Perhaps the worst aspect of the recent government bailouts of some of America’s biggest industries/welfare recipients with fat stacks of America’s taxed income--and boy are there some ethical, practical, and political “worst aspects” to choose from--is that doling out that much money to bail out failed and failing businesses has given license to everyone with a bad business plan to come, hat in hand, to Uncle Sugar asking for their very own personalized bailout plan. We can argue over the merits of the plans (not that I want to; I’m growing a bit sick of the whole thing), but I did have to highlight what I can’t help but think is a particular bit of lunacy in Matt Rosoff’s letter to Obama: Hey Obama: Reboot the music industry!

But what about the music industry? Yes, the big labels have earned a lot of scorn for their technophobia and suing their customers--a practice which finally ended last week--but music is a multibillion-dollar industry, responsible for employing hundreds of thousands of people, and in the midst of several years of steep sales declines. If we can bail out the U.S. auto industry, and spend at least a trillion dollars saving the global financial system and reinvesting in infrastructure, surely we could spare a dime for the music biz.

Serious economic thinkers might scoff at the comparisons--finance touches everybody, and our entire infrastructure has been designed around the automobile--but music’s more than a lark or a luxury. It’s a core part of the entertainment industry, which is one of the few areas in which the United States is still an exporter and world leader rather than an importer. Even The Economist has acknowledged the deep biological importance of music, leading off its annual double Christmas issue with an investigation of why we love music.

As with Friedman’s proposal to save America, my proposal to save music would start at the bottom--it’s not enough to give the big labels and radio stations a few hundred million dollars to stem their losses and encourage re-investment. Instead, we need to create a culture of music appreciation and nurture the talent that will lead to the next generation of musicians.

It doesn’t take a big-L Libertarian to balk at the idea that the music industry is in need of saving. There is simply no way to begin to make the argument that we are in danger of running out of musicians, that the entire music industry is near collapse, or that it is in our government’s interest to help usher in the next wave of pop music abominations. While I do fear for the future of classical music and opera in America, our government’s involvement isn’t likely to be meaningful or particularly positive. More likely, it would be inept, fill half-empty music halls with less than half-baked talents, cost outrageous sums of money that could have been better used if left in tax-payers wallets, and benefit nearly no one.

His idea of stipends for non-classical musicians is simply dumb. No matter how much it sets wannabe rock stars salivating at the thought of Uncle Sugar paying for their ramen, pot, and cable bill for a few years while they noodle away at a soon-to-be-failed career, what precisely is the payoff for the taxpayer? Where is the benefit to the people footing the bill? That Canada has a similar plan for “self-trained” musicians is hardly a big selling point; I haven’t noticed an emerging army of latter-day Canadian Elvii swarming through the world and hoovering up entertainment bucks from the international buying public in a way that might offset the government expenditures or contribute so significantly in any cultural way as to be an undeniable argument for the nurturing of hundreds or thousands of no-talent hacks who think that being a rock star is the best way in the world to get laid.

So let’s just say “no” to this poorly considered bailout (or “reboot) of the American music industry. There’s no need for it and, even if there were, it would hardly be the responsibility of our ever-growing government to provide the solution.

Luckily, this was an idea from someone who isn’t able to reach directly into my pocket and pull out the cash he needs to fund his dreams. But it’s representative of the direction people will be looking whenever any American industry hits a difficult patch from now on--and that’s going to be a hard habit to break. Once we citizens hand over a responsibility to the government (like our retirements, for instance), it becomes nearly impossible to ever take that responsibility back. Most people prefer the security of a bad investment backed by an agency they trust over the scary monsters of having to find a way to provide for themselves. Government tends to be big, dumb, inflexible, slow, cumbersome, and inefficient--just the kind of organization that can revitalize big, dumb, inflexible, slow, cumbersome, and inefficient industries like those that are now in trouble in the US.

Whatever answers there are that can solve the problems of America’s industries (whether it’s financial institutions, car manufacturers, or the music industry), the answers aren’t likely to come from Uncle Sugar or from money foolishly and inefficiently spent by a government agency.