficult. It just seems like it.
Second, “If keeping up the pace of scientific progress demands more resources, it points to a clear solution: recruit more scientists and spend more money.” But who decides “the pace of progress?” Who is the rightful owner of “more resources?” Who “recruits more scientists?” To Klein and Thompson, it is “we.”
History
One of the top historical references in this chapter is the creation of the Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSDR) by President Roosevelt. The catalysts were German aggression in 1940 and the persuasive skills of computer engineering pioneer Vannevar Bush. Clearly, persuasion is superior to force and government must act to defend liberty from imminent threat.
At the same time, brilliant people can be convinced to sacrifice themselves (altruism) to totalitarian rule if they perceive a moral justification (the greater good). The German socialists and Soviet socialists were really good at this - until they weren’t. Their moral code was collectivism, and their knowledge system was faith in the omniscient State.
While both models are the practical application of “the primacy of basic research without thought of practical ends,” sometimes the best way to learn the causes and consequences of government science is through literature.
Most compelling is Vasily Grossman’s characterization of Viktor Pavlovich Shtrum in his epic novel from 1960, Life and Fate. Grossman was a journalist at the battle for Stalingrad in the early 1940s. And more philosophical is Ayn Rand’s State Science Institute and its lead character, Dr. Stadler, from her epic novel from 1957, Atlas Shrugged.
Rand was a schoolgirl in Stalingrad during the Bolshevik Revolution and both authors were born Russian Jews turned brilliant writers. Accordingly, their credibility is infinitely greater than the New York Times that promoted Stalinism to their American readers. For a literary account in the form of a documentary movie, see Mr. Jones.
Ethics
With regard to medical research, the subject of time and money wasted on bureaucratic paperwork is rightfully centered on the massive growth of the budget and power of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). However, the cause of this is ignored by Klein and Thompson. They don’t know. Throughout the book they evade the foundational principles for a prosperous and tolerant society.
In this case, Abundance conflates economic power and political power. To be clear, economic power rests with the individual who uses his mind and body to create things of value. Through voluntary agreement, that energy can be hired by a larger entity. And in all cases, wealth is created by the private sector. That includes wealth that is created by government institutions because they need to confiscate wealth to fund their operations in the first place.
That is the nature of the individual and their relationship with the State. On the other hand, political power is either delegated to protect rights (retaliatory force) and enforce contracts or it is coerced by democratic, socialist, or anarchist forces.
Reality
The best thing about chapter 4 is that it makes an excellent case for avoiding its author’s recommended solutions for the housing, high tech and medical research supply problems.
1. “Kariko and Weissman’s work caught the attention of a brash group of postdoctoral researchers, professors, and venture capitalists.”
2. “Program managers with vision, creativity, and independence are the most important part.”
3. “The very thing that drives its progress: the art of taking bold risks.”
4. Turning scientists into clerks would cost the nation millions of dollars in lost time from research.”
5. “Applying for grants has put a premium on status seeking rather than pure science.”
6. The American innovation system would benefit from trusting individuals more and bureaucracies less.”
7. “Natural for them to consider the commercial potential of their work, which might explain how they created so many useful products.
But to fully understand the cognitive dissonance Abundance has with its individualist premises and Statist proposals, look no further than here: “the NIH makes it hard for outside researchers to compare proposals that it funds against the ones it rejects.”
First, authoritarians do not submit themselves to second-guessing. Second, it is impossible to know what is rejected because many great ideas are not subjected to labor intensive grant writing and the subjective approval process. Third, comparisons of all proposals require more layers of bureaucracy with no benefit except to the committee members who have no skin in the game.
In other words, the “knowledge problem” identified by economist Friedrich Hayek in 1945, “the knowledge of the circumstances of which we must make use never exists in concentrated or integrated form but solely as the dispersed bits of incomplete and frequently contradictory knowledge which all the separate individuals possess.”
And where is highly dispersed knowledge most effectively processed and resources most efficiently allocated? Venture capitalists and the price mechanism free markets, as Hayek attests: “the “economic calculus” proper helps us, at least by analogy, to see how this problem can be solved, and in fact is being solved, by the price system. To learn more, please click The Moneyball Method.