USA to Pass Science Crown to China

instantgames writes "According to a working paper of the National Bureau of Economic Research, rapid development of a science and technology base by populous Asian countries soon may threaten the economic position of the United States. Not only is the U.S. losing ground in high technology exports, but its very capacity to develop new technologies is declining rapidly with respect to the rest of the world. According to Richard Freeman, the paper's author, the sheer population of Asian countries may allow them to train more scientists and engineers than the U.S. while devoting a smaller share of their economy to science and technology." From the article: "The phenomenal growth of China's industrial base has been widely publicized, but Freeman focuses on what is perhaps the more important long-term indicator of a nation's prosperity - its re-investment in science and technology education. "

Comments

That should go along nicely...

[daveschroeder]

...with China's commensurate commitment to freedom of speech, human rights, free flows of information among its citizenry, support of protest and political dissent, and so on.

That's not the only critical front on which the US will be competing with China: the US will soon pass the oil/fossil fuel consumption crown to China as well if current trends continue.

Further, China is free to spend for its own growth with little oversight from the populace (such as investing heavily in pebble bed fission reactors, planning to build 30 new reactors by 2020), allowing it to spend money as it sees fit without the same social and political constraints as the US. And even with what little oversight you think we might have in the US, it's far greater than the influence a typical Chinese citizen has. It's too bad that we'll likely never see new nuclear plants built anytime soon here, with all the political baggage.[1] We'll just keep using the quickly diminishing supply of conventional fossil fuels.[2]

[1] An environmental research group came to my door the other day extolling the virtues of environmental law, conservation, anti-pollution law, and etc., as you'd expect. All noble causes, when tempered with economic reality. But they continued on to also say opposition to ANY nuclear project was critical. Could they "count on my support?" In a word, no.

[2] Bush is actually pushing hard for the nuclear plants we're in desperate need of. See the policy speeches here. Contrast this with some typical opponents' opposition to all ongoing nuclear research under the guise of nuclear weapons nonproliferation.

Re:That should go along nicely...

[jahudabudy]

But they continued on to also say opposition to ANY nuclear project was critical.

Yeah, sometimes (most of the time?) passionate self-righteousness precludes any rational thought. I work on the campus of a liberal arts college, and see a lot of PCU-style protesters. A few years ago, NC was looking to build a waste-disposal site for low-level nuclear waste (generally stuff like rubber gloves used in medical procedures involving radiation or x-ray). I was approached by a protest group that wanted me to sign a petition decrying this horrendous environmental affront. I asked them what they proposed should be done with this waste, they said "Stop producing it." I pointed out that a) chemotherapy patients, dental patients, etc. would object to this "solution", and b) this "solution" would do absolutely nothing for the already existing waste.
I'm not sure which was louder, the howls of rage, or the giant sucking sound as my points were hurled into the intellectual vacuum.

Re:That should go along nicely...

[frank_adrian314159]

what in the hell does that even mean? Is he going to set off the nukular reactors and blow someone up?

No. To spell it out for you, nuclear power plants are supposed to be privately held, but publicly regulated. This regulation is essential to insure that the populace is not injured due to lack of plant maintenance or poor operation. The Bush administration has shown itself willing to allow industries off the hook (and actively fighting for them to be kept of the same hoook) for several years now. It is unlikely that their stance on nuclear regulation would be different. As such, most people (even us who support the technology) are quite leery about letting it return under this administration.

And before you give me the old Libertarian saw about how the power companies would be hurting themselves if they let the plants go out of safety compliance, remember that people and companies do a whole lot of things which, in hindsight, appear to be stupid, in order to take "low-risk" gains, only to have said probability turn aginst them. Also, as the Congress' new tort-reform legislation has been signed (and was always limited in practice by actual assets - there's not a lot of value in a busted nuclear plant), there is almost no way for the public to have redress if such an accident did happen. all of these act as factors to say that nukes probably won't be getting approved for at least another 3 years are up. Stop voting for idiots who think it's fine to let companies screw over people without penalty and maybe they'll let the companies have their (somewhat dangerous) toys back.

Re:That should go along nicely...

[mellon]

Look, there are five big issues with nuclear power:

1. The waste is toxic, and not biodegradable, so it remains toxic for longer than the lifespan of any historical civilization.
2. The waste can be used to build nuclear weapons.
3. Reactors can melt down.
4. Reactors can accidentally emit radioactive material into the atmosphere.
5. Reactors wear out, and when they are no longer usable, the entire reactor is itself toxic waste, and remains that way for longer than the life of any known civilization. Tearing down the reactor inevitably releases this waste into the environment - the groundwater, the soil, and the atmosphere.

It's quite possible that all of these problems can be solved. It's also true that in some cases, coal power is worse than nuclear. For example, fly ash from coal contains a certain number of parts per million of uranium, radium and thorium, depending on where it was mined.

But let's be clear. Pebble bed solves the meltdown problem. That's all it solves. It doesn't solve the waste problem.

Theory is that breeder reactors might solve the waste problem - in fact, what they allow you to do is extract about 75 times more energy from the same uranium, which is very cool indeed, and what's left is much less radioactive than what you started with (but it's still radioactive).

Unfortunately, the best example we have of a fast breeder reactor is the Superphenix reactor in France. This was shut down in 1997 because it began to fail in exciting ways, prematurely, particularly due to problems in the liquid sodium (!) cooling system. So this technology, unlike pebble bed reactors, isn't as stable as one would wish.

So we've completely addressed problem (3), and there's the possibility that problems (1) and (2) may be partially addressed by breeder reactor technology at some future time. But they aren't completely addressed even in the future, and aren't addressed at all in the present. Plus, we're still left with the other two problems, which are quite significant.

So you do the math. What's the cost/benefit analysis for coal? For solar? For nuclear? For wind? For some combination of these? If you think the answer is easy, you probably haven't actually done the math.

I think the reason for the wide disparity of opinions on this topic is that (a) people value different things differently, and (b) nobody is really even talking about the same thing.

For example, when someone talks about recycling nuclear fuel with breeder reactors, they're speaking hypothetically, even if they don't know it, because the technology isn't yet mature enough to be able to say that it's actually usable in practice. All current practical experiments have thus far yielded failure, although some have been more successful than others, and we do know that the basic idea does work.

Likewise when someone talks about getting energy from kites, it's also hypothetical, because nobody's actually doing it in production yet. Once again, there have been trials, and we do know that the basic idea does work, but we do not yet know if it can be used in practice, en masse.

Both things are interesting, but when you're discussing energy policy decisions, neither thing is presently relevant, and neither will be until they have demonstrated success in production.

Likewise, for some people, the value of generation techniques that produce no first-order pollution byproducts (i.e., combustion byproducts or fission byproducts) is more attractive than techniques that do produce these byproducts. It's important that we not let ourselves be fooled by the lack of first-order byproducts when the second-order byproducts overwhelm the first-order byproducts (e.g., the debate about the net energy cost to build a solar panel).

But assuming that we are taking these factors into account, it's still possible that even if the generation cost of, for example, solar, in dollars, were more than the generation cost of, for example, nuclear, it might still be better to build solar, because we are not counting certain externalities which, while they don't cost in dollars, do still matter.

Re:That should go along nicely...

[Bastian]

what in the hell does that even mean?

It means to me that, given the Bush administration's current record on international relations and national security, putting up more nuke plants with people like him in power conjures images of scores of nuclear power plants with huge targets painted on the cooling towers, large cash rewards being posted for anyone who can bulls-eye one, and maps showing the locations of all of them along with their bounties.

Let's wait until the country isn't being run by an administration that is hell-bent on giving people all over the world reasons to hate us while being so tunnel-visioned in on playing nepotism games and chasing white whales and ninjas in the bushes that it's incapable of putting up a solid, carefully-planned defense strategy.

He's not evil. He just a causehead who has no fucking clue about anything but does have an incredible knack for making emotional appeals that keep people who are easily influenced thinking he's a well-balanced intellectual. I mean, come on, this is the guy whose idea of the most financially responsible thing to do with Social Security is to prop it up with a $2,000,000,000,000 loan.

The warning signs have been around

[tcd004]

Yep, this has been creeping up on us for awhile, despite warnings from U.S. industry insiders. Both government and private funds for R&D are drying up.

Still, some economists argue that China isn't growing nearly as quickly as it could. How could that be?

One probable cause is that infrastructure for research and development has a long way to go in many developing Asian countries, especially China. Having some history behind your scientific community has its benefits. Thats why, even with our moral and ethical hurdles in the way, we're still winning the "great stem cell race." For now.

(enjoy the plugs for great articles in my favorite magazine)
tcd004

What do you expect?

[donleyp]

From an elementary school's billboard in my neighborhood: "Adequate yearly progress, once again!"

This is what we get for handing our children's education over to the government.

Moderators, please don't rate this post as "Funny", because it isn't.

Re:What do you expect?

[Evro]

This is what we get for handing our children's education over to the government.

As opposed to China, where they've handed everything over to the government?

Re:What do you expect?

[EvilTwinSkippy]

Last I checked, the Government was also handling children's education WAY back in our glory days during WWII and the space race.

What is a sin and a shame to me is the "one size fits all" mentality that shapes education. When are we going to finally grow up and realize that not everyone is cut out for college. Of course that would also require a measure of respect for the trades as a legitimate line of work, and not simply something for the "special" kids.

Re:What do you expect?

[donleyp]

There have been lots of great ideas for fixing it, but every single one of them have been shot down by the NEA.

It is a sad state of affairs when the major private organization in our country helping to shape education policy is a teacher's union, who's interest lies with teachers, not students.

Let me refine my point by pointing out that you can track the decline in S&E with the rise in the power of the Department of Education.

Re:What do you expect?

[linzeal]

Get rid of most of the teachers after grade 5 or so and let people who can utilize the vast array of self-tutorials, peer-forums and the sheer power of the internet to learn. My niece is 12 years old and has advanced all the way to precalculus with a mother and father who know only basic arithmitic and has never been in a school or met a teacher. She is self-sufficient and is not some super genius or anything. Teacher-led instruction as the basis for education in a fast paced knowledge driven economy is damaging children before they learn you can learn for yourself, by yourself.

Re:What do you expect?

[ncmathsadist]

Ah, it's the perennial bitchfest on American education. Why don't our schools work like they should? Here's a view from the inside (I teach in a public magnet school).

1. American culture is deeply anti-intellectual. Americans do not value teaching and learning. Look at the behaviour of our largest universities. Americans are interested in their children being credentialed; they for the most part don't give a fig if their children become sentient, civilized adults.

2. Education has a second-rate image as a profession. Americans think that teachers should work "for the love of it". These same people think that a tepid middle relief pitcher should get 3 megabux a year 'cause its important for the home team. There is no star system for teachers. All are yoked in syzygy into rigid pay scales that do not reward performance. Well, Americans are getting what they pay for.

3. Education starts in the home. Are you sending your child to school properly socialized so he can function effectively? Do you read to your chyldren? Does junior know his colors and shapes, or is he educated by the television?? This is probably the biggest source of the achievement gap in schools, tho' it ain't PC to talk about it.

4. Schools STILL function in the industrial revolution model. Your average edhead says "Gee, don't one size fit all....?" Schools are, more often than not, tighly and centrally controlled like factories. Schools push values such as lockstep conformity. "Dont be different! That's bad!" Then their administrations sit and wonder why every kid is doing drugs as a teen. In the 21st century, people need to learn to think for themselves to be effective citizens. (this is a heretical and incendiary idea)

5. It's OK in america to neglect gifted kids. "They will take care of themselves anyway" Uh, wrong. Tragically wrong. This is a topic for a lengthy disquisition. I have been a specialist in the field of gifted education for many years. The misconceptions held by the public on this issue are legion.

It is not a pretty picture. And given our yahooish culture (highest cultural value in America: tits wiggling on a video screen) and the loutishness and selfishness of our business and political establishments, change isn't in the cards any time soon. Remember, it's always fat'n'sassy right until the very moment the roof cafes in. Hello Bejing.......

Re:Bill Gates on US Education

[Com2Kid]

This nation does not have a history of education or academic excellence. Our WW2 genius was mostly imported, as was much of our cold war research.

We as a nation have been able to attract great minds with promises of "vast tracks of land", but that is about it.

Emulation, not innovation

[winkydink]

China is still very much more a copier of technology than an innovator. Once they become successful innovators, then we have to worry.

It wasn't due to a "rapid development"...

[Anonymous Coward]

but rather due to capital flight. Our corporations, in an effort to turn a quick buck, intentionally transfered our high-technology manufacturing assets to asia. Our design centers were sure to follow.

It only makes sense that a majority of future developments are going to come to us from Asia as we are no longer the experts -- they are.

Is it just me...

[ultramk]

Does this remind anyone else of the dire warnings about Japan "taking over" in the '80s and '90s.

This just reeks of fear-mongering. I half-way expect Michael Crichton to write some stupid novel about it.

m-

Re:Is it just me...

[Distinguished Hero]

Japan had a population roughly equal to half that of the US. In order for Japan to surpass the US, the average Japanese citizen would have to be twice as efficient as the average US citizen.

China has a population roughly equal to four times that of the US. In order for China to surpass the US, the average Chinese citizen would have to be one quarter as efficient as the average US citizen.

Now, do you have any reason to believe that the average Chinese citizen cannot be one quarter as efficient as the average American? Now imagine what will happen when the average Chinese citizen is as efficient as the average American. Then, imagine what will happen if/when the average Chinese citizen becomes as efficient as the average Japanese.

What, us worry?

[gsfprez]

at least our kids know how to be politcally correct, don't have the stress of having to know how to read their own diplomas, are sensitive to every kind of form of sexual proclivity by the time they are in 4th grade, have shitloads of self-esteem, and can be sure that when they or their neighbors with little or no english skills work so hard that they reach the pinnacle of academic achievement - community college - they can be sure that there will be free childcare for them and their 4 kids when the go to class after working the all night shift at McDonalds.

why are we worrying about science? Thats for nerds that don't watch American Idol. Which is, in and of itself, a sad state of affairs when you look at it...that those people are who we collectively teach our children to idol.

just so long as we can yell and scream and blame every problem in the country on Bush and Judge Roberts, why would you want to fill our kids' heads with crap like science? They won't have room for remembering Nelly lyrics! /bitterness and dispair

Re:What, us worry?

[gosand]

just so long as we can yell and scream and blame every problem in the country on Bush and Judge Roberts, why would you want to fill our kids' heads with crap like science?

You mean our Jesus-freak President? Who sold our children's and grandchildren's futures to fund a personal-vendetta war that he has NEVER been able to justify? We will be able to blame the Bush administration for the state of things for a long long time. He has had that huge of a negative impact on our society. We haven't even begun to feel the reprocussions of this misguided fool.

Not that he can be blamed for everything, our society has been trained to be ignorant by the religious right for a while now. Video game that allows you to beat up and kill people? Hmm, OK. Wait, what!? There is a SEX scene in it?!!! AHHHHHHH! RECALL IT! Won't someone think of the children!!!

Not all bad

[NineNine]

I say that it's not all bad. What we lose in scientific-ness, we more than make up for with our awesome Jesus-osity! We may be dumber, but we're Holier!

Good!!!

[Quiet_Desperation]

All those decades of a culture where intelligence is derided and ridiculed, and vacuous beauty or the ability to do things with a ball are hailed as things to be blindly worshipped are finally coming home to roost.

The endless raging river of media vomited images of the intelligent person being something that should be made fun of and looked down upon, washing over generation after generation of ill-educated and hyperactive minds, worming its way into every single crevice of the collective coma is appearing as a giant sinkhole after eroding away all support beneath the surface.

And you think this news will stop the stupidization of this society? Dream on. 99% of the population will never even become aware of it. They'll be blithering about red states and blue states and angels and demons and what whore Justin Dumbass Timberlake is fucking this week.

Harsh attitude? Tough shit. I have met parents who were bothered when their children did *too* *well* in school, lest they be considered "brainiacs" or "geeks". People aren't remotely harsh enough on these sorts of memes.

I was tapped out of tolerance on this front years ago. I'm on my way to retire in my early 50's, and then I'm outta this dump. Sit an wallow in your celebrity gossip, sports teams composed of sociopaths who are forgiven every crime by their followers and your endless wasteland of (pseudo)reality television and basing scientific legislation on ancient fairy tales.

Every empire has its end

[tulsadano]

I'm curious why Americans are so shocked that the world preeminence we have enjoyed for a century looks like it will come an end in the next few generations (if we're lucky).

History is in fact rife with empires that rose to politcal, military and cultural dominance and then (for whatever reason) saw it slip away. The English before US. The Spanish before them. The HRE, Romans, Egyptians...

Why on earth do Americans think, "Oh, but the American world dominance will be the one that lasts forever?" Didn't the English believe that in the eighteenth & nineteenth centuries? The Spanish in the fourteenth - seventeenth centuries? ...

It is a fact of history: Cultures rise to dominance and then fade from dominance. America is just fulfilling the eon old historical pattern. Maybe China will be the next in line; Maybe an unified Europe; Maybe India; Maybe a repeat of the middle ages where there was no global power. I don't know. But I do know, that eventually America will fall from its penacle. No doubt about it.

Re:Every empire has its end

[jstott]

I'm curious why Americans are so shocked that the world preeminence we have enjoyed for a century looks like it will come an end in the next few generations (if we're lucky).

History is in fact rife with empires that rose to politcal, military and cultural dominance and then (for whatever reason) saw it slip away. The English before US. The Spanish before them. The HRE, Romans, Egyptians...

Because we're even worse at studying history than we are at science?

-JS

Re:Cultural difference

[Coryoth]

As long as the culture in the US continues to denigrate academic achievement and to glorify ignorance, this country will continue to fall behind the rest of the world in research and invention.

There was an interesting Op-Ed piece in AMS Notices this month. Let me quote the relevant passage:

"For the next ten years of a now 28 year business career, I hid my mathematics background. It wasn't shame or embarassment that inspired my actions, as I am quite proud of my achievements in the discipline and feel strongly that mathematics is a major contributor to all of my business accomplishments. No it was the knowledge, based on experience, that talking about mathematics with those not steeped in the discipline would steer a business conversation away from business and onto an entirely different plane.

What was the conversation? I am sure you have had it.
Person 1: Dr. Schaar, I appreciated your comment on education policy and the role that corporations can play in long-range programs. You seem to have a such a deep understanding of what educators want and need. What is your background?
Schaar: I am a mathematician and taught at the university level for several years.
Person 1: Oh, I was never any good at math. Hated the subject actually. I never could figure out how I would use it after school and didn't get along with my teacher...

I do not have to continue. But over the years I began to realise that there was somethign hidden in Person 1's remarks. There was an insinuation that Person 1's non-mastery of mathematics was a non-issue. She was a successful business person in spite of it. So there! Her lack of matery was validated by the business world, and also by her peers, who eagerly confessed their lack of mathematical savvy as if it invited entry into a secret club. These same leaders trumped their abilities in the business world, while downplaying the significance mathematics played in the equation"

From "Mathematics in Public" by Dr. Richard Schaar, AMS Notices August 2005.

I'm sure any other mathematicians here, especially those who have spent time working in the business world, will find that conversation entirely familiar and typical. People take pride in their failure to study and master mathematics. It is all too common. Yet as Dr. Schaar pints out later in the article, mathematics is increasingly necessary skill in the modern compter oriented business world. The skills of logical thought and deduction fostered even by basic mathematics are the foundations for a large amount of IT related tasks, let alone the more advanced mathematics that can be so very benficial in engineering and computer science. Dr. Schaar goes on to describe how he now continues such conversations:

Person 1: Oh, I was never any good at mathematics.
Schaar: Well, that is too bad. Were you any good at reading?

His point is that being good at mathematics, and the logical thought it teaches is as vital in the modern business world as reading. We ought to e taking it far more seriously than we are. I agree.

I'd like to make a further point though, having had exactly such conversation many many times myself. Whenever I probe a little deeper it is almost always the case that the person liked and was good at mathematics at some point, usually very early primary/elementary school, but at some point along the ay they "had a bad teacher", or were given the impression that mathematics was hard, fell a little behind - and once behind the problems compounded at higher and higher levels and they quickly grew to hate the subject. The "bad teacher" is an all too common explanation.

Is it any wonder though? The people who most often go into primary/elementary school teaching are precisely thoe people who never liked and struggled with mathematics at high school. They lack the ability to provide a wealth of ways to look at the problem, and lack any interest or enthusiasm for mathemat

Yeah...but only the U.S. can outlaw evolution

[joelsanda]

Not only is the U.S. losing ground in high technology exports, but its very capacity to develop new technologies is declining rapidly with respect to the rest of the world.

So what? In the U.S. we can outlaw evolution. We'll just change science when and if needed.

"Kansas school board's evolution ruling angers science community" [CNN].

Re:Bill Gates on US Education

[spun]

Listen, lad. I've built this education system up from nothing. When I started here, all there was was swamp. The king said I was daft to build a school in a swamp, but I built it all the same, just to show 'em. It sank into the swamp. So, I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third one. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up. An' that's what your gonna get, lad -- the strongest school in these islands.

Re:Bill Gates on US Education

[Buelldozer]

If you truly think that "religious extremists" are the problem you're even more nuts then they are.

The REAL problem is that our society does not LIKE smart people, it prefers jocks.

It starts in grade school with the teasing of the "smart kid" and progresses through High School where large football players with brains the size of walnuts play whack-a-mole with kids half their size and three times their intellect.

When we become adults are we, defined as popular society, more interested in learning about the latest advance in Physics or what Brittney Spears had for breakfest?

Religous extremists are NOT the reason our education system is failing nor are they the reason that we are producing fewer and fewer talented, motivated, and intelligent Scientists and Engineers.

THE answer is all around us, and it is IS us...it's society stupid.

BTW, my father-in-law is a devout Christian and an AWESOME Advanced Placement Physics instructor at the local high school.

No Wonder

[linuxhansl]

In no particular order:

1. Funding slashed for public education.
2. Lawyers fighting trivial patent battles (instead of that money being used to innovate).
3. Companies suing their own customers for copyright infringement
4. "Infotainment" instead of informed news. Fox News anybody?
5. Controlfreak-behavior everywhere. Controlling what people with their information, controlling foreigners/terrorists/everything, etc.
6. Manipulated Science Papers to receive funding.
7. Polically motivated resaerch to bring a certain politically favoured outcome.
8. Removing of non-PC topics from school books (like "fanatism", "racial issues", in some cases "evolution theory").
9. Huge defense budget (instead of using the money otherwise).
10. Religious (christian) fundamentalism.
11. Campains to make the US the most disliked country on this planet, even by its allies.
12. etc/etc/etc

Honestly, who is surprised? This maybe what currently the majority of the (US) people want, but these same people should realize that actions have consequences.

Europe isn't much better either.

Re:Zero Sum Game and Education

[Coryoth]

America is hated largely because we are number one in terms of ... freedom

Freedom, n. Exemption from the stress of authority in a beggarly half dozen of restraint's infinite multitude of methods. A political condition that every nation supposes itself to enjoy in virtual monopoly.

-- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary (1906)

Almost a century later and just as accurate as ever.

Jedidiah.

Re:Zero Sum Game and Education

[kocsonya]

> America is hated largely because we are number one in terms of GDP, freedom, etc. I say let someone else take that spot at the top (at least in GDP) so the rest of the world can hate them for a while.

America is not hated because you have more GDP or freedom than the rest of the world. You are hated because you attack and destroy countries and sovereign governments when your economic interest dictates that, in the name of "liberating" the population (well, the part which you do not kill) while you do not give a hoot about hundreds of thousand dying when there is no money for you in it.
You are hated because you toot around against WMDs whlie you are the largest developers of named WMDs and, in fact, the only one who used nuclear weapons against civilian targets.
You are hated because you refuse to care about the environment because it would hurt your bottom line and the rest of the world suffers from your ignorance. You are hated because you define what "freedom" must mean to the rest of the world: the American Way of Life. Everyone who thinks differently is an enemy of Freedom and Liberty and the enemy of the US of A.
You are hated because you set up dictators when it suits you then try to depose them, with all your military might, when they do not toe the party line any more. Never mind how many people die in both turn and never mind what gets destroyed, as long as weapons sale profits are high enough.
You are not hated but looked down for touting freedom when you had seggregation just 30 years ago, for warning parents that the Origin of Species contains dangerous theories that are not in the Bible, for having a patent system that allows you to patent a way of combing your hair to cover a bald spot, for cranking out movie after movie with no plot but more blood and explosion than a slaghterhouse hit by a Pershing and you call it "culture" but in the same time you have no problem destroying many thousand year old remnants of human history - all in all, that was not American, thus it must have been worthless. You are looked down for being the largest porn manufacturing industry but with an unbelievable hypocricy make nudity a deadly sin. You talk about freedom but ban gay marriages. You talk about women's rights but ban abortus even to an underage rape victim.
The idea that the world envies you is false. It comes from the idea that the US is, by definition, the best. Therefore obviously the world wants to be like the US just evil forces want to stop development and in order to liberate the world in their quest to finally living "our way of life", as your great leader puts it in every speech, you should attack them by economic, political and military needs. The fallacy in the whole ideology is that the rest of the world does not want to live like you. Europe appreciates her own decadent ways you know, with all that culture rubbish and lack of rights to have machine guns but with some rights of not being killed by your fellow citizens. Asia has a culture that is a lot more ancient than even Europe's and they seem to be doing reasonably OK with it, thank you very much. Africa is just too poor to have its priorities around freedom and ideology, they think about the food and water and medication more than their liberty.

Noone would have a problem with the US wanting to lead the world.
The problem is that you do not want to lead, you want to rule.

Already used my mod points,

[Tetravus]

but I'd mod you up if I could.

The neglect of gifted children is one of the worst things that occurs in the public education system. For those children who are gifted and could succeed, there is no reason to strive. They would be belittled by their peers and given no additional resources. For those children who are gifted and have concomittant special needs (i.e. can finish assigned reading in 1/2 the allotted time and then disrupt the class because they're bored, does the teacher have anything for them to do afterwards?)

You know the saying about the first 80% of an objective being easy to achieve? The next 10% is challenging, the 5% after that very difficult and the final 5% almost impossible. For some reason our schools are attempting to get the final 5% onto par with the first 80% through mainstreaming of students who may never produce average results; simultaneously they are ignoring the 10% of potential high achievers who may require more stimulation to really bloom.

my own observations

[BlightThePower]

I teach in an engineering department in a fairly good european university.
We had a meeting recently where the senior members of the department discussed project work and instructions to students. Their concern was that a pattern was emerging along these lines...

Domestic students would or would not do what they were told by the deadline. They may or may not introduce some ideas of their own in doing this.

European students would tend to deliver but had a tendency to deliver what they wanted deliver rather than what was discussed, this would vary a bit as to whether it was a good thing (innovative, neat ideas, rejecting what on balance became bad advice) or a bad thing (willfully ignoring good advice) depending.

Japanese students tend never to say no, but would sometimes reappear at an advanced point in the project and confess they were stuck. Sometimes this would be a bit too late to do much about it. They'd normally get by though, just on the basis that up until that point they'd have had a damn good go at attacking the problem and there was often on close examination some stuff there that could be re-worked or otherwise given prominence to attract the credit it deserved.

Chinese students, basically, would never so no and always deliver exactly what was requested, even if they staggered in looking like death warmed up.

The bulk of the meeting was discussing how we could get our overseas students to loosen up a little and be more proactive. Its a fine balance obviously recognising the needs of individuals but not being discriminatory. But as one Prof quipped, we could probably kill a Chinese student by giving them an insoluable problem to work on whereas a domestic student would probably turn up and call us names (rightly). Be careful with the off-hand suggestions was the message, be clear about what the goals are and what are side issues. This should help all the above in different ways.

Does this translate into anything nationally? Not sure, but it might be relevant if it says something universal about mentality. Chinese engineers certainly have the work ethic, put it that way.