Monthly Archives: February 2006

The Times’ David Brooks tells me not to worry about foreign competition. I wish I could tell that big fish (who I often find insightful and occasionally agree with) to read this low-power and frequently schizophrenic blog.

We’re far from doomed and the future direction of our country is ours to mold, of course, but Brooks is practicing social promotion in the face of global challenges. You can’t read his column unless you’re a Times subscriber, so I’ll excerpt salient parts below.

The Nation of the Future
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: February 2, 2006

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. . . .

Brooks gives several paragraphs of compelling statistics about productivity, R&D, GDP, compeitiveness, engineering unemployment, etc.

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. . . .

I’m not a defeatist. I have faith in the current generation and the longevity of the American entrepreneurial spirit. I know we have amazing infrastructure and impressive stores of talent and malleable raw materials. But how many of those statistics about post-secondary education are buoyed by foreign enrollment and rosy expectations about conditions abroad not changing enough to keep students here afterward as entrepreneurs. Fareed Zakaria’s guests suggest that the tide is already turning out to sea on reverse brain drain.

Airports in India were the single greatest reminder that, despite all of the nation’s progress and aspirations, the ground truth is troubled and complicated. Most airports are glorified train stations, but with metal detectors. Planes leave late or don’t show up. Travelers’ services are missing — though Madras and Bombay were on par with the Des Moines, Iowa, and Casper, Wyoming, airports I frequented in my college days. Many airport workers just can’t be bothered. Etc.

If we had time enough, I suspect we would have just taken the train between different regions of the country. The shatabdi express trains are quite comfortable, and they come with mostly identifiable food, too. We could have taken the train from Rajasthan to Madras via Bombay for about 400-3200 Rs ($9-75) depending on seat class for the Bombay-Madras leg, but it was scheduled to take 23 hours for the 1275 km. Compare that to roughly $80-200 for a two hour flight. India is a place to discover slowly or at Western expense.

But the private airlines and the Indian government really want to improve the airports and air travel, and the government plans on privatizing some of its airports. Airport workers aren’t having it.

BANGALORE, India, Feb. 1 — Thousands of airport workers went on strike across India on Wednesday in an attempt to halt the government’s plan to privatize the country’s two busiest airports, in Mumbai and New Delhi. . . .

Conditions at Indian airports are generally poor. Passengers endure long waits for services. Even the busiest airports lack decent restrooms and waiting lounges. With the recent boom in air travel in the country, airlines have complained that aircraft parking and landing facilities are woeful.

During the strike, passengers were forced to handle their own baggage and faced difficulties in entering and leaving the airports. Passengers left planes using stepladders.

But better air travel seems inevitable. Airlines are hiring and private carriers are consolidating.

Update (20-Feb-2006): I’m not the only one who thinks Delhi’s domestic airport is awful. (Via Desi Pundit.)

Despite not being a friend at all of the current administration, I am really intrigued by GWB’s competitiveness initiative. I have no doubt that he and congressional committees are going to mess it up completely while putting it into practice, but I like the ideas in it.

Among the highlights of Bush’s proposal are:

• Permanently extend the R&D tax credit, costing $86 billion.
• Double federal funding for basic research in physical sciences and engineering over 10 years, at a cost of $50 billion.
• Spend $380 million to improve math, science and technological education from kindergarten through 12th grade, including training 70,000 new high school teachers over the next five years to lead advanced math and science courses for low-income students and encouraging up to 30,000 math and science professionals to become adjunct high school teachers over the next eight years.
• Start “Math Now” programs to promote math among elementary and middle school students.

While driving home today (and dodging ramp traffic while in the higher speed “breakdown” lane on 128/I-95 — it’s a Bay State thing) I listened to an NPR segment on the initiative and contemplated how I fit into it.

For the most part, the folks most capable of teaching high school students the technical skills they need are in industry and higher education, not in the high schools. I suspect that many of us would very much like to pass on our knowledge and excitement about science, engineering, and mathematics — whether by volunteer tutoring or as faculty — but I’m not naïf enough to believe that significant numbers of us would give up our current situations to get teaching certificates or subscribe to the austerity required of high school teachers. But I can very easily warm to the idea of keeping my day job and becoming an “adjunct” high school teacher in math or computer science.

I suspect many high tech companies will get on board with the initiative (supposing it doesn’t smell when/if the proposal becomes policy). The MathWorks, where I work, has a social mission that encourages exactly this kind of public-private cooperation, especially among underserved communities.

Which makes me wonder: How well will these proposals serve underdeveloped areas and populations?