No one ever thinks to ask, “Hey, Mr. T., did you learn to be an actor and how to work out and grow a mohawk in school?” Nor do they ask the same questions of a bunch of multi-millionaire basketball players and rappers. Did Michael Jordan learn to play basketball “in school”? For the rappers, I don’t remember there being Hip Hop 101 in college.

All public schools in the U.S. today are prep camps for jail or for being a cubicle rat for the rest of your life.

THE SCHOOL “SYSTEM”

Jim Rohn said, “formal education will make you a living. Self-education will make you a fortune.”

Today, however, formal education, often, does not even make you a living, as the cost of schooling has increased dramatically ever since the government subsidized it with grants, loans and tax benefits.

But education is not the real goal of the education system. As William Torrey Harris, U.S. commissioner of education in 1906, said, “Education… scientifically defined, is the subsumption of the individual.”

Johann Gottlieb Fichte, head of philosophy and psychology at Prussian University in Berlin, said it even more clearly: “Education should aim at destroying free will, so that after pupils are thus schooled, they will be incapable throughout the rest of their lives of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school masters would have wished.”

THE 99% HAVE HAD THEIR FREE WILL DESTROYED

The saddest thing I have seen in a long time is the “We Are the 99%” page.

And it’s not necessarily sad because of the tough situation these thousands of people have found themselves in.

What is sad is that you can see how broken they are as individuals. How they bought into a system and have had all their free will drained from them. This is particularly shown by the fact that thousands of people would take the time to write out on a piece of paper all of their concerns and unhappiness with the expectation that this will CHANGE anything!

I estimate over 90% of the people on that site appear to be in rough shape due to student loans. But not one of them sees the truth. They’ve all been brainwashed to think a college education is not only a good thing, but is a guarantee of having a great life.

One starving artist had $175,000 in student loans. $175,000 in student loans? To become an “artist”? But he sounds as though it is the system that let him down. He takes no responsibility for his massive error in judgment.

Another 99 Percenter is 47, penniless and in debt after her “college education,” yet what does she want for her daughters? To put them through the same system! She has been brainwashed to believe that a “college education” is a necessary and good thing despite all the evidence in her own life that has provided that it was not.

Rather than realizing their errors, many of these people figure that writing their problems on a piece of paper on the Internet may help! Or by chasing down rich Wall St. bankers (a symptom of the problem) with pitchforks while admonishing the government (the real problem) to play a bigger role in the economy.

STUDENT LOANS ARE SLAVERY

Rather than hoping the government helps them, many of these people with student debts should be looking at ways to get out of the country.

Why? First of all, student debt is the only debt in the U.S. that is not able to be defaulted on in a bankruptcy. In other words, the starving artist above with $175,000 in debt will never be able to remove that chain from his neck as long as he lives in the country. If he were to expatriate, he could at least start fresh somewhere else.

And now the U.S. government has dropped many hints that in order to get a passport in the future, you will need to have your government debts (taxes, loans, etc.) up-to-date.

It is not much of a stretch of the imagination for the U.S. government to demand that all those behind on their student debt will be ordered to report to duty with the military. Any opposition will be met with unlimited prison sentences.

There are plenty of opportunities in the world. Look for employment in places like the Canadian oil sands, where they can’t even find enough employees. Or in booming places such as the Middle East (try Qatar) or in Asia (plenty of finance-related jobs in Hong Kong — and a 15% income tax rate).

But remember, in life, there are no “sure things” or guarantees. The government fooled you into thinking there are, but there aren’t. In real life, you just have to get out there and do it.

KEEP YOUR KIDS OUT OF SCHOOL

For those with children, keep them out of school. Any school.

Real education, today, is all free and can be done via the Internet from anywhere. All you have to do is ensure your child can read and from there they can self-educate.

MIT’s entire curriculum is available online for free via MIT’s OpenCourseWare. As well, University of the People is a tuition-free online university. Not to mention there is a YouTube video or a Wikipedia article on any subject matter you’d ever want to know.

BE A COLLEGE DROPOUT… OR DROP-IN

I am not a college dropout. I’m a college drop-in. I dropped in to college, at the behest of my mother, for a few days and quickly got out of there. Consider doing the same.

Don’t get caught in the education trap.

Regards,

Jeff Berwick

The Dollar Vigilante

The Education Trap was originally featured on Whiskey and Gunpowder. Visit Laissez Faire Books for the best selection of libertarian book titles.

Today, Mr. Greenhut and I talk more problems and solutions. Read on below…

Gary: We talk about the markets a lot in Whiskey & Gunpowder, and their power to give people what they deserve. And in your book you say that in a system where we take the market out that we’re bound to get bad results.

Steven: Well, I had a debate with our public school superintendent, and it was a very friendly debate in front of a bunch of teachers. And I argued for the complete separation of school and state, the elimination of the public school system. And not its replacement with charter schools or vouchers, but a true market. It was a thought experiment, that we just shut down the public school system. And at first, they were aghast. But then I explained that we need teachers…

There’s no question that you have to have good education and you have to have schools, and we need teachers. And in a market situation, the best teachers could be paid an extremely high salary. The market would determine. So you might have a great teacher, might get paid a small fortune. But that teacher might be worth it.

But we have this system of the collective bargaining system, where it’s very hard to reward good teachers. So everyone gets paid kind of the median, and often teachers do not come out of the whole public, the teaching programs, they’re not the premiere programs in universities. So in some ways, it’s a bit of a race to the bottom. So a market’s the only way to determine what we should pay people, not a government system.

Gary: Well, a lot of people are truly horrified at that notion, and disbelieving…that the market could provide quality education and more kinds of education, more choice, more types of education specific to a given student’s needs. Markets do it for everything else from cars, to computers to houses to higher education, but people get antsy when you suggest it could be done for more basic education. They think it’s just one of those things that need to be run Soviet-style.

Steven: Right. I don’t know why people don’t want to – I mean my idea is too radical, even for conservatives, the idea that we create our schools – and I talk about this a little bit in the book, and I always present it as a though experiment. Because for some reason, people think this is just such a crazy, radical idea. But the idea that we create public schooling the way we create cars. Right? If we do the equivalent, if we produced cars, let’s say, which are arguably far less important than educating our kids. If we produce cars the way we produce public education, we’d be paying $100,000 for Yugos. It’s obviously competition is what creates the best. And what – I might – I drive a Mini Cooper. My neighbor drives a mega pickup truck.

We have different needs. I drive to San Francisco every week. He’s doing construction. It’s a simple analogy, but we have vastly different needs of transportation, so we drive vastly different vehicles. And of the type of vehicle we each drive, there are all sorts of choices. And we pick what suits us. And because of the competitive system, we end up with a pretty darn good product at a pretty darn good price. And car manufacturers woo our business. In the school system, my kids, all my kids are different, and my neighbor’s kids are different in what they value and what skills they have and their intelligence levels and their interest levels.

And yet we offer them a one-size-fits-all type of education. Take it or leave it. And the only way to change it is to send them, pay again, and send them to a private school, or to move out of the neighborhood. And that’s a crazy way to do things. I mean one model is a Soviet model, and the other is a market model. So people will say to me, “Well, what about the poor people?” I mean poor people care about their kids too and they would pay and have their kids go to schools, and there would be competition for their business, just as there’s competition for their business in other areas.

Right now it’s the poor kids that suffer the most under the current system. That’s why we have parents in poor neighborhoods camping out overnight to get into the few slots in different fundamental schools or charter schools in their area. They want their kids to have the best education. But instead, they have to often go to these horribly performing schools, often with dropout rates as much as 50 percent. I mean imagine if 50 percent of the articles I wrote or the books that you sold were completely flawed. I mean that would not bode well for our careers. And yet, at LA Unified, they’re arguing whether it’s a 33 percent dropout rate or a 50 percent dropout rate.

What does that say? So unionization and this monopoly system that it feeds off of has created what is, in many times, a horrible, horrible type of education system. And the mayor of Los Angeles, a liberal democrat, a longtime union supporter, blames the unions for the huge obstacles to progress in that district. And he calls the education crisis for poor kids the new civil rights movement of our time. This is what we get from this kind of system. And compare that to any competitive system.

Gary: It’s a system that seems to give the worst the same reward as the best. I don’t know how you improve a product without rewarding what works and weeding out what doesn’t.

Steven: And the fact is it’s impossible to fire teachers. The Los Angeles Times did a series which I refer to in the book, about how hard it is to fire teachers who are credibly accused of misbehaving on the job, and it could take 10 or 12 years, and they get put in these rubber rooms where they’re paid their full pay and benefits while their case is adjudicated. And LA Unified doesn’t even – and this is probably typical in other school systems – they do not even try because of unionization, to fire incompetent teachers. So they do what’s called “the dance of the lemons”, where there’s this arcane process for moving teaching around and promoting teachers, and the bad teachers get foisted on other school districts.

I mean this is an insane way to run a school system, and yet thanks to union work rules and collective bargaining that’s the kind of system we have now. How do we have good public services with this kind of system? How do we determine the real worth of a public employee in a system like this? This is nonsense.

Gary: What you’re describing sounds, I don’t mean to be pejorative here, but it sounds like a system that attracts thugs and parasites.

Steven: Well, you know, I don’t use terms like that because it’s obvious that there are a lot of good people in all government professions. It’s just that you’re going to a system that protects the worst. It’s certainly going to attract a certain amount of people who are not the most stellar people.

I’ve seen it up close and personal as a newspaper writer. I have watched unions defend some really troubling actors: police officers who abuse their power, teachers who misbehave. And the union process is designed to protect everybody.

And it’s also not designed to reward the best. So we get what we encourage, and we’re not encouraging the best.

Gary: Like we would in a more market-based system. You won’t hear any argument from me on that.

So we’ve identified the problems and seen how bad things are. What can be done to turn things around?

Steven: We need to reduce the size of the pensions and the power of public employee unions. Most of us can come up with a variety of solutions — moving to a defined-contribution system for new hires and, as the Little Hoover Commission reported, reduce the size of the pensions for current employees going forward. But it’s a political problem, not a technical one. That’s why I agree with efforts to end collective bargaining for public employees. That would help reduce the power of the unions and enable managers to make changes to the pension system and improve accountability for public employees. By reducing the power of unions, the public could have a better chance at achieving meaningful reforms that reduce costs and improve public services.

Gary: Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us, Steven.

Steven: My pleasure.

March 7, 2011

How Public Employee Unions Are Bankrupting the Nation, Part II was originally featured on Whiskey and Gunpowder. Visit Laissez Faire Books for the best selection of libertarian book titles.

Freedom for Federalism. Some of us have actually read the U.S. Constitution. Readers may know the document I mean, the written one, the one containing the set of behavioral limitations placed upon the created government. Not the imagined version penned with invisible ink whose words and meaning are discernible only by elites with special glasses. (Pointedly many of these elites so-called have either been elected or appointed and thus have been required by the written Constitution’s Article VI to take an oath “to support this Constitution,” meaning, because of the Framers’ deliberate use of the definite article “this,” the one visibly available to the rest of us.(*)) When reading that Constitution, we know that the created federal government has no authority to legislate on any matter dealing with education. On this point we have Mr. Madison in our corner. “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined [(**)]. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” ~ Federalist #45.

(*) In addition to Clause 3 of Article VI (the Oath/Affirmation Clause), the phrase “this Constitution” appears in 11 other provisions of the Framers’ 1787 document, demonstrating unequivocally that the Framers’ use of the definite article “this” in pointing at the words of their written document was intentional, not inadvertent.

(**) We know precisely what those few and defined powers are because they are listed – in writing – in the document itself. Education is not on the list.

This understanding undergirds the 9th and 10th Amendments. “You may go this far, but no farther.” Despite these clear restrictions, we have today a huge federal superstructure called the U.S. Department of Education(!) which intrudes not only into K-12 education but also into the collegiate system. Since no provision in the Constitution authorizes federal involvement in education (among countless other federal intrusions), this can only be the result of government officials being unfaithful to their voluntarily-taken oaths to “this Constitution,” acting without the consent of the people, compounded by the people’s own failure to appreciate the genius of the American constitutional system: by restricting governmental power, individual freedoms are maximized.

There is nothing inherently American about a top-down, one-size-fits-all public school system, a system drawn from the authoritarian Prussian model (promoted circa 1840s by Horace Mann, a Massachusetts liberal, among others). Hearthside teaching aka home schools, private tutoring, and small community-based private schools (with the emphasis on small) are representative of the American tradition.

The elimination of the public schools would deprive Congress of the excuse that it “must” take money from taxpayers in order to support education by connivingly offering “help” to the several states, provided of course that those states agree to a few controlling strings. In short, eliminating the public schools assists Congress by forcing it to obey the written Constitution. When government is limited, then ipso facto the people have more freedom. “The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.” Thomas Jefferson.

That Congress has strayed from the essence of the Constitution – limiting the reach and power of the created government – can ultimately be laid at the feet of the electorate. Not enough of us have demanded that Congress obey the Constitution because not enough of us know the Constitution, not a co-incidence since the public schools have gone out of their way to avoid teaching the country’s foundational underpinnings. It’s no surprise then that a sizeable percentage of the population does not honor our Constitution since appreciating its ingenuity has been replaced by academically-approved Statism and its worship, a tactic accelerated under Obama but which began in earnest in the 1930s. Certain constitutional symbolisms may still prevail – congressional and presidential terms still begin and end on January 3rd and January 20th respectively; those nominated for federal office still receive the advice and consent of the Senate; state of the union addresses are given “from time to time”; and so forth – but the substantive core thesis of the Constitution – its raison d’être, namely, strictly limiting the reach of the created government – has been so grossly ignored that the “system as practiced” would be unrecognizable to the Framers.

Consider the all-too-typical routine: (i) Congress (whether D or R controlled) passes a putative “law” that has no textual authority, thereby neglecting its institutional duty to check-and-balance itself and only enact measures for which there is express constitutional language, with affirmatively-voting Members disregarding their individually-taken constitutional oaths to support “this Constitution.” (ii) The president, failing in his independent check-and-balance duties to ascertain a law’s compliance with the Constitution and unfaithful to his special constitutional oath, signs that “law.” (nb: Both D and R presidents have been equally guilty.) (iii) That “law” when tested in the federal courts is, surprise, surprise, found to be “constitutional” because the judiciary, ducking out on its own independent check-and-balance duty, relies on a long-practiced, judicially-created legalistic convenience, wink-wink, nudge-nudge, known as presumption-of-constitutionality, an artifice which holds that anything and everything done by Congress is to be presumed by all courts (both federal and state) as constitutional. [Having the benefit of this presumption is an enormous strategic advantage: it shifts the burden of proving constitutionality from the government (the proponent) onto the shoulders of citizen-challengers who are then burdened to disprove the “law’s” constitutionality, a very high legal standard to overcome.] In all other venues of life, a proposition’s proponent bears the burden of proof and persuasion, but perversely not in the one venue where it really should be mandated because in the federal law-making venue can be exercised the greatest measure of control over the greatest number of people. The ObamaCare “law” easily comes to mind, and supporters of this pretense at law-making have been quick to assert the presumption-of-constitutionality trump card against the people.

In short, we have the textual and apparent form of a limited, appropriately checked-and-balanced government, but not the actual substance which will only occur, indeed, can only occur, when men and women of honest character, whose “yes” is their “yes” and whose “no” is their “no,” serve, individuals to whom the letter and spirit of the Article VI oath to maintaining a government of limited reach is a meaningful undertaking. To this point Founder John Adams was prescient in assessing the efficacy of paper handcuffs, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Today we have Members who openly acknowledge that they do not read bills before voting, even apart from performing a thoughtful analysis of a bill’s provisions for compliance with the Constitution, a document to which they have taken a personal oath to support. Some even openly acknowledge that most of what Congress does is unconstitutional (see the recent remarks of Democrat Rep. James Clyburn, SC-6, found here). Despite these admissions, they’re re-elected! Again and again! have we gone mad? A private employer would never tolerate such behavior from an agent or an employee, but we the American people do. That we are in this state of affairs can be blamed in large measure on the American public school curriculum where an appreciation of the ingenious American system is neither taught nor admired. We’ve now arrived at the point where a sitting Congressman (Democrat Rep. Phil Hare, IL-17) can openly state (see this recent video here, at 00:45) that he doesn’t care what the Constitution says, a sentiment obviously held by a majority of Members since Congress continues to putatively enact “laws” in the utter absence of express constitutional text. The recent health care reform act may be the largest and ugliest example, but it hardly stands alone. Contrast the Clyburns and Hares of the world with Davy Crockett (yes, that Davy Crockett), a former Member of Congress (Tennessee, 1827–1831, 1833–1835), in an attributed speech, “Not Yours To Give,” found here.

Where is the express authority to enact so-called health care reform legislation; or the authority to give billions in “foreign aid”; or the authority to enact national educational funding and academic standards; or the authority which enables the executive branch to conduct war/s without express declarations; and on and on? Obviously no such authority exists except in the minds of those privy to the Constitution’s invisible ink. To maintain that Congress’s authority to do as it wishes may be found in the Interstate Commerce Clause, or in the even more nebulous General Welfare Clause, is to say that the Framers went through their painstaking work of setting forth limitations on power, with memories of the harsh treatment which British unlimited government meted out still fresh in their minds, only to learn that they had written two clauses (ICC; GWC) that swallow and emasculate the core concept of limitation. With this sort of open-ended reasoning, nothing is beyond the reach of Congress, Article I, section 8’s enumerated listing be damned.

On this score there is no middle ground: Either we have limited government, or we live under its only known alternative, unlimited government. What should we see as worse: Having Members of Congress who are ignorant of the Constitution’s purposes, or having Members who understand those limiting purposes but who intentionally undermine them through blatant disregard? One is dim-witted, the other dishonest. The answer to this question may be of little moment since the result is the same: a corrupted government that does not play by the people’s agreed-upon rules for conducting self-government. Want proof? Listen to the recent words of Democrat Rep. Alcee Hastings, FL-23, member, House Committee on Rules, “When the deal [i.e., the process of legislating, -editor] goes down, all of this talk about rules, we make [th]em up as we go along.” Video found here.

Contrary to the portrayal by the MSM and the left generally, the current 10th Amendment and Tea Party movements are not anti-government; rather, they are anti-corrupt government. Their existence and the various state proposals to fight the perversion of the Interstate Commerce Clause through intrastate statutes (for example on gun matters or health care reform “mandates”) are healthy signs of an engaged citizenry acting as self-governors. That more and more Americans are carrying pocket-sized versions of the founding documents is evidence that a strong sense of independence from government animates many, and is further evidence that the pathetic efforts of the public schools to erase the personal responsibility heritage of our history have not been altogether successful. Could all these efforts at reviving federalism flourish? Yes, without question, but only if the people follow through and do what they must: Insist that their federal and state representatives strictly confine Congress, binding it, borrowing again from Jefferson, “with the chains of the Constitution.” Such should be a bedrock principle found in the 2010 campaign literature of every worthwhile candidate.

Regards,
Paul Galvin
LewRockwell.com
Whiskey & Gunpowder

May 4, 2010

Eliminate Public Schools, Part II was originally featured on Whiskey and Gunpowder. Visit Laissez Faire Books for the best selection of libertarian book titles.

We have managed to create enemies around the world by interfering in others’ business, lifestyles, and politics, especially in Muslim nations. Why are we in Afghanistan, and Iraq? Why are we responsible for millions of innocents being put to death in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Korea? Did any of these nations harm or threaten us? It goes back to economics again, because those wars have reduced the value of our dollar so much, that it will buy but perhaps 10% of what it bought before Korea. The devaluation of the dollar has made saving in it stupid, but most still do. We have decapitated cities, jobs and manufacturing gone overseas, and a huge underclass. How did it happen?

Several things happened, and not just when FDR came into office. They all have been committed by…the federal government. Every single problem or situation we have now, in this once land of the free and home of the brave, was instigated by the federal government and the Congress and Presidency which operates it. The concept of public schools, and for that matter ‘public’ anything, is certain to lead to corruption, inefficiency, huge costs, and little accomplished. Would you rather use a private bathroom, or a public rest room? The concept of public schools, arose from the usual reasons, which politicians always use, and that is ‘for the public good.’ ‘Everyone should have an education!’ Everyone should be rich too, and have a car, nice home, ample food, vacations, free air travel, and admission to movies and amusement parks also. But everyone isn’t going to get those things, at least for now, so why should government make taxpayers pay for and force attendance to a public school? Public schools are a disaster, simply because they are ‘public,’ and everyone thinks they are ‘free.’ Before public schools, America was infinitely better educated than it is now. Check out a McGuffy’s Reader of 125 years ago, and see for yourself.

Voting used to require people to be able to pass a literacy test and pay a small poll tax before they were allowed to vote. This sifted out those who were unable to make a good decision, or even know what they were voting for, and the poll tax paid for the cost of the election. When the voter rights act was passed, do-gooder liberals invaded poor sections of America. As a result, we had, and have even more now, inept voters, who always vote for the Democrat who promises the most largess from the public treasury. This takes us back to economics again, and a huge debt. America has a crop of politicians in office, who are an absolute disgrace, because of the overwhelming number of inept, low IQ, un-educated, voters. What is wrong with a voter being able to know what’s going on, and to have to pay a dollar or so to be able to vote? As an addition, why not require a voter to prove he has a job, or even own property?

When FDR and his Democrats passed Social Security, which has naturally become a habit-forming nightmare, Americans forgot how to prepare for the future, and Social Security will be with us forever. Its cost will escalate infinitely, and is already bankrupt, with not a single dime in the till. A nightmare conceived by politicians, because everyone ‘needs to have a good retirement,’ which is the same as saying, “everyone needs an education.” The result of both is a disaster. What everyone ‘needs,’ and what our Constitution says government should do, are opposites. People should have to work for what they “need,” and not have it given to them, because it destroys the mind and incentive when they are given what politicos have told them they “need.” For every freebie or subsidy, the deficit grows larger, and collapse grows nearer, which will bring on violence. Try to get out of the big cities before the inevitable happens.

The public school idea, has proven to be a disaster of titanic proportions, but no one knows how to stop it or tame it. It’s that way with all supposedly important and needy things, such as food and health care, to name two more examples. When Medicare was passed in 1965, because ‘everyone needs to have good health,’ the camel got its foot in the tent, and now he is in the tent, and the medical system will go down the tubes. Medicare, was simply the first step towards what Obama, Democrats, and probably too many RINO Republicans want, and that is what Canada, the UK, and other socialistic nations have, and that is total government medical care. This will mean that America will no longer be the primary discoverer of new drugs, and have the world’s best hospitals and doctors. We’ll just be another cog oin the big wheel of socialism, communism, and totalitarianism, or total government.

When the first public housing was built in 1937, because “people need to have a place to live,” that spelled the ruin of our cities, caused white flight, huge oil consumption for commuting, expensive, taxpayer paid for highways, air pollution, frayed nerves, billions of hours wasted in travel time, and lost tax base in the cities. There will always be public housing now, because no one could possibly do away with it. Those people vote for their Democrat representatives and senators.

When food stamps were started in 1972, because ‘poor people need to eat,’ another cog in the communistic wheel of total government was cast, and it will never go away. I haven’t even mentioned the income tax and Federal Reserve, which was sneaked into law in 1913. (The word “snuck” is terrible grammar, and far too many use it!). The Federal Reserve, which is not ‘federal,’ and has no ‘reserves,’ caused the great depression, as well as the one we are currently in, but no one in D.C. has the guts to look at the fed, and realize that it has helped to kill America. The 16th Amendment (income tax) was not legally ratified, but the Supremes say it was, even though absolute proof exists that its ratification was totally unconstitutional. Two volumes in my possession, titled, “The Law That Never Was,” volumes one and two, give every state’s vote, and every single detail of that state’s vote for the 16th Amendment, and this unequivocally proves that it was never constitutionally passed. So we continue to pay, and probably always will. No one in D.C. has the guts to stand up and say ‘ENOUGH.”

If all these things were immediately stopped dead in their tracks, we would have mass rioting, which we might have anyway, when the debt problem causes a dollar melt-down. There may be ways to correct it still, if the Tea Party Movement gets really into gear. Here’s how it could happen if the right politicians got into office.

(1) Prohibit any new entries into Social Security, but allow those in it already to continue. Give a refund of all that was put in, for citizens under the age of 30. That would rid us of it in 32 years.

(2) Prohibit any new entries into Medicare, and refund all that those under 30 have put in, plus abort the new Obamacare law.

(3) Eliminate all federal subsidies for public schools, public housing, and public anything. Let the states decide what to do, and what to tax.

(4) Gradually eliminate 90% of federal bureaucracies, beginning with immediate removal of the Department of Education. Want a shocker? Google “Federal bureaucracies and agencies,” and you’ll be amazed at the nonsense that goes on in D.C.

(5) Eliminate all federal mandates to states, counties and cities. These cost taxpayers lots of dollars, and are throttling their legitimate functions.

(6) Naturally, bring all the troops home, and declare total neutrality, which might bring a semblance of sanity to D.C.

(7 to 100) you name it!

We are at a time in history, when it might be possible to save America from the natural progression of things throughout the history of all nations and civilizations, which seem to have had a lifespan of about 200 years. We’re way past that. It will be difficult, seeing the low quality of voters who always vote for the Democrat who promises them the most. We got the low quality because of the above. To win, the thinkers and logical, patriotic citizens, must out-vote those who are hooked on handouts, Medicare, Social Security, food stamps, public schools, and public housing. It will not be an easy job! There is so much wrong here, all caused by ever growing government. Mistakenly, people look to government to fix things, but government not only makes things worse, but creates ever more destructive laws, bureaucracies, and mandates, which have destroyed America. Ten years ago, would any American have thought we’d have a couple dozen “Czars?”  Chin up, protect yourself, and go to one of 2,000 Tea Parties today!

Regards,
Don Stott
Whiskey & Gunpowder

April 16, 2010

Federal Government Provides Entitlements at the Cost of Collapse was originally featured on Whiskey and Gunpowder. Visit Laissez Faire Books for the best selection of libertarian book titles.

The slow, agonizing death of that dream began in 1913 with the establishment of the Fed. It was damaged further by the behavior of the Fed and the big money men through events which led to the Great Depression, and suffered mortal blows under Roosevelt and Truman. The avalanche of irrational spending and social legislation since that time has lead to impractical expectations that could never have been true in any country at any time…after America in the early nineteen hundreds.

“Achievement” based on our own talents and effort has has been replaced by the entitlement mentality and the politics of envy. Passing lightly, for the moment, over the fiscal impossibility of Mr. Obama’s latest scheme to duplicate a chicken in every pot — “A college education for every young American!” — this is yet another feel-good, gimme, pie-in-the-sky statist ploy. In a nation with the drop out rates and widespread illiteracy among youngsters, how does anyone propose to qualify every last kid in America for matriculation? Where are the extra classrooms, textbooks, and teachers to come from?

The whole idea is ludicrous because no matter what the Constitution says (not that statists care), all men are not created equal intellectually. All men are not created equal in terms of what they want to do with their lives or what they would find fulfilling careers. Some of us do not want a MacMansion if it means living in the city. Some would stay cramped in a railroad flat in NYC for decades just to be in the Big Apple. Some like being mechanics and plumbers and electricians, careers which provide them with considerable personal satisfaction and very much above average incomes. Some don’t want to do anything except lie around watching TV or to talk trash, smoke dope, mug strangers, and “draw” welfare.

I did an analysis in 1990 and discovered that over 90% of all youth going before the courts in Seattle were functionally or totally illiterate. How does Mr. Obama propose to turn such into college graduates? A shockingly disproportionate number of “gifted” kids drop out of school, bored senseless with the watered down curriculum and “social” programs. Some, in time, will earn a GED and go to college; many will be wasted.

Each generation in the last century saw a lessening of expectations academically. Use a search engine to find the final exam for the 8th grade — as high as undergraduate education went late in the 19th Century — for Kansas, I think in 1895, although it may have been 1875. I have two college degrees and have done graduate work in five fields. I could pass that exam, but I certainly could not cover myself with glory.

The HS education of the Thirties was the equivalent of a BA in the Sixties. Very few of those who have been graduated since the Eighties will ever begin to know what the average college graduate knew in the Viet Nam era. The real truth is that most of the erudition the highly-educated have came from work they had done on their own because they wanted to know. They view education as a life-long pursuit.

These days we have a show asking “Are you smarter than a fifth grader?” We have millions who never even heard of diagramming a sentence.

Two years ago a high school junior in a “good” school in Houston took Biology. At her age, we were dissecting angle worms the first day and worked our ways up through rats, eels, and cats. HER class went to nearby Galveston and got a small shark. The course of instruction consisted of keeping the shark alive until the last week of school when the teacher dissected it. This is not the sort of biological “knowledge” that leads to future research geniuses. Neither does “Bowling,” another of her classes, or “Yearbook.” She had yet to have mastered the multiplication tables and was still on “pre-Algebra.” I had my first real Algebra course in the 7th grade and three more in high school plus geometry, Latin, Spanish, and Business Law, which stands me in good stead to this day. A college education these days is little more than a necessary stamp of the ticket and does not begin to guarantee even an entry level job, as witness how few recently-graduated lawyers were able to get jobs in that field ten years ago and ever since. We’ve got more lawyers than we need and nowhere near enough engineers, veterinarians, and butchers.

We cannot make genuine college graduates, with what most of us think that term should mean, out of every bit of the raw material at hand. Kids who read poorly, if at all, have no idea how percentages work, and think they are “entitled” to free food, housing, insurance, and medical care are not college material, any more than all of them can become stars in the NBA, successful actresses, or morticians.

Naturally, we cannot set the matter of cost aside. The federal government has beggared this nation for generations and is on a rampage in this century that cannot fail to usher in The Greater Depression. Japan has been suffering from Depression for 19 years, now, and it didn’t spend nearly as much as Washington did. There are so many “social” programs now, and so many more being demanded, that it is not feasible to fund college even for those who qualify even under the current very lax standards.

College is a sheer waste of time for those who have neither the inclination nor the ability to succeed there. Year after year the costs have gone up, and the degree it took four years to earn in my day now takes six. Rather like car loans. Less product for more money.

We can all but guarantee that with true joblessness running nearly 20% (by the standards used during the Great Depression), firms cutting back hours and cutting salaries, and the difficulties universities are having getting operating funds because charitable giving is down, that prices will continue to rise, enrollment will drop (making cost per student even higher), and we will see increasing defaults on student loans. My son has about $75,000′ worth, himself, for which he was graduated summa cum laude and has an MBA. That is also over a year’s salary for him. To add to the strain, through governmental witchery some of those student loans got thrown over into a program with 15% interest rates, breaking the agreement Andrew had made! Nobody consulted him; they just broke the contract and said, “This is how it is now.”

I have written before that the future of higher education is on-line schooling, just as the best option for fortunate children is home-schooling. Three years ago it cost almost exactly what going to the University of Texas for ‘Drew’s MBA would have…but his books were included, classes were never closed to enrollment, and he didn’t spend a great many dangerous, expensive hours on freeways, hunting parking places, or hanging around campus between classes. His work involved all written projects and reports, developing the writing skills he had learned at home. (By the time your mama the editor has marked up all of your papers for three years…)

There isn’t even an illusion of pie in the sky any more. The big rock candy mountain is down to a pile of grubby shards. ALL of the children in America may not and can not go to college for free or even otherwise, and $4000/a year or even a semester is a token. A college education these days costs as much to the families — or a state — as does incarcerating a felon, although it yields a better proportion of taxpayers eventually.

Next time we will discuss other factors which lead to the dismal level of “scholarship” in America and what that portends for the future. Governmental policies have driven away manufacturing jobs, and brains have been drained. There will be less and less interest in “service” industries. My focus is always on what we, as individuals, can do to solve problems for ourselves. We can see that our children do not end up unable to distinguish between they’re, their, and there, or confused over whether to write “companies” or “company’s.” Education, charity, and financial responsibility all need to begin at home, as they did long ago.

Regards,
Linda Brady Traynham

September 16, 2009

The Education Bubble, Part I was originally featured on Whiskey and Gunpowder. Visit Laissez Faire Books for the best selection of libertarian book titles.

When I went to school from the late ‘40s thru the early ‘60s (I know. I’m dating myself.), the object was to learn. And learn we did. Instead of kindergarten and pre-kindergarten …which is now preceded by various forms of child care when the kid presumably learns to relate to his or her peers and be part of a group… we started school in the first grade.

If a child didn’t know how to read before he got to school, he started learning right away. Not just reading but spelling, the multiplication tables, arithmetic and how to tell time. They were even taught penmanship. You know, how to hold your pen or pencil and write clearly? How many people today do you know whose scrawl rivals that of doctors? And when it comes to the way they hold their pens….

As for learning to get along with their peers, that was a natural progression of teacher influence and playground interaction. It also didn’t hurt that most parents were exactly that. Parents. They taught their children to behave, have respect for authority and not talk back to their teachers.

Way back when, report cards were totally different from what they are today. First of all, you had to earn your grade. There was no such thing as social promotion. Even more shocking was that at least half the report card was devoted to…Shock! Amazement!.. something called Citizenship. You were actually graded on citizenship. Areas of concern included Courtesy, Cooperation, Obedience, Industry, Effort, Thrift, Dependability, Health, Neatness, Orderliness and Self-reliance.

If a child was frequently sick or severely underweight, it wasn’t reported to the Child Protective Service. The teacher or principal talked to the parents and/or accepted a note from the doctor and the word of the parent.

Good thing, too. I was the sickly kid in the crowd, due to major chest surgery when I was five. I was in school barely more than I was out and couldn’t gain weight if you handed me an anvil. Despite the fact I was blessed with good parents, CPS would’ve put me in protective custody and investigated my parents for child abuse. To give you an idea of just how scrawny, when I graduated from the 8th grade, I was 5’4” and weighed 78 pounds. Today I’m
6’1” and weigh about 189.

Being absent so much wasn’t a detriment to me. Thanks to my parents and, I suppose, a fairly decent level of intelligence, I had no problem keeping up with my classes. I was using a telephone and reading before I was three, knew the multiplication tables and how to tell time before starting school. I also had a full-blown set of adult encyclopedias that I used to satisfy my curiosity. It didn’t hurt that my mother, when I asked a question, didn’t say “go look it up.” Instead she said “Let’s go look it up.”

According to the teacher, I was reading on a 6th grade level when I started 1st grade, but the truth was that I could pretty well read anything you put in front of me by that time.

For practical purposes, I was partially home schooled before home schooling existed as an industry. Between that and an insatiable curiosity that drives self-education, I’ve wound up with an education substantially beyond the GED that I can claim on a formal level.

But it isn’t that way for a lot of kids today. Education has been dumbed down and many schools are little more than prisons with the teachers acting as wardens. If you doubt that, spend some time on the internet to find out how many schools have metal detectors and the number of weapons they’ve confiscated. School security guards routinely patrol student parking lots to spot weapons that the students forgot they had or didn’t hide sufficiently.

High School graduates can barely read on an 8th grade level. In Texas there’s a test called TAKS (Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills) that students must pass at specific points. Since teachers are evaluated in part on how many of their students pass the TAKS …or more accurately, how many fail it… they wind up teaching to the test and not bothering to teach anything not directly related to it. Other problems that teachers have to deal with are students who cannot speak English and are still required to take the TAKS, even though they will most likely fail it. Finally, special ed students are now being mainstreamed into classes, even though they are not capable of performing at grade level.

But the problems go even deeper. For example, a member of my family is a history teacher in what are called AP classes…and no, that doesn’t stand for Associated Press. It is a very rigorous international program called Advanced Placement. While all students have to pass the TAKS to graduate from high school, those who complete the AP class and make a certain score or higher on the AP test qualify for college credit.

This year, they wound up 40 books short, but not according to the administration. Their logic is that the teachers somehow lost 40 books when the truth is that 40 additional students enrolled. So, you have the same number of books as last year but 40 more students. But will 40 more books be ordered to replace the ones the teachers ‘lost’? Your guess is as good as mine.

Public education today is a lost cause in many parts of the country. Teachers and the better educators are fighting a valiant rear guard action, but it’s essentially a losing proposition. Federal regulation, federal funding, fantasyland promises of free college education for every child, escalating costs and a general dumbing down of the curriculum offered is destroying what’s left of quality education and preventing its revival in most instances.

What’s left? Self-education, home schooling, Christian schools, private schools and internet-based schools. None of these answers are perfect, but they do work and work well.

No matter how you slice it, all of the choices just listed are far and away better than the public option.

Regards,
Richard Marmo

September 14, 2009

Education Then and Now was originally featured on Whiskey and Gunpowder. Visit Laissez Faire Books for the best selection of libertarian book titles.

Someone wrote in arguing that countries like China, India and Japan ought not to be used for role models in reforming America’s education system. The point is that the styles used in those nations focus on rote learning, and there’s also a very high-average standard.

Someone else wrote in lamenting the lack of self-control most public students have when they’re in the classroom…and the parents who endorse such behavior. This readers point was that, if students would be quiet, sit still and listen to their teachers (and if parents would enforce discipline at home), our country wouldn’t be facing the education deficit it is now.

And yet, another reader chimed in with the belief that all of the above suggestions, plus mine from my article, should be combined together to solve the problem.

So Here’s Where We Start

As I mentioned in my previous article, the United States has a long way to go in order to catch up with the educational standards of countries such as China, India and Japan. These three nations and others consistently rank ahead of our in terms of student tests results and overall readiness for working in the “real world” upon graduating high school. One of the things most Asian countries such as these are well known for is what’s known as “rote learning.” For those who don’t know, rote learning makes students learn various facts, figures, etc. through rapid repetition. The idea is to get Johnny and Janey Q. American, Jr. to memorize and memorize more…as some critics would point out, at the expense of understanding.

If all rote learning involves is rapid, intense memorization, then why teach our children that way? Some of you might be asking, “Why do we even want to be like China anyway?” The answer is this: Frankly, we can’t get much worse than what we are now! It’s sad to think, whenever I flick on the ion bombardment tube at home (otherwise known as a television) and I see these so-called “reality” game shows, the lack of common knowledge so many of these contestants have. It shames me to think how many of my fellow countrymen don’t know that George Washington is the first president of the United States, or what the Pythagorean Theorem is, or that the human heart is a muscle, or that the sun is a star.

It’s time we get back to the basics, so to speak, and get our students to actually have some kind of working knowledge of these and other facts and figures. And it’s also time we get Little Johnny and Janey American, Jr. some kind of appreciation for their natural sense of creativity…the kind of creativity which has allowed American ingenuity to lead the world for so long.

Package the Lessons, Not the Students

So with all that said, I’d like to take a few moments to expand on the American Renaissance. Or, at least the points I made about it in the last article. I stand by my points that we need a greater appreciation of the fine arts in American public education. There’s certainly not enough of it taught, and certainly no attempt to correlate it to math, science, history, etc.

On top of limited instruction of the visual and performing arts, one of the biggest problems with our education system is how our students are just moved through grades 1-12 as if they were manufactured goods in a factory. Little Johnny and Janey go through inspections at the end of each grade and receive either a “pass” or “fail” grade. If they receive the latter, they’re usually sent back to repeat that grade…or, sometimes, they factory just ships them out to the department stores of life, just hoping someone will buy them and overlook the students’ defaults. Most of the time, these shortcomings are not the factory workers’ (i.e., teachers) faults, but rather a broken down factory process that simply wouldn’t allow for some personal attention to make the final product better.

If you want a good product, you have to give it some individual attention. It requires catering to that products individual needs…perhaps taking some extra time with it…and even changing the process in the factory if enough manufactured products keeps coming out unprepared for the marketplace. Likewise, our education system’s negligence (sparked by Uncle Sam’s ineptitude) has pushed through many, many fine students who are not ready to compete in the global marketplace. Johnny and Janey American need an education that’ll tailor not only to their specific needs, but also their personal interests. And that’s how we can make the Renaissance practical…

No Place Like Home

I’ll concede my plans for the Renaissance are best utilized in a system where the students accept responsibility — and the parents enforce it. In any society, the schooling is only as good as the parents and guardians who get involved in their children’s education. I say, shame on the parents who don’t care about their kids’ futures. And some people might make the argument that parents can provide extracurricular activities in the fine arts if they wish to do so. But then again, they could also just shove Johnny and Janey American Jr. into some math camp, too.

My point is this: A lot of parents out there really do try hard to teach their kids right and wrong. Some are more successful at it than others. There are some kids out there that just flat out don’t want to learn, no matter how tough their parents are about getting an education, and these kids will just act up. And let’s be brutally honest about our media… They only report on the bad things — the sensational stories, the ones that drive up ratings and get people talking. The stories about Little Johnny becoming an Eagle Scout and Little Janey winning first place in the local science fair contest aren’t gonna cut it. But I digress…

So the American Renaissance is all about improving education in more areas than just one. An awakening to the visual and performing arts will be the central theme of it all, no question. This revival can only come with reforming our education system so that students can see just how different lessons in the academic subjects relate to their own lives…and inspire them to grow. It requires discipline on both the childrens’ and parents’ parts—and for Uncle Sam to just stop overburdening teachers with having to teach to ridiculous standards. But the Renaissance can be achieved. And so can Johnny and Janey American Jr.’s success.

Sincerely,
Adam Hopkins

April 22, 2009

A New Kind of Rote Learning was originally featured on Whiskey and Gunpowder. Visit Laissez Faire Books for the best selection of libertarian book titles.

“Dear Mish,

“Considering the dismal manufacturing news today — 3 million jobs lost since 2000 — I am wondering what people think about our move into the ‘knowledge economy.’ Is it just a hoax, or is there really a shift going on, in the same way that America shifted from being an agricultural economy to a manufacturing economy in the last century? I lived and worked in Taiwan for two years, and they are big believers in the knowledge economy. Because they are such a small country — 23 million people — they have a somewhat different model of economic organization than ours here in the U.S. Below are segments of a draft of an article that I’m working on, and I’m looking for any and all input.

“Much appreciated.

“Michael Nystrom”

Thanks for that question, Michael. It is much appreciated. Before answering, let’s take a look at the key ideas in the article.

“Until very recently, the United States was both the world’s wealthiest nation and the world’s manufacturing powerhouse, leading economists to believe that there was a correlation between the two. This is why the ‘hollowing out’ of American manufacturing was viewed with such alarm throughout the 1980s and ’90s. Remember Ross Perot sounding the alarm bell during the 1992 election over NAFTA and the loss of American jobs?

“Perhaps this was just an overreaction, a misunderstanding. If it is indeed true that we are moving into an ‘information age’ or a ‘knowledge economy,’ as the experts tell us, the new source of wealth becomes something intangible: knowledge. This is demonstrated by Stan Shih’s smile curve:

“More on this graph in a moment, but first a brief introduction to the guy who thought it up. Perhaps you’ve never heard of Stan Shih, but in Asia, he is a rock-star capitalist — the founder of Acer Computer, a genius business theorist, and now a hotshot VC.

“Shih’s ‘smile curve’ comes from his observations as a contract manufacturer of PCs for U.S. brand-name manufacturers. Remember back in the mid-’80s when PC clones first caught fire? There were hundreds of PC clone brands, but most of them were made by OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) — like Stan Shih’s Acer — in Taiwan.

“What Shih noticed was that while companies like his did all the hard manufacturing work, it was the name brands — the IBMs, the Compaqs, and the Digitals — that got all the glory — and the profits. The big American firms with the concept, the R&D, the brands, and the distribution channels could outsource the ‘lowly’ manufacturing work to the lowest bidder. This resulted in a bidding war to the bottom in Taiwan, driving down the cost of production not only in the realm of PCs, but chips and components as well…

“To explain this using a more modern example and in concrete terms, let’s take the example of the Apple iPod. Apple recently announced that it has sold 100 million iPods, and the product has been a cash cow for Apple. Everyone seems to have an iPod. But where was the value in this product created? Not in the manufacturing. Apple doesn’t make the iPods, it contracts the manufacturing out to a Taiwanese manufacturing giant you’ve probably never heard of: Inventec.

“In fact, ‘manufacturing’ is rather a misnomer. Assembly is more like it. An iPod’s chips come from a variety of high-value suppliers (Texas Instruments among them), the hard drives from others (Hitachi), and the hundreds of other electronics components from hundreds of other suppliers. Inventec is really just a very organized assembler of parts from different companies all over the world. And the assembler’s margins are woefully slim. Inventec doesn’t just make iPods, it also makes notebook computers, phones, personal digital assistants, calculators, and whatever else it can for companies much more famous than Inventec is or likely will ever be.

“The real ‘value creation’ in the iPod came in the knowledge required to conceptualize, create, market, brand, and position the player, as well as the ability to leverage that knowledge into a hefty profit. The iPod certainly wasn’t the first mp3 player, but it is by far the most popular, thanks to the unique conceptualization, sleek branding, and superior design and engineering. In short, the value came from knowledge, and through leveraging that knowledge.

“Apple is able to capture huge margins on sales of the iPod. Say each iPod costs $5-10 to make, but Apple sells them anywhere from $150-250 because it controls the distribution network and can therefore set the price. Because the iPod is a unique item, there are no bidding wars with other MP3 player makers. Let others sell MP3 players as cheap as they like — few people want them.

“From this example, manufacturing does indeed appear to be the lowest value input. This is why, the capitalists say, the world has evolved to the point that it has. “We think, they sweat,” they say. We, of course, are the Americans, and they are the sweating Asians.

“Clever, isn’t it? But I have a nagging feeling there is something wrong with the theory, though I’m not exactly sure what. Perhaps I’m too rooted in the old economy, unable yet to adjust to the idea of the ‘knowledge economy.’ But I have a feeling there is something more.

“What is wrong, if anything, with the model? Or am I just a dinosaur?”

Michael, there is nothing wrong with that chart. One can clearly look at China, India, and Southeast Asia in general and see, without a doubt, what is happening. And in spite of enormous increases in raw materials, the prices of finished goods have barely risen.

Are cars, boats, pottery, computers, monitors, printers, light fixtures, etc. keeping up with the prices of the raw materials that make them? Clearly, the answer is no. The curve reflects what is happening. In fact, the curve represents additional profit that can be had by shifting manufacturing to low-cost providers. That is, in essence, the very foundation of global wage arbitrage. However, you are missing several key points.

Key Points

1. Global wage arbitrage is not just about manufacturing.
2. The U.S. has no intrinsic brainpower advantage.
3. The smile curve is flattening.

Please consider the recent announcement: “Citigroup Details Massive Restructuring Plan”:

“Citigroup Inc. on Wednesday said it will eliminate 17,000 jobs, or 5% of its work force, as part of a broad restructuring plan designed to cut costs and bolster its long underperforming stock price…

“Citigroup plans to move more than 9,500 jobs to lower-cost locations worldwide, with about two-thirds through attrition. It will also eliminate layers of management, often increasing the number of workers reporting to each manager.”

Poof! 17,000 jobs are gone and the details show that we are talking about “layers of management,” not just low-level clerks. Where are the jobs headed? “To lower-cost locations worldwide.”

We are seeing the same thing in medical outsourcing, tax preparation, and accounting functions. With medical outsourcing, we have X-rays being taken here, shipped to India for diagnosis, and only the treatment being performed in the U.S.

Outsourcing Innovation

Next consider “Outsourcing Innovation”:

“First came manufacturing. Now companies are farming out R&D to cut costs and get new products to market faster…

“While the electronics sector is furthest down this road, the search for offshore help with innovation is spreading to nearly every corner of the economy…

“Underlying this trend is a growing consensus that more innovation is vital — but that current R&D spending isn’t yielding enough bang for the buck. After spending years squeezing costs out of the factory floor, back office, and warehouse, CEOs are asking tough questions about their once-cloistered R&D operations: Why are so few hit products making it out of the labs into the market?…

“The result is a rethinking of the structure of the modern corporation. What, specifically, has to be done in-house anymore?…

“‘You have to draw a line,’ says Motorola CEO Edward J. Zander. At Motorola, ‘core intellectual property is above it, and commodity technology is below.’

“Wherever companies draw the line, there’s no question that the demarcation between mission-critical R&D and commodity work is sliding year by year. The implications for the global economy are immense. Countries such as India and China, where wages remain low and new engineering graduates are abundant, likely will continue to be the biggest gainers in tech employment and become increasingly important suppliers of intellectual property. Some analysts even see a new global division of labor emerging: The rich West will focus on the highest levels of product creation, and all the jobs of turning concepts into actual products or services can be shipped out. Consultant Daniel H. Pink, author of the new book A Whole New Mind, argues that the ‘left brain’ intellectual tasks that ‘are routine, computer-like, and can be boiled down to a spec sheet are migrating to where it is cheaper, thanks to Asia’s rising economies and the miracle of cyberspace.’ The U.S. will remain strong in ‘right brain’ work that entails ‘artistry, creativity, and empathy with the customer that requires being physically close to the market.’”

The idea that the “U.S. will remain strong in ‘right brain’ work that entails ‘artistry, creativity, and empathy with the customer that requires being physically close to the market’” is pure arrogance.

But for a second, let’s assume it’s true. The question, then, is how many “right brain” creative jobs we need, versus how many “routine, computer-like” ones.

Look at the jobs this service economy is creating: jobs at Wal-Mart, Pizza Hut, Home Depot, Lowe’s, nail salons, grocery stores, etc., etc. Exactly how many of those jobs are needed versus the creative, artistic, super whiz-bang design jobs?

Is Education the Answer?

Some have proposed that education is the answer. That presumes China and India and other countries are standing still. Like it or not, they aren’t. China and India are churning out engineers faster than the U.S. I am not trying to dismiss the importance of education, but logic dictates that if everyone had a Ph.D., then Ph.D.s would be greeting at Wal-Mart and serving pizzas at Pizza Hut.

In short, this is not a right brain versus left brain phenomenon, nor does the U.S. have a monopoly on brainpower. The idea that we no longer need manufacturing jobs and the U.S. can thrive on R&D, branding, marketing and other value added services assumes the world is standing still. It also assumes those jobs are somehow safe from competition. That’s a big mistake.

Global competition for jobs at every level in every capacity is increasingly the norm. China and India are churning out enormous numbers of doctors and engineers. Global wage arbitrage has now shifted from manufacturing to other spots on the curve. Look at medical outsourcing and increased outsourcing of R&D as proof. Expect further pressures on wages at every spot on the “smile curve,” with intense competition at the ends of the curve, and you won’t be far wrong. Is the U.S. prepared for a flattening of that curve while the world catches up? I think not, but it will happen anyway.

Regards,
Mike Shedlock ~ “Mish”

April 25, 2007

The Knowledge-Based Economy was originally featured on Whiskey and Gunpowder. Visit Laissez Faire Books for the best selection of libertarian book titles.