The U.S. is shifting from industry supporter to active owner by taking direct equity stakes in firms like Intel and U.S. Steel. This move blurs the lines between free markets and state control, risking a system where political connections, not performance, determine success.

The most effective government role in innovation is to act as a catalyst for high-risk, foundational R&D (like DARPA creating the internet). Once a technology is viable, the government should step aside to allow private sector competition (like SpaceX) to drive down costs and accelerate progress.

Treat government programs as experiments. Define success metrics upfront and set a firm deadline. If the program fails to achieve its stated goals by that date, it should be automatically disbanded rather than being given more funding. This enforces accountability.

CZI focuses on creating new tools for science, a 10-15 year process that's often underfunded. Instead of just giving grants, they build and operate their own institutes, physically co-locating scientists and engineers to accelerate breakthroughs in areas traditional funding misses.

Instead of sending aid, the US could profit from global conflicts by becoming the primary manufacturer and seller of weapons. This approach would re-industrialize the nation, create high-paying jobs in the military-industrial complex, and generate revenue without direct military intervention or sending cash abroad.

SoftBank selling its NVIDIA stake to fund OpenAI's data centers shows that the cost of AI infrastructure exceeds any single funding source. To pay for it, companies are creating a "Barbenheimer" mix of financing: selling public stock, raising private venture capital, securing government backing, and issuing long-term corporate debt.

China is explicitly subsidizing domestic semiconductor firms through its National Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund. This state-backed capital is the key driver behind its policy to achieve technological independence and replace foreign companies like NVIDIA.

To improve federal efficiency beyond partisan politics, Oliver Libby proposes creating a Chief Operating Officer for the U.S. government. Modeled after the long-term, cross-administration tenure of the Fed Chair, this role would focus on making government work better for citizens regardless of who is in power.

The current market boom, largely driven by AI enthusiasm, provides critical political cover for the Trump administration. An AI market downturn would severely weaken his political standing. This creates an incentive for the administration to take extraordinary measures, like using government funds to backstop private AI companies, to prevent a collapse.