> However, there are certainly projects out there with high multiplier affects. For instance, in PA the "Ben Franklin Partnership", who invest in early stage startups, claims a 5x multiplier of economic value over its funding. This is the type of infrastructure spending I could get behind.
This is one of those cases where people like to take credit for economic multiplication that would have happened anyway (the biggest culprit of this is NASA). It doesn't take a government project to fund early stage startups. How many would have been successful anyway? How many were not successful, because they stayed in Pennsylvania, instead of moving elsewhere?
A very valid point! No one can deny that all organizations can claim things like this. There are good and bad parts of them, such as everything in Pittsburgh looking for their seal of approval first - which could lead to a herd mentality for or against a company.
However - I personally know several companies that wouldn't have started sans their investment and efforts. There is a certain "activation energy" with companies that orgs like YC and Ben Franklin (Innovation Works / AlphaLab locally) provide for. This was true for my company.
The "say in PA" part of the program I agree is a bad thing. They should force PA to work to retain companies - not using golden handcuffs... However, all in all, if I was going to spend tax money - I'd rather put it there than into potholes.
This is one of those cases where people like to take credit for economic multiplication that would have happened anyway (the biggest culprit of this is NASA). It doesn't take a government project to fund early stage startups. How many would have been successful anyway? How many were not successful, because they stayed in Pennsylvania, instead of moving elsewhere?