Are you arguing that Alabama would be better off imitating California's policies? Has it occurred to you that California has some natural advantages, none of which are attributable to its governance, that don't generalize to other states?
The point of the article is that California's government is wasteful and the state horribly mismanaged. That people still find a way to make successful businesses here doesn't refute that point.
I've been using Straight Talk for a few months now with no regrets. The Nexus 4 is a good match for Straight Talk since LTE isn't available on the network (ST only provides HSPA+).
Note, the data plan isn't truly unlimited. AFAICT the company will simply terminate your account if you regularly exceed 2GB/month.
Taxing something in proportion to its external costs isn't picking a loser, it's levelling the playing field. OTOH, subsidizing particular manufacturers of solar panels or electric cars puts all other alternatives at a disadvantage.
BTW, you've failed to substantiate your claim that the market fails to pick efficient winners and losers. How would you even define "efficient" without appealing to the marketplace?
I disagree. If you don't like the external costs of a particular form of energy you can tax it directly. Taxing things you don't want is different than subsidizing particular companies offering particular alternatives (i.e. picking winners and losers) since it does not favor one solution over another. Government should act as referee, not venture capitalist.
One irony to Tesla is that while they do benefit from loan programs they would have been much better off if GM and Chrysler had been allowed to fail. As it is now Tesla has to compete with companies with strong government support.