COMMENT OF THE DAY: BOOTSTRAPPING INNOVATION WHILE GIVING UT THE BOOT 
“It’s absolutely surreal to see these extraordinarily non-innovative approaches to becoming an innovation hub. Does anyone really think ‘being innovative’ is a status that one can inherit, or subcontract out, or buy like a product? . . . Also, I can’t help but wonder how much of this push for innovation was based on an expectation of that UT grad-student center being built. It would seem Houston’s last chance to be an actual center for innovation walked out the door along with that project.” [justaswell, commenting on Houston’s Innovation Problem; Sneak Peek at The Carter Penthouses] Conceptual rendering of cancelled UT Houston campus: UT System
Sign up for the Newsletter
Everyone is taking it so seriously. Jeez, it was just a real-estate flier by a rogue McRaven, or possibly a bargaining chip to use in this legislative session. There was never any plan. Let’s just move on.
Ummm, no. I disagree with the premise. Houston is already an innovation hub. Houston makes energy commodities and refined products…cheaper. (And it is a world-renowned center of cancer research.) That’s not as sexy as if it was known for producing luxury consumer iJewelry or monopolistically-priced pharmaceuticals or economy-destroying financial instruments, but the effects of cheap energy are far more impactful in real terms. These costs guide the course of all of human civilization and yield legacy infrastructure that enables and/or constrains the future, and yet the work that goes into that is mostly invisible and usually taken for granted — even by policymakers and lobbyists.
.
We need to ask about the UT-Houston campus whether the UT System was going to provide a service to the State of Texas (which is the relevant jurisdiction vis-a-vis any state public university system) that could not be provided without it, and do so without getting lost in football rivalries.
Why can’t UT “innovate” in Austin?
Why can’t UH “innovate” in Houston?