RSS

August 1, 2009

Hennadiy A. Kovalenko, Ministry of Defence of Ukraine, Bronze Contributor (23)

I can agree with Mr. Baldwin in his assessment of the Europe. The nations from the Europe have different perceptions and different attitudes towards main current threats and challenges.

It is a dangerous situation in particular concerning security and defence issues.

For the Europeans the US can be a good example of consolidation. At the same time European countries can provide America with experience of tolerance.

Nevertheless, the Europeans and the Americans are not much different as somebody wants to present.

August 2, 2009

Jeff Hathor

I have to agree with both Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Kovalenko.
Thank you Mr. Baldwin it is nice to see some comparative percentages. There are many similarities in the way the USA and Europe progress.

Security
As the trend has shifted to more peace keeping operations in order to prevent both civil wars and all out global wars, because these seem to escalate beyond the control and predictions of all participants. Europe has adjusted by developing light fast fighting forces and a wave of new negotiation and political intervention tactics. The USA has focused on the projection of heavy forces with full combat suppressive capability to force a halt to hostilities. It also has multiple rapid deployment light infantry forces for both quick initial response and quick reinforcements.

Economics
Europe has tended towards increased levels of education to support its ongoing research which has always kept Europe providing the world with advancing technologies. On the one hand this makes Europe appear to be kind of way out there wacky theorists, then on the other hand you have learned cooperation like Holland when a farmers land gets flooded, he cannot just pump the water to the next farm over. The farmers must work together on both irrigation and drainage. Knowledge is powerful when shared and the group gets stronger.
The USA has tended toward competition between companies and even between employees at the same corporation. Most of the time (good economic times) employees work very well together. There are a few times however (bad economic times) the fear of losing one’s own job leads to this mind set: Knowledge is powerful when kept to oneself, because if you train your teammate to be better than you, he will get your job and you will get laid off.
The USA is working on far out theories to be in league with Europe. Scientific America has shown articles about Quantum computers and Superconducting power lines to support the increased demand for electricity to power the electronics revolution still in progress. However our stock market and banking system do not reward such long term projects. These projects are necessary and unfortunately do not create the production jobs as fast as taking one small advancing step at a time.

Education
Former Vice President Chaney had some hush hush meetings with USA corporate CEO’s to inquire what kind of government support corporations needed to succeed in the future. The top item was a restructuring of public schools to prepare children for technology jobs. The problem seems to be that, each and every job is becoming very unique and no degree trains us for the multitasking environment which requires general computing skills, some programming, machine operation, advanced communication (languages, video conferencing, power point presentations).
The challenge is to add a few categories to our teaching without giving up the basics. Maybe we can weave the new and the old together. Example: Part of math class is to put some math formulas into an excel spreadsheet. Part of speech class is learning to prepare and give a power point presentation. Electronics class could include disassembling and reassembling some old computers cleaned up and donated by a recycling plant in exchange for a tax write-off.

Europe
Europe clearly advances its education system periodically with universities and I believe normally keeps up with Industry needs. In the last year or two some Europe studies indicate some areas only have about 80% workers with the skill level needed for high technology jobs.
British professor Sir Ken Robinson is working very hard to promote improving education for children in the world. Specifically to improve creativity. Here is the short version of his lecture 8 minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17Ye368aQVk

Naturalist
We all seem to have professors who love the study of nature.
German Alexander von Humboldt Botanical geography, biogeography, George Forster naturalist, biologist.
French Aimé Bonpland botanist, Jean Lamarck naturalist.
British Charles Darwin naturalist
Recently some important nature discoveries are being made in both Europe and the USA.

German Professor Bert Hölldobler and USA Professor Edward Wilson wrote a book called The Super-Organism. Studying ants who have been around for nearly 160 million years has brought new understanding of how super organisms work. Please see the video lecture. It is quite amazing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yf_ijizSTAE

British BBC wildlife video shows amphibious ants. This is very advanced. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A042J0IDQK4

French and Swedish researchers have been filming in the south of France many varieties of insects. They released a video called Microcosmos. Here is a six minute preview (the first minute is just plants and music, you can skip forward) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BseGLUTkD8&feature=related

In a way the USA is the junior to Europe when considering time as a country evolving forward as a civilization. Much of our foundation originated from Europe, so of course we spring forward from that foundation. Being so close to our European brothers and sisters sometimes gets us into some family like squabbles, resembling a high school popularity contest. In the end we work hard to get along and share with each other. Here’s to friendship.

Jeff Hathor
Evolution Theorist
www.engfuture.com

August 2, 2009

Member deleted

From India, the US is almost like Europe. Crime-prostitution-terrorist networks account for much of European presence in India as do radical left insurgent outfits that account for US presences - though again largely via religious channels. Their favoured target audience (must be an inspiration from Pakistan) are the universities and those amongst the soft targets for the largesse that comes from mafiosi and flesh trade.

As democracies and as community-of-power that then also describe such nomenclatures into masses of homo sapiens and make things more real than the reified state - well, such contradictions and one thinks if Prof. Samuel P. Huntington was not being too ambitious when he also speaks of the "western civilization". Obviously from China to Japan to the Indian sub-continent and the Arabian peninsula - they use different dictionaries. Since the term civilization connotes many a things and in very positive senses.

www.johnlately.webs.com leads to a blog section that may prove useful since civilizations endure - even if segements within the Indian state (police-military rots) may agree with the notion of a Clash of civilization engineered by three prostitutes. One Indian. One French. One Ukrainian and the devastation of a Jesuit because the nun was watching a Hindu innocent.

August 2, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

Professor Baldwin is correct. Contrary the perception which has been cultivated over much of Europe, the US is in many ways a 'middle of the pack' welfare society by European norms. I use 'welfare society' as opposed to 'welfare state' deliberately, as the US tends to solve many of it's welfare problems in a somewhat different manner and using different structures than the approach commonly followed in Europe, but solutions are there.

Not all of those solutions work as well as they might. I think the US has something to learn from the French or the Germans in structuring the health system, to give an example. Then again, I think the US has a distinctly better approach to some problems than most European countries do. Though in some of these cases the problems the US faces are much different from those facing Europe, so it may be more accurate to claim that some of the US structures do a better job solving American problems than jerry-rigged European solutions would do.

Note that this is nothing new. Obama has not waved a magic wand and caused a welfare state to appear - it has been there for a very long time.

Professor Baldwin fails to mention one enormous difference between most of Europe and the US - the US is considerably younger than Europe is, and the US population is set to continue rising for the forseeable future. Given current demographic trends the population of most European countries is projected to drop in the medium to long future in numbers ranging from somewhat (France, UK) to a considerable amount (Italy, Germany).

We have seen this pattern with Japan. A country with few children will tend to appear as an economic world-beater for a very long time. In such countries can exits a favorable proportion of producers to dependents. Children are almost pure dependents in any rich society, indeed one point where a country may be judged as growing rich is when child labor is outlawed, which occurs when a society finds better returns from putting the children through long schooling rather than using them as workers.

So countries which produce relatively more children tend to lag others which are not, in the short term. Countries with younger demographics will tend to consume more than middle-aged or aging countries, in the short term. In the long term, the 'middle-age' countries tend to produce a lot of pensioners, while the younger countries 'grow up' as their children grow into their maturity.

August 3, 2009

Julia Follick, Georgetown University, Gold Contributor (129)

Just as you can't generalize about all of Europe having the same welfare state policies, neither can you generalize about all of America having the same policies. Perhaps the differences are smaller, but quite a few of these important issues are decided at the state level, leading to some very different outcomes.

For an interesting take on the varying degrees of welfare state politics in different US states, and the varying degrees of success of these policies, see Ross Douthat's op-ed in the NYT this weekend:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/03/opinion/03douthat.html?ref=opinion

And while I agree with Mr. Stadler that the change under Obama is not radical or akin to waving a magic wand, especially not in the first 7 months, I do think he has done a significant amount to change the agenda, change the way these issues are discussed, and, most importantly, change the boundaries for when the federal government can get involved. Unless the federal bailout and the stimulus package are undeniably proven to be bad policy, I think we'll be seeing the effects of this increased government activism on our society for a long time even after Obama leaves office.

August 3, 2009

Benjamin Schuman-Stoler, George Washington University, Moment Magazine, (8)

While Mr. Baldwin may have a provocative and seemingly fitting analysis, we would do well to look a bit below the surface before agreeing with him wholeheartedly.

Sure, the Obama revolution is changing the landscape of American society from above (via taxes on the upper classes) and below (via audacious health care reform). But how much has America changed fundamentally? Despite what the far right talking heads would have us believe, the US is not becoming socialist. Rather, the ways in which Obama's administration has sought to change the entrenched problems in US society are simply necessary improvements. These changes--especially in the realms of health care and environmentalism--have been long due.

In other words, Obama's administration looks like Europe at the moment because Europe has long had better social policies; the US simply upgraded. But to say that that signals a Europeanization of the US is heavy handed. Even with the current (and probably temporary) market caution, there is no indication that Americans will forfeit their traditional economic ethos.

I would argue that the US, at least in its domestic policies of late (and indeed perhaps in foreign policy as well), has not Europeanized--it has simply liberalized.

August 3, 2009

Wyatt Paul Lane, University of New Mexico, Silver Contributor (29)

"Europe has long had better social policies; the US simply upgraded"

I agree with this characterization of the current changes in the US, though it oversimplifies the situation.

Having been afforded the opportunity--at the end of the Second World War, and then again in the 90s--Europe quickly took advantage of the political landscape in order to implement many of the good ideas that we see in action in Europe today. I would point to educational initiatives like Erasmus which has enriched the lives of millions of students. The only educational legislation in the US with a household name in recent years was No Child Left Behind: a failure in many regards.

Even with democratic control in congress and the presidency, the far right in the US is so hostile to change that many of Obama's plans may go unfulfilled. It is not at all a done deal. The cry of socialism is so prevalent that the lawmakers with even the slightest fear of losing their seat will likely dissent. I could easily see the latest push for health care reform dying just as it did under Clinton in 1994.

The US already boasts a substantial "welfare society" as Mr. Stadler coined. The major differences I see in social policy is the implementation of best practices in a somewhat rapid fashion. For better or worse, systems such as the NHS in Britain have been around for decades, whereas in the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world in 2009 we continue to debate whether or not some form of universal health care should be afforded the citizens of the US. To hear many of our distinguished pundits, our very freedom is at stake!

I see a great many differences between America and Europe, though I believe at the most rudimentary level these two peoples share a great many cultural and political traits--no surprise given the history of the European and North American continents. It is my personal belief that in terms of social policy, the US would do well to take some cues from Europe. As Mr. Stadler said, the US is quite young...we could benefit greatly from the wisdom of a continent that has experienced as much turmoil, deprivation, rebirth and prosperity, as has been cycling through Europe for centuries.

August 4, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

Ms Follick,

I don't disagree that the changes made by Obama will have lasting effects, I do believe that he was elected because of some long-term shifts in the US economy and political landscape, and that the changes he will bring will be mostly evolutionary, not revolutionary.

The reason why the GOP gained power is because they pitched themselves as the party of Main Street. At a time when the Democrats seemed to b confining themselves to appealing to Ann Arbor and Watts, Reagan positioned himself as the President for those who worked hard and took riskswith their own money.

That position deteriorated under Bush, partly because of some Bush policies, but also because of shifts in the world economy. Many see the 2008 election as a product of Iraq and the banking meltdown, but I think the seeds of change were being sown much earlier. From my personal POV we have been in a depression or recession since 2001. Perhaps a slight recovery circa 2005-2006, but not a healthy recovery. I think many American workers were in a similar position with incomes well down from 2000 levels most of the decade, or at best stagnant.

The 2008 crash exacerbated the trend. Are Americans more open to an expansion of the welfare state? Without a doubt, and for good reason. Life looks much different when you're income is stagnating or dropping, and your job is at risk. That is what I've been living with for 8 years now. If I lived in the US my health insurance would be a risk all the time. I live in the UK, so I have the NHS. It's not free (pay for it in taxes), but it's there whether I am working or not. I'm making it, for now, largely by dint of efforts at work and learning at home which do not stop at 5 PM. It's a case of get better, quickly, or be shown the door. Jobs go to India at at the drop of a hat. The only ones who have materially benefitted from globalisation are Chinese, Indians. and Bankers. The latter take risks - but with other people's money, other people's livelihoods.

That is why the political shift enabling a shift to the welfare state. If it works it will be around for a long time. If not? The Obama may end up looking like Jimmy Carter. I think he'll do better than that, but I could easily see the GOP begin to make inroads into Congress as soon as next year, with a takeover in 2014. If the Obama program doesn't work, that is.

Finally, what about Obama's 'green' initiatives? Similar comments, they will stick if they work. Not in terms of reducing carbon dioxide, but in terms of creating enough good, lucrative jobs for the middle & working classes. If Obama can improve the conditions of those who work for a living in the US, the dems could be in power for a generation. And they will have earned that, if they can do that.

If they don't? Pfffffhitttttt. GOP congress in 2014, GOP in the WH in 2016.....

August 4, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

Mr Schuman-Stoler,

"because Europe has long had better social policies;"

What are 'better' social policies? A nation's social policies are informed by it's pocketbooks and it's values, should it be otherwise? In the US the primary focus is on what is good for people who work for a living. Private sector over government work, government work over handouts to the able-bodied and minded. Those are the core US values, and the reason why FDR succeeded is because the New Deal should actually have been titled "A New Deal for American Workers and Retired".

If Obama can do something like that the Demos need not fear for their electoral future. If all he can do is make AFDC more generous and blow up the national debt, his party will pay a price, sooner rather than later I think.

"Even with the current (and probably temporary) market caution, there is no indication that Americans will forfeit their traditional economic ethos."

That is true. Of course I would contend that electing a Democratic Congress in 2006/2008 and electing Obama President last year is fully in line with America's true core principles, which are not meant to allow feckless bankers to get rich by beggaring Main Street.

August 4, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

"from Europe. As Mr. Stadler said, the US is quite young...we could benefit greatly from the wisdom of a continent that has experienced as much turmoil, deprivation, rebirth and prosperity, as has been cycling through Europe for centuries."

Nonsense, most of this I fear. The US is the 'oldest' nation in a very real sense. Old enough to understand that you can't secure your future by aborting the grandchildren. Unlike most of Europe, Japan, and even China. Which is the reason the US is relatively young - because it hasn't reprised the Fall of the Roman Empire as most Europeans have been doing. Europeans may be nominally wiser in certain respects. But they have missed the big fundamental question, that of whom will inherit. The flow of capital generation-wise is from the old to the young. When there are few young, and many of them face restricted opportunities? Well then you must lend to strangers, young strangers. In the US, Eastern Europe, etc.

China is a different case, much of China's savings are in the hands of the government or stae-related enterprises or 'quasi-private enterprises'. China's competitive advantage has been low-cost labor, and you only keep that kind of advantage by continuing to keep the working class poor. Unfortunately that only cn work for a time. WHat happens oif the West runs out of consumers? Scratch that, and say 'solvent consumers'?

What happens is a fiscal panic, exacerbated by the fact that low wages in India and China mean lower wages in the Western consuming markets. Lower pay. lower consumption. The unemployed consume still less, and eventually events catch up....

August 4, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

Dear Atlantic-Community.org Editors,

If the stereotypes persist, it is because they do capture in some aspects genuine differences in society and politics. Those differences are rooted not only in history: political cultures matter. Where there were opportunities to develop together, these were put in place with the European Recovery Program in the late 1940s and 1950s. By the 1960s, Europe's main economies were in a recovery that was to lead to the economic strength of the European Community. America was getting bogged down in Vietnam. The trajectories of the two continents headed in different directions post-1965 with America involved more in Third World interventions, proxy or otherwise, which had genuine domestic, and international, consequences over time. The US political culture has evolved along the lines of the "military-industrial-congressional" complex Eisenhower foresaw. This is not likely to change any time soon. Nor is the capacity of a wide segment of the American consumer population to overspend on the plastic. These two transformations since the 1960s are significant in terms of the political choices the leadership now faces. Europe has its own difficulties. Yet, the Union's system can run on autopilot with the bureaucracy in place. Its policies, candidly, are largely reactive to events in the world. The challenge for Europe is largely one of cultural assimilation, which is an area where the US has a comparative advantage. America has been relatively successful integrating the talents of those from elsewhere at all levels, not just the elite. This is still a source of the country's strength and development even with weaknesses in the education system that must be addressed. The fact that Donald pointed to, Europe's aging population, is a clear point of vulnerability. This is also true in a country of strategic importance knocking at the door: Turkey. By 2023, Turkey will face the same difficulties as Europe in terms of policy choices given an aging population. Socially, and politically, this is the crux of the difficulty, and the difference, between Europe and America.

Sincerely, Colette Mazzucelli

August 4, 2009

Wyatt Paul Lane, University of New Mexico, Silver Contributor (29)

"But they have missed the big fundamental question, that of whom will inherit."

Welcome to the post-Caucasian world. It'd be the same in the US if immigrant populations weren't maintaining our birth rate.

A decline in birth rate is congruent with level of development and quality of life--or, in the case of China, a combination of that and policy aimed at curbing an out of control population. Urbanization, professionalization, they all play a role in demographics of course, as does abortion.

"The US is the 'oldest' nation in a very real sense."

" Which is the reason the US is relatively young"

Okay, I assume here you are saying historically old, demographically young? That's true. What I simply meant by my statement, is that historically speaking, the experience of the 20th century in combination with a long and arduous journey of prior centuries, to include everything from inquisition and imperialism, Renaissance to Enlightenment, provides a certain sagacity, or at the least, some insight into the trajectory of human development, that could be useful. But I have no doubt that in areas such as health and education, the US will continue to learn the hard way.

August 4, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

Colette, I agree with most of that. Some comments:

"military-industrial-congressional" complex Eisenhower foresaw. This is not likely to change any time soon."

Not sure I agree with this, although I I think the changes will be relatively evolutionary, not a compete turning away. Let's not forget that something like 40-50% of the US electorate are 'conservatives' of some variety, and that this segment of the populace tends to be underreported and poorly understood. Not only in Europe, but even across wide swaths of 'Blue' America itself, like New York City. This has led to surprises before and will do so again. The 'Bush could not have won because everyone I know voted for Gore/Kerry' effect.

I would say that the military-industrial complex is likely to change when it no longer shows positive returns. Speaking of such returns, what kind of positive return has US participation in NATO and in the Atlantic 'dialog' produced (say) these past 30 years? For the US, I mean? Just a thought.....

"Nor is the capacity of a wide segment of the American consumer population to overspend on the plastic."

WIllingness, perhaps. I was not much of a spender even before 2007, and now much less so. I had a very bad patch beginning last year and will be doing little discretionary spending for the forseeable future. I have debts to retire & savings to rebuild, and the point at which I will feel safe enough to spend more freely has gone up several multiples. So it will be a while until I pull out the plastic - if I ever do. Hard to forsee something coming many years in the future.

The US savings rate has gone over 5% for the first time in year. Some analysts forecast it going over 10% as debts are retired. Doubt if the plastic will be popular for a while.....

"This is still a source of the country's strength and development even with weaknesses in the education system that must be addressed."

Many of these problems are virtually impossible to address directly. You are more familiar than I with the ongoing problems the NYC public schools have had for decades, I am sure. As well as the successes. NYPS is an example of both the very best of US public schooling - and the very worst. The traditional answer is to provide affordable and good quality college education, Hofstra perhaps being an example of this. The vast spread of the unoiversity sector in the US is simply not seen in Europe. Some European schools are as good as or better than anything in the US (Oxbridge and les Polytechniques spring to mind). But the higher eduction market is not nearly as segmented in Europe as in the US. I live within easy wlking distance of a majoe engineering university in the UK, a 'redbrick', and was stunned to see how little adult education, night school, and continuing education provision they have. Basically none, they leave that to the local CC and the Open U. Amazing.

"By 2023, Turkey will face the same difficulties as Europe in terms of policy choices given an aging population. Socially, and politically, this is the crux of the difficulty, and the difference, between Europe and America."

Not only Turkey. Russia also. In fact, off the top of my head I can identify precisely two major economic player nations which are reproducing themselves or better, the US and India. Perhaps Canada. I can't think of any others.

August 4, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

"It'd be the same in the US if immigrant populations weren't maintaining our birth rate."

As it ever was. The immigrant Irish had big families, the (Boston) Brahmins did not. Eventually the pronegy of Joseph Kennedy overcame those of Cabot Lodge. But by assimilating and beating the codfish-eaters at their own game. We're already seeing Asians and Indians doing the same thing, and I'm not betting against native-born Latinos and Blacks either.

"A decline in birth rate is congruent with level of development and quality of life--or, in the case of China, a combination of that and policy aimed at curbing an out of control population. "

Perhaps. But in Germany certain cities are deliberately destroying certain neighborhoods. In Detroit als, or so I have heard.

"Urbanization, professionalization, they all play a role in demographics of course, as does abortion."

The working-poor have traditionally been the font of national ferment and growth, but in Europe they are increasingly hard to see. The non-working poor are fundamentally disconnected with the society - they have little hope, little deep connection with the nation in which they live & which pays for their support. I think it will come to a bad end.

As for 'abortion' well - the US has it too. But what I'm really referring to is the failing will to reproduce your numbers. Whether the cause be abortion, 'alternate' lifestyles, birth control, or delaying the childbirth into the infertile years matters rather less than the fact that it happens.

August 7, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

Greetings Donald,

Thank you for these thoughtful comments. I will respond to each in turn.

"I would say that the military-industrial complex is likely to change when it no longer shows positive returns."

Sadly, as long as the arms trade is lucrative, and increasingly diverse in terms of weapons to sell, there is an incentive, and the profit motive, for the complex to thrive. This is the dynamic of "savage capitalism" (Albert, Capitalism against Capitalism).

I believe that change is resisted because the perceived gains outweigh the acknowledged costs everytime. The problem is not primarily the system as it presently exists. It is the individuals who make the rational choice to profit from these kinds of transactions. Your thoughts?

"Speaking of such returns, what kind of positive return has US participation in NATO and in the Atlantic 'dialog' produced (say) these past 30 years? For the US, I mean? Just a thought....."

As you know, Donald, NATO was an integral part of the international system the US established after World War II. That system, I would argue, served American interests well as long as the policy in Washington supported regional alliances to counter a Soviet threat.

Kennan foresaw the issue of security/insecurity from the vantage point of Russian history and authoritarian traditions. Containment was as close as the US foreign policy establishment ever came to a comprehensive strategy for action. Today containment must be revisited given the threats we face across the globe. NATO enlargement makes no sense. The use of its assets out of area will not command the support of the allies the US needs in the Middle East.

The times require a revitalized dialogue across the Atlantic, which brings in the rising powers in Asia. There is too much baggage for NATO to be the forum for that dialogue. How to fashion a new strategic concept that is not merely the reflection of the institution's diminishing returns is the dilemma we face...

One could argue that the focus should be less on institutional survival owing to bureaucratic inertia and more on constructive use of assets to address problems as they arise.

The differences across the Atlantic concern, as always, the out-of-area issues, which the Europeans are unlikely to support.

All the best, Colette

August 7, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

Greetings from New York, Donald,

Once again I respond to your comments in turn:

"Nor is the capacity of a wide segment of the American consumer population to overspend on the plastic."

"WIllingness, perhaps. I was not much of a spender even before 2007, and now much less so. I had a very bad patch beginning last year and will be doing little discretionary spending for the forseeable future. I have debts to retire & savings to rebuild, and the point at which I will feel safe enough to spend more freely has gone up several multiples. So it will be a while until I pull out the plastic - if I ever do. Hard to forsee something coming many years in the future.

The US savings rate has gone over 5% for the first time in year. Some analysts forecast it going over 10% as debts are retired. Doubt if the plastic will be popular for a while..."

Respectfully, this is the reasoning of a mature person who understands the responsibilities debts incur in society. I teach college students. A $500 cell phone bill is not unusual for a young person who has no prospect of steady employment.

Credit card companies send multiple offers to these young people with extended lines of credit. If the parents do not exercise their role to prevent acceptance of the cards, the youngsters are, shall we say, off to the mall...

I would argue that the plastic shows no signs of going out of style anytime soon and that its popularity with the youth is high because the young live for today. Tomorrow is another day.

I would be curious to know if the savings rate increase you cite is the result of that percentage of the US population over 50? And if this percentage would be offset in time by the spending habits of the percentage of the US population under 30? The US is, as you know, not an aging society...

All the best, Colette

August 7, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

Hi Donald,

Some reflections to close this series of responses:

"This is still a source of the country's strength and development even with weaknesses in the education system that must be addressed."

"Many of these problems are virtually impossible to address directly. You are more familiar than I with the ongoing problems the NYC public schools have had for decades, I am sure. As well as the successes. NYPS is an example of both the very best of US public schooling - and the very worst. The traditional answer is to provide affordable and good quality college education, Hofstra perhaps being an example of this. The vast spread of the unoiversity sector in the US is simply not seen in Europe. Some European schools are as good as or better than anything in the US (Oxbridge and les Polytechniques spring to mind). But the higher eduction market is not nearly as segmented in Europe as in the US. I live within easy wlking distance of a majoe engineering university in the UK, a 'redbrick', and was stunned to see how little adult education, night school, and continuing education provision they have. Basically none, they leave that to the local CC and the Open U. Amazing."

Where I observe the potential for significant change is in the community college systems across the country. Enrollments are up in New York as people of all ages retool to make inroads on the job market. Online enrollments are also likely to rise given that community colleges are usually ahead of the curve in distance learning offerings.

The problem with genuine ramifications for society is the commodification of education as tuitions sky rocket and young students evaluate the quality of an education on the basis of the price tag one must pay.

The SUNY and CUNY systems are still quite affordable in state. You know though that the financial crisis is hitting all educational institutions hard, particularly on the endowment side. Harvard is the most blatant example of huge losses...

Where the US really needs to upgrade is in the vocational training area. Here the US education market could stand to be even more segmented with the impetus on training for a trade. Young persons would benefit from varied options to start a career with an apprenticeship in an area of genuine value to society instead of wasting money and time taking up expensive seats in college when this is not where their real talents lie.

All the best, Colette

August 7, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

Collette, thanks for your thoughtful reply:

"Sadly, as long as the arms trade is lucrative, and increasingly diverse in terms of weapons to sell, there is an incentive, and the profit motive, for the complex to thrive. This is the dynamic of "savage capitalism" (Albert, Capitalism against Capitalism).

I believe that change is resisted because the perceived gains outweigh the acknowledged costs everytime. The problem is not primarily the system as it presently exists. It is the individuals who make the rational choice to profit from these kinds of transactions. Your thoughts?"

Is it necessary for the US taxpayer to subsidize the defense of the rich societies in continental Europe to keep the arms trade going? I think not. Arguably a sudden increase of the percieved threat level to Europe might boost trade if that is the objective. The US could demonstrate it's devotion to Vlad by selling him good technology to boost the effectiveness of the Russian military, then also sell to Europe to meet the increased threat.

The fact the US has not done this suggests that profit maximization is not the primary goal of US policy vis the arms trade.....

""Speaking of such returns, what kind of positive return has US participation in NATO and in the Atlantic 'dialog' produced (say) these past 30 years? For the US, I mean? Just a thought....."

As you know, Donald, NATO was an integral part of the international system the US established after World War II. That system, I would argue, served American interests well as long as the policy in Washington supported regional alliances to counter a Soviet threat. "

Historian Tony Judt argued compellngly that NATO was the result of the US being unable to withdraw itself from the tar-baby which was postwar Europe in a recent history of post-war Europe. In point of fact Roosevelt and Truman fully intended to pull US forces out of Europe and build down, much as the US did after the Civil War (internally) and withdrew from Europe after WWI.

Judt opened my eyes to a few facts which aren't often emphasized. Specifically that the USSR wasn't the most important reason for NATO's establishment; Germany was. Germany had been prostrated once, after WWI, and had picked itself up again and devastated Europe - again. Far worse than the first time, in fact.

It was necessary for the US to stay in Europe to keep Germany down, keep the USSR out, and to allow Europe to recover economically and knit together socially. Mission accomplished, time to go. When the natives get restless, march in the streets chanting you are national socialists, etc, it is a sure sign you have worn out your welcome.

I also argue that staying in Europe is against US national interests, considered as a whole. The 'military-industrial complex' probably disagree because they make money out of the arrangement. The timeserving 'Atlanticists' in the Pentagon disagree - careers are at stake, and some might not make General or full Colonel. So it isn';t in their interest wither. But this is called 'rent-seeking' in economics. The seeking of corporate or individual advantage at large cost to the whole. It should go.

"Kennan foresaw the issue of security/insecurity from the vantage point of Russian history and authoritarian traditions. Containment was as close as the US foreign policy establishment ever came to a comprehensive strategy for action. "

Which Kennan do you refer to, Coleen? The Kennan who wrote the piece in Foreign Review? Or the later Kennan who was the most trenchant critic of NATO and the 'containment' strategy? ;)

Regards from London,

Don

August 8, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

"I teach college students. A $500 cell phone bill is not unusual for a young person who has no prospect of steady employment.

Credit card companies send multiple offers to these young people with extended lines of credit. If the parents do not exercise their role to prevent acceptance of the cards, the youngsters are, shall we say, off to the mall..."

I'm not sure. It could be an artifact of an era swoftly passing. The 20's were the era of hip flasks, raccoon coats, and trips in the Stutz Bearcat to the football stadium to cheer on dear old Harvard. The 30's were much, much different. More the era of the lean and hungry student at the New School for Social Research. The era when the University of Chicago dropped varsity sports and left the Big Ten.

Steps could be taken, perhaps easy bankruptcy before age 25, except for educaion loans perhaps.

"I would argue that the plastic shows no signs of going out of style anytime soon and that its popularity with the youth is high because the young live for today. Tomorrow is another day."

Easy jobs after graduation, too. Except that isn't happening now, is it? It''s hard for everyone right now (except those in funds of couse).

Even hard for me, with my vast range of skills. Just laid off again Wednesday. So I stayed up late Thursday & Friday, nailing down another skill from a book waiting on the shelves..... With my skill base and job hunting skills I can find work any time except when there is nothing out there. Like fall last and early this year. Scary dead that was......

"I would be curious to know if the savings rate increase you cite is the result of that percentage of the US population over 50? And if this percentage would be offset in time by the spending habits of the percentage of the US population under 30? The US is, as you know, not an aging society..."

A lot, I would venture to guess. The over-50's are the ones in steady jobs (as far as they exist any more) and with the skills to stay working fairly steadily. My next gig may be a fairly lucrative contract, in which case I'll be swelling the bank account a lot for as long as it lasts.

The young are busily going bankrupt, living in their old bedrooms at home, perhaps working in the grey and black economies right now. I graduated during the last big downturn, summer of 1982 - in the rust belt. I pushed broom to make the rent and the mac & cheese. Dressing up in my shiny polyester suit to go to job interviews. Eventually I learned enough to land something better, though not much better paid to be honest.

Learned some tricks then which I use now. I shop late at Tesco's. It's when the marked down food appears. Scored a batch of carrot sticks tonight 85% off!

The US is in fact a slowly aging society, just not aging as fast as Europe or most of Asia.

August 8, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

Collette,

I'm going to bore you again by agreeing with most of this:

"Where I observe the potential for significant change is in the community college systems across the country. Enrollments are up in New York as people of all ages retool to make inroads on the job market. Online enrollments are also likely to rise given that community colleges are usually ahead of the curve in distance learning offerings."

CC's can also focus on skills valuable in the local labor markets. Unis can do that too, if they want and if tenured faculty deign to teach what is needed and not what they want to.....

If they don't wish? Bankruptcy can happen, and the state legislature may cut appropriations to the public institutions. Happened during the Great Depression as I recall....

"The problem with genuine ramifications for society is the commodification of education as tuitions sky rocket and young students evaluate the quality of an education on the basis of the price tag one must pay. "

Cost-effective education. Who'd have thunk it? ;)

"The SUNY and CUNY systems are still quite affordable in state. You know though that the financial crisis is hitting all educational institutions hard, particularly on the endowment side. Harvard is the most blatant example of huge losses..."

Harvard is still a great university, but at the undergrad level has been converted into a prep school for the investment banks and the great consultantcies like Kinsey. A shame really, when it once was and still could be so much more.

CUNY is one of my favorite institutions. A selective system providing a free, relatively high quality university education. Or it once was. It was an example of a kind of prep school which I think we need more of. CC's can be prep schools for university or college level also. In fact I'd like to see more prestigious unis steer some of the less-prepared into specific CC's set up as 'prep' schools, with the promise to consider transfers to those who prove themselves at a lower level.

Another prep school is the one the US military runs on a base in New Jersey I think. It's a year-long program of military trining and remedial academic work intended to make the graduates competitive at any of the military academies. They send promising enlisted men and minority kids who are otherwise well-qualified. I's like to see the Ivies, the Big Ten, and the University of California use such schools. It would be a leveling institution.

"Where the US really needs to upgrade is in the vocational training area. Here the US education market could stand to be even more segmented with the impetus on training for a trade. Young persons would benefit from varied options to start a career with an apprenticeship in an area of genuine value to society instead of wasting money and time taking up expensive seats in college when this is not where their real talents lie. "

Agreed. But we could also use more adult training. I train myself on a regular basis, quite rigorously. I find that I must. Frankly, even a city like London has little adult training worth the time, effort, and money. At least to keep myself on the bleeding edge in my profession, it's useless.

The only good programs of the type I'm aware of are in New York (NYU/Columbia) and perhaps Silicon Valley. So living in London, I attend night lectures and train at home....

August 8, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

These dialogues are never boring, Donald, good morning from New York. I do agree with your emphasis on adult training. Since I have taught within New York University's School of Continuing and Professional Studies (SCPS) at the Center for Global Affairs (CGA) these past five years, I see how extensive these adult programs are in different fields.

The Center also hosts the Foreign Policy Association's (FPA) Teacher Training Institute each summer. The Institute is a wonderful forum for educators who are concerned to teach their high school students about the Great Decisions facing different countries around the globe. I believe these types of programs should be an integral part of curricular offerings, which utilize new technologies to illustrate 'best practices' in training comparatively across different cultural environments.

The great advantage with technology is that you can train from home and link to a university or think tank setting. Lifelong learning is so critical these days with aging populations. It is so important in terms of human capital for mature persons to be able to retool and retrain at different stages in life.

I had not thought about prep school education in the ways you discuss regarding the options available. Your point about Harvard is well-taken. I was only there briefly in the mid-80s to attend courses on France and ethics in international affairs with a professor I admire. Candidly, I attended more for the professor than the institution. This is just one unfortunate example of the path learning can take when market demand trumps humanistic values in education. At least Harvard has the potential and talent to swing back to its former strengths. That's a decision for administration and professors alike, which should reflect and respect student concerns in the curriculum.

I think we are beginning to see changes in terms of what professors are being asked to teach. Bankruptcy is a real concern, especially for these smaller colleges that simply cannot compete in a brutal tuition-driven market. Professors that do not want to integrate technology into the classroom are in for a rude surprise as students demand technology-mediated instruction and learning more to feel prepared to enter the labor force. With tenure options on the decline, it's a changed world in academe.

All the best, Colette

August 8, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

Dear Collette,

"Since I have taught within New York University's School of Continuing and Professional Studies (SCPS) "

That was the school I had in mind. I took several night courses there during the late 80's when I was working in New Jersey. At that time it was 40 hours of top notch technical training for about $400 a course. A bargain any way you looked at it, and not only because of the faculty. The students were almost as fast as the instructor, and more discussion than lecture. I learned almost as much by going out with students and instructors afterward as in the classes.

"I attended more for the professor than the institution."

I looked into grad school in two fields, computer science/software engineering and an MBA. After researching the subject I came to the conclusion that in both fields the extracurriculars were almost more important than the curriculum. That is in computer science you select on the basis of projects and professors who are doing interesting things you wish to learn. At MBA programs groups and activities were as important as curriculum, I think. Didn't do either in the end, alas. I had responsibilities I could not get shut of.

"The Center also hosts the Foreign Policy Association's (FPA) Teacher Training Institute each summer. The Institute is a wonderful forum for educators who are concerned to teach their high school students about the Great Decisions facing different countries around the globe. I believe these types of programs should be an integral part of curricular offerings, which utilize new technologies to illustrate 'best practices' in training comparatively across different cultural environments. "

You seem to be in one of the less abtruse corners of academia and very concerned with teaching. I think you must be a superb teacher.

I believe that project work has gone global, particularly in technology. The open source movement, sparked by many projects which exist globally on the internet, seem to exist in parallel with the older location-based project form.

"This is just one unfortunate example of the path learning can take when market demand trumps humanistic values in education"

I have mixed feelings about this. An awful lot of the professoriate has gone the other direction, particularly in the humanities. The influence of generations of increasingly abtruse French philosophers have led to the sometime sublime (Satre) to the ridiculous (Derrida). Not to say that Derrida was himself ridiculous, I am sure he was not. Or would be if I could even begin to understand him.

But his influence on lesser practicioners has been a very bad thing. I think it may be analogous the the effect of James Joyce on the novel. Joyce wrote some amazing, indeed unique books. But the efforts of lesser talents to emulate Joyce's achievements have led to many of the most horrendous and pretentious literary garbage ever published. They would have done much better to emulate Dickens, Austen, or Victor Hugo.

Derrida is impenetrable because that is where his muse led him. Lesser talents don't posess the same insight but impenetrable they can certainly manage. To the detriment of academia in general and of their poor students in particular....

"I had not thought about prep school education in the ways you discuss regarding the options available."

We have heard much discussion of the potentially pernicious effects of monoculture in agriculture, where planting millions of acres in a single variety of food grains leads to high production but high risk of a single phage (natural or bioengineered) causing extreme economic and even famine.

I think the admissions procedures of prestigious colleges and universities run a strong chance of promoting a monoculture of the social classes in western society. A monoculture of the mind in this case, leading to what I increasingly percieve as almost a proto-caste system developing in the US and the UK.

The admissions system can be gamed, that much is obvious. The SAT and ACT can be prepared for, with trained mediocrity crowding out untrained talent. The increased seperation of 'Red' and 'Blue' America is a symptom, as is the crowding out of the poor and working classes in the better universities by nominally 'better-prepared' scions of the middle classes here in England.

I think there are many possible remedies. One of my favorites is the prep academy. We use it to train basketball and football players to man the professional 'amateur' teams fielded by our universities; why not use a similar system to bring poor children with promise to the level where they can truly compete and excel at selective universities?

Affirmative Action is largely (though not wholey) a failure for two reasons I think. It does give a chance for less-advantaged students from certain groups to attend great universities, but at the cost of tossing them in over their heads and either failing or clustering into their own little subcultures and unable to take advantage of the full range of opportunities there. So why not 'yeshivas' for these students, lower-level but demanding schools which hone the wits and prepare these students to succeed?

CCNY once did something like this for the great grad schools. They recruited the best out of CCNY's free colleges, a great success as proven by the 12 Nobel Laureates CCNY has produced.

The other problem with Affirmative Action is that it only solves part of the problem because it assumes the problem is race rather than class, leaving out vast chunks of the poor populace. Any caucasian, asians mostly, etc. Any group not perceived as 'disadvantaged'.

August 8, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

Colette,

Oops, I didn't gove the other side of my argument. I think that the grest unis should try to increase the diversity of their student bodies. I mentioned that Harvard produces way too many traders, i-bankers, and consultants. The obverse of that is that it produces far too few heterogeneous talents. Too few humanists, scientists, entrepeneurs, novelists, playwrites, composers, philosophers, and what have you. Harvard would better serve America by widening it's admissions to admit many more students with no interest in commercial careers. To enable this Harvard ought to redirect it's finances to support these students through scholarships and the like, or repayment plans which charge much higher tuitions to the i-bankers than to those choosing to go into paths less trodden. I like Larry Summers, but think his investment in bricks an mortar a disasterous one. Universities primary business is developing minds, not property. Even research should be secondary to this, I believe.

August 16, 2009

Colette Grace Mazzucelli, Hofstra University / New York University, Platinum Contributor (333)

Greetings Donald,

I wanted to return to this thread and our discussion after some time to reflect on the other side of your argument. I agree with your point about diversity although the issue you raise about the admissions process is complex. How do we know, for example, that students do not enter Harvard or any other elite school with the idea to be a novelists or scientists only to be lured by the pull of a career in one of the professions you cited, banking or consultancy?

I am not sure that widening the admissions will produce the heterogeneity you seek from these institutions' graduates. What is in question is the influence of the elite system in education once these students enter college/university.

If the primary vocation of the unversity is to develop minds, and I agree with that assertion with the emphasis on critical thinking, we have a dilemma, in my understanding, again in the functioning of the higher educational system in America.

The emphasis on bricks and mortar a la Summers is likely to be more relative in the years to come, particularly in the face of shrinking budgets and profit maximization, with a balancing in terms of brick and click, i.e., greater investments on the IT side. Brick and click, as argued by my former boss, Dr. Arthur Levine at Teachers College Columbia University, may provide the competition for limited resources in higher education as campuses continue to upgrade their infrastructures. This is as important to campus life as new buildings; perhaps more so if physical space is limited.

The dilemma is in the fundamental distinction between universities and corporate institutions given mission, mode of operation and, most importantly, public purpose. A. Bartlett Giamatti shared his views in The University and the Public Interest. In another publication he wrote: "the academic imperative [is] to seek knowledge objectively and share it openly and freely; and the industrial imperative [is] to garner a profit, which creates the incentives to treat knowledge as private property."

In my experience, students can benefit when teaching, research and concerns focused on the public interest re-enforce each other in the classroom. The challenges arise in that the system conforms more and more to the industrial imperative. New York University defines itself as "a private university in the public interest". Does this relativize the industrial imperative? Or make the balance to strike between the academic and the industrial the focus in the leadership? Either way, the dilemma is one that remains to be addressed at most institutions of higher learning in the United States...

All the best, Colette

August 17, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

"I agree with your point about diversity although the issue you raise about the admissions process is complex. How do we know, for example, that students do not enter Harvard or any other elite school with the idea to be a novelists or scientists only to be lured by the pull of a career in one of the professions you cited, banking or consultancy?"

I don't necessarily have all the answers to this, Collette. But I think that changing the admission system so that a certain percentage of the admitted class were judged by work rather than SAT's might help do the trick. Kenyon College is a selective college with a particular strength in poetry, and gives considerable weight to students who show poetry portfolios. So much so that a poet can have a much lower SAT score than average for the school.

Perhaps Harvard could do something similar with young historians, for example. Offer a scholarship and a place to the student(s) who write the best paper about history each year? Offer science placements and scholarships to the students who do the best science project, or who write the most radical paper in scientific theory.

Another thing I think we're starting to see are advanced distance learning classes offered at state or regional level. Perhaps Yale could tap into these networks somehow? Perhaps getting the distance teachers to recommend their best and most talented students from the rural areas of Montana and the like, then actively recruit them?

The gret colleges used to do this kind of theng before the advent of the SAT (as well as admitting many scions of the privileged classes who perhaps were less worthy. But I think many college admissions people would agree with me; the SAT has become a straightjacket which measures only certain kinds of merit. So do something radical; keep the SAT - but reserve half the places in your class for students who write essays, do scientific projects, write fiction, poetry, history, whatever. Reserve some places for older students, perhaps ones who have been in the military, but also other lines of work. Factory workers, etc. Why not?

One of my favorite authors was the late James Michener. Michener came from an impoverished and disadvantaged background, yet found some good teachers and good mentors, and eventually won a scholarship to Swarthmore, which is perhaps the finest small liberal arts college in the US. I believe he won the scholarship through being personally vetted by senior professors in the English department. Michener was a late-bloomer. He was an itinerant academic, traveled the world on tramp steamers, and later wored as an editor in a publishing house before going into the Navy in WWII, where he wrote the Pulitzer-winning Tales of the South Pacific. I believe he was in his late 30's or even early 40's before he achieved anything the world might see as success. Michener was a good writer and a liberal-minded citizen of the word. A great man. We need more like him. He could not have done what he did had he been saddled with $100,000 in educational debt.

August 17, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

"I am not sure that widening the admissions will produce the heterogeneity you seek from these institutions' graduates. What is in question is the influence of the elite system in education once these students enter college/university."

I think you may be correct in a sense, but also wrong in a sense. I think the majority of these students will come from the rich suburbs as they do now. But a widened admission procedure based upon actual work will encourage them to learn and excell in different things. And even if they go into investment banking after doing classics, for example, is that a bad thing? The late Peter Drucker mentioned an investment banker he worked for in London during his 20's. When attending the funeral of his mentor he discovered something he hadn't known; the mentor had had a seperate life as a minor classics scholar. Two sets of mourners at the funeral, investment bankers - and classical scholars.

Perhaps Harvard can limit the number of economics seminars they offer, or whatever it is that young IB's and consultants take. Or perhaps they can promote a close mentoring system between senior scholars (perhaps emeritus) and undergrads. Try to show them other ways to make a life. Perhaps bring in working writers, playwrites, poets, historians, etc. Change the influences. Perhaps even house the young scholars in different houses, or perhaps leaven the career-minded with the less materially-driven. But above all - give financial breaks on tuition for those students choosing less-lucrative paths.

August 17, 2009

Donald Stadler, Self-employed, Diamond Contributor (1052)

One more thing I would advocate is Affirmative Action - with a difference. Find and recruit talented young people from disadvantaged minorities. If they are not ready to take on Harvard, or Tufts, or NYU - place them in prep schools like the one I mentioned the US militry runs for the service academies. Get them up to speed - and THEN admit them to the top schools! I'm thinking something like a yeshiva, but with a wider curriculum designed to hone their minds.

Affirmative Action should be based on social class, not race. That is, AA should be offered to the disadvantaged of whatever race or ethnic background, not exclusing caucasians and asians as well as the more traditional groups. I think AA will still be skewed toward the traditional groups, but only because they tend statistically to be more disadvantaged. I fail to see why the son of William Gates, the distinguished Harvard socioligist should be given an advantage over the daughter of a cop from Jersey City merely because of skin color. Social class is the true indicator in my opinion.

March 21, 2012

wwjfxz

KfVdhv , [url=http://pengfbibhfyx.com/]pengfbibhfyx[/url], [link=http://ygwcfhcrrcgx.com/]ygwcfhcrrcgx[/link], http://ovgjxwizwvhc.com/