America Losing Its Edge In Innovation

jaywhybee writes "Forbes has an interesting article about America losing its edge in innovation because engineers and scientists in the US are not as respected as they are in other countries, and thus fewer youths aspire to become one. Quoting: 'I’ve visited more than 100 countries in the past several years, meeting people from all walks of life, from impoverished children in India to heads of state. Almost every adult I’ve talked with in these countries shares a belief that the path to success is paved with science and engineering. In fact, scientists and engineers are celebrities in most countries. They’re not seen as geeks or misfits, as they too often are in the US, but rather as society’s leaders and innovators. In China, eight of the top nine political posts are held by engineers. In the US, almost no engineers or scientists are engaged in high-level politics, and there is a virtual absence of engineers in our public policy debates.'"

Comments

They once were

[Cryacin]

Think back to the TV shows of the '50's and '60's. We had an Astronaut/physics guy as the main character in I dream of Jeanie, A senior marketing executive as the husband of a witch in Bewitched, and many many others. The key factor was, they were all intelligent.

These days we have Homer Simpson and the King of queens, et al.

Re:They once were

[RazorSharp]

It seems like you cannot understand the intelligence behind the social commentary in The Simpsons. Do you seriously think that this show encourages people to aspire to the likes of Homer? And in any case, he is an engineer in that power plant, isn't he?

The Simpsons is a sad case b/c almost everyone misses the social commentary. Or they realize it's a satire of couch potatoes, but it doesn't make them feel bad, rather it makes them feel accepted, or at least acceptable. The show itself kind of drops the ball in this regard: Marge always comes back to Homer, no matter what he does (which begs the question, whom is more stupid?). Intelligent/geeky characters are ridiculed: the science guy, comic book guy, Lisa.

I love the show, but it only contributes to the negative perception Americans have of academics. Because, really, the show doesn't go out of its way to make political statements. An environmentalist is going to think it's pro-environmentalist b/c of Lisa, an anti-environmentalist is going to think it makes fun of environmentalists b/c of how everyone treats Lisa. The Simpsons rarely takes a stance, it allows the audience to make their own conclusions based on what characters they relate to and their own personal biases.

You may see the Simpsons as making fun of fat dumb slobs, but fat dumb slobs see it as a reinforcing their normalcy. This was most damaging with kids during my generation (growing up in the 90s). Bart was an icon of cool. No one wanted to be a Milhouse or Martin.

Written by someone who obviously is neither

[antifoidulus]

Yeah, a lot of those kids say they want to become scientists or engineers but very few actually have a passion for it, they only get into it because it's what their parents tell them to get into. It's been my experience that people without a passion for science/engineering and are only going through the motions because they were forced into make really shitty engineers. It's Friedman-esque reporting at its finest(ie taking PR points from companies as the honest truth and not scrutinizing a single thing they are fed provided it matches their preset narrative).

Too busy at sports practice

[Bayoudegradeable]

I am not going for flames, I am being honest here. I teach at what would be called a "rich kids" school (in a medium sized metro area of 1.2 million), even though the real rich kids schools are even higher up the tuition scale than my school. I bring this up to point out what seems to be most important to a vast majority of "elite" families: playing, starting and excelling on sports teams. Science club? What kind of dork does that!? Focus most time on studies? Loser! I fear much of our nation is stuck in a trap where parents are reliving their lives and the kids are feeding like crack addicts off of this behavior. What the hell kind of future do we have when the "top" young people of the future will sit around at board meetings talking about the time they caught the game winning touchdown in a flag football game played in 8th grade?

Re:What's missing from this article?

[jepaton]

I believe that it says more about politics than innovation that few engineers and scientists choose to enter politics. Perhaps engineers and scientists feel that they can't succeed with a well researched fact-based viewpoint against the slippery populist rhetoric of typical politicians. It's either that, or politicians have provided the ideal environment for engineers and scientists such that they feel there is no need to effect change through politics.

Re:public policy is made by real economics

[Random BedHead Ed]

Government is the one, that is causing the fall of the US economy

Sad that you ruin your comment with a largely baseless shot against your favorite boogeyman, because you then move on to make a valid point:

Science and engineering will not be promoted in a society that has no production

This is not the problem caused by gubmint. Countries where science and engineering are thriving, such as in Germany or Canada, have much larger government spending per capita and more social programs than the United States. The idea that government is the principal hurdle to overcome would only make sense if we had no data from outside the United States, but fortunately we have discovered that there places with similar economies in the lands beyond these shores.

I'd argue that the challenge is split between two factors: culture (as in, sports are cool, science and math are not) and economics (manufacturing goes elsewhere because of liberal trade policies and a strong dollar relative to other currencies). Again, you can't argue that the latter problem is caused by government just because that nicely fits into your preferred world view, or you would get stuck failing to explain why countries with government run healthcare (unlike ours, even under the recent reform) and sub-65 retirement ages have employment rates equal to or higher than ours, as well as more manufacturing.

Two modest solutions:

• Cut school sports, reduce pupil headcount per teacher
• Tariffs on imports. It's called "protectionism," and though it's a no-no when you have free trade policies that actually work, it's exactly what you do when something as silly as exchange rates causes lopsided export levels.

Re:A lot of problems.

[epyT-R]

1) An excessive and irrational fixation on "being yourself"

So, what are we supposed to be, great leader? Automatically submit to authority no matter what just so we can earn its favor and maybe some cash too?

The irony is that Americans end up conforming themselves to pre-defined pigeon holes anyway way worse that I've seen in other countries.

Of course, because in other countries, the kids are told what they're going to be, and if they don't measure up, they commit suicide working in some factory. See, I can stereotype too. Conformist attitudes (like yours for ex) are common to the species. Now there's some irony for you.

2) A fixation on pleasure.

As opposed to? A fixation on thankless wage-slave servitude? What would make anyone wake up and want to go to work in the morning except the threat of starvation? What a shitty life that would be. I don't do extreme sports or go anywhere near the club scene so I guess I'm safe from your wrath for now.. Talk about stereotyping. Sounds like you're watching too much TV. You must have too much free time, please get another job, lazy person.

3) A crap work ethic.

So anything less than a chinese slave-wage laborer is laziness? Your argument is a false dichotomy: there is middle ground between 'special little snowflake' and 'thankless cog.' work-life balance is what's supposed to separate free countries from the rest. Without that, there's nothing to live for. All that would be left is the details of how people are enslaved. In china, you're told what you're going to be by family/government, in the states, you get one chance to succeed at what you select, but if you fail, you're destitute for the rest of your life because the school debt has to be paid by a low wage alternative. Thanks to modern computers, more often than not, everyone (potential employers, law enforcement, friends) knows your personal history whether it is desired or not, and it's people with your attitude that usually want this information so they know what resumes to skip in the pile. Meanwhile, these same attitudinally-challenged douchebags bitch about how there are so many 'lazy' people out there who aren't working. Those who are 'lucky' enough to work for said employers end up being overworked, underpaid, and given zero respect. People aren't robots, but maybe there is something to the asian stereotypes about behaving that way. Sorry, but I have no desire to live that way.

But the fact is that by and large hard work is still valued. Parents instill the importance of education and hardwork in their kids. They engage them in activities they're convinced will ensure academic success. They aren't fixated on raising athletes, celebrities or kids who are socially popular. And people tend choose careers based on what will provide the best living, not what will make them happiest. And they work their asses off, putting in long hours on a regular basis.

Best living? What is best living without being content? making the most money? Is that all there is to life? Sadly, it's the semi-rich (six figure income) people who suffer from this the most: they have all that wealth yet have no time to enjoy it. They're ALWAYS working. Where's the success in that? No, I am not advocating that prima-donning kids is a good idea.

Too many Americans have an awful work ethic. They do just enough to get by but somehow think they're entitled to that job. Far too often I seen people rationalize that mentality by arguing that they deserve better, that they could do what management does. Maybe they can, but given that they can barely do their own jobs right, I wouldn't bet on it. There's too much self-righteousness going around.

Usually, it's management who can't do the job, so they hire people who can in the form of 'consultants' and *gasp* employees who know what they're doing! When the