[forextradinginfo]

I thought this was an interesting op-ed in the New York Times. There's always a lot of negativity towards the NY Times, and I know that foreigners often are viewed as anti-american. I never understood how criticism of something automatically means that you are against it, btw. So I figured.. I'll post this article. I'm posting it completely, as you have to register to be able to read the article otherwise. And I leave you with the question: do you think the positive tone of the article is justified? Are there things the author is overlooking, ignoring, twisting? What is your view of the US, where it's now, where it's going?

The Nation of the Future

By DAVID BROOKS
Everywhere I go people tell me China and India are going to blow by us in the coming decades. They've got the hunger. They've got the people. They've got the future. We're a tired old power, destined to fade back to the second tier of nations, like Britain did in the 20th century.

This sentiment is everywhere — except in the evidence. The facts and figures tell a different story.

Has the United States lost its vitality? No. Americans remain the hardest working people on the face of the earth and the most productive. As William W. Lewis, the founding director of the McKinsey Global Institute, wrote, "The United States is the productivity leader in virtually every industry." And productivity rates are surging faster now than they did even in the 1990's.

Has the United States stopped investing in the future? No. The U.S. accounts for roughly 40 percent of the world's R. & D. spending. More money was invested in research and development in this country than in the other G-7 nations combined.

Is the United States becoming a less important player in the world economy? Not yet. In 1971, the U.S. economy accounted for 30.52 percent of the world's G.D.P. Since then, we've seen the rise of Japan, China, India and the Asian tigers. The U.S. now accounts for 30.74 percent of world G.D.P., a slightly higher figure.

What about the shortage of scientists and engineers? Vastly overblown. According to Duke School of Engineering researchers, the U.S. produces more engineers per capita than China or India. According to The Wall Street Journal, firms with engineering openings find themselves flooded with résumés. Unemployment rates for scientists and engineers are no lower than for other professions, and in some specialties, such as electrical engineering, they are notably higher.

Michael Teitelbaum of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation told The Wall Street Journal last November, "No one I know who has looked at the data with an open mind has been able to find any sign of a current shortage." The G.A.O., the RAND Corporation and many other researchers have picked apart the quickie studies that warn of a science and engineering gap. "We did not find evidence that such shortages have existed at least since 1990, nor that they are on the horizon," the RAND report concluded.

What about America's lamentable education system? Well, it's true we do a mediocre job of educating people from age 0 to 18, even though we spend by far more per pupil than any other nation on earth. But we do an outstanding job of training people from ages 18 to 65.

At least 22 out of the top 30 universities in the world are American. More foreign students come to American universities now than before 9/11.

More important, the American workplace is so competitive, companies are compelled to promote lifelong learning. A U.N. report this year ranked the U.S. third in the world in ease of doing business, after New Zealand and Singapore. The U.S. has the second most competitive economy on earth, after Finland, according the latest Global Competitiveness Report. As Michael Porter of Harvard told The National Journal, "The U.S. is second to none in terms of innovation and an innovative environment."

What about partisan gridlock and our dysfunctional political system? Well, entitlement debt remains the biggest threat to the country's well-being, but in one area vital to the country's future posterity, we have reached a beneficent consensus. American liberals have given up on industrial policy, and American conservatives now embrace an aggressive federal role for basic research.

Ford and G.M. totter and almost nobody suggests using public money to prop them up. On the other hand, President Bush, reputed to be hostile to science, has increased the federal scientific research budget by 50 percent since taking office, to $137 billion annually. Senators Lamar Alexander and Jeff Bingaman have proposed excellent legislation that would double the R. & D. tax credit and create a Darpa-style lab in the Department of Energy, devoting $9 billion for scientific research and education. That bill has 60 co-sponsors, 30 Democrats and 30 Republicans.

Recent polling suggests that people in Afghanistan and Iraq are more optimistic about their nations' futures than people in the United States. That's just crazy, even given our problems with health care, growing inequality and such. America's problem over the next 50 years will not be wrestling with decline. It will be helping the frustrated individuals and nations left so far behind.

[Borrinas]

Fascinating. Yes, I think the postitve tone is justified. But I cannot stress how important it is that America keeps the good work up, and that we reall need to improve education via real reform.

Ben

[AnypecekceS]

I'm surprised it came from the NYT, but this is the kind of "Glass half-full and rising" thinking that we need much more of. So much of what anyone hears is negative, but that's just the nature of the news beast. Good news rarely sells.

[unatkot]

It's true Spad, most news is bad. I like reading stuff like this, not sure I believe it though. I hope it's true! I don't see how we can compete in the long run though, if our jobs go to China and India and our national debt keeps growing this fast and our Muslim fellow humans on the earth keep hating us.

[AssinHT]

David Brooks is one of the most intelligent and thoughtful conservatives in the US; he often will present a balanced perspective that challenges the generally accepted wisdom on a subject. He does leave out some important factors, such as the enormous cost of education in the US, but he does not attempt to present every aspect of an issue. He often will write about the aspect of an argument that is not publicized. I read him regularly, and agree with him often. I think he is a fine writer.

Most of the criticism of the NYT is due to its extreme left-wing bias and the corresponding decline in standards and in quality. The NYT used to be one of the world's great newspapers. I grew up with it and still read it every day, but it is sad to see how far it has fallen. Brooks is one of the only conservative voices on the editorial page.

[casinobonyanes]

It's true Spad, most news is bad. I like reading stuff like this, not sure I believe it though. I hope it's true! I don't see how we can compete in the long run though, if our jobs go to China and India and our national debt keeps growing this fast and our Muslim fellow humans on the earth keep hating us.

The thing is, new jobs are being created to replace the old ones. We've gone from being agricultural, industrial, and now intellectual.

Ben

[Vomephems]

I only buy bits and pieces. For example, R&D money, I agree with. Education and the shortage of engineers is not urban legend. Our major universities are a HUGE source of R&D and a lot of that knowlege is being exported for free with foreign students who return to their homelands and leave the dregs for U.S. based companies. I agree with the 0-18 year old figures on our neglect in education. I've seen far better first hand overseas.

[buchmausar]

David Brooks is one of the most intelligent and thoughtful conservatives in the US; he often will present a balanced perspective that challenges the generally accepted wisdom on a subject. He does leave out some important factors, such as the enormous cost of education in the US, but he does not attempt to present every aspect of an issue. He often will write about the aspect of an argument that is not publicized. I read him regularly, and agree with him often. I think he is a fine writer.

Most of the criticism of the NYT is due to its extreme left-wing bias and the corresponding decline in standards and in quality. The NYT used to be one of the world's great newspapers. I grew up with it and still read it every day, but it is sad to see how far it has fallen. Brooks is one of the only conservative voices on the editorial page.

Hey Tim. That's all I really wanted to say.

[GypeFeeshyTes]

Hey Tim. That's all I really wanted to say.

Hey W.E.B. Good to see you.