Activism, Economics and Technology

An article in Investors' Business Daily yesterday (see here) brings to light the trade-offs between environmental activism (and really, government interference in the market) and economic reality. Everyone thinks that going green is a good thing but what happens when pursuing those policies mean that people lose their jobs, prices increase and/or competition is stifled? How about when politicians see these initiatives as a way to generate cash flow instead of sound economic and fiscal policy making? Can anyone really expect to have a sustainable business or develop new technologies that rely on inefficient uses of capital as the justification for a company's existence? Or how about taxes and fees that make the "next big thing" a non starter? Sure, government mandates (i.e. interference) can provide a spark for innovation but how can anyone raise capital for speculative technologies when concepts like risk, ROI and market driven capitalism have been distorted by non market forces? How does the consumer gain access to the solutions that best meet their needs from a cost or utility basis when policy makers want to appease special interest groups?