Short Quiz - Suggested Answers

[johnkarls]

.
Question 1

Have we read/studied any of Thomas Friedman's books in the past?

Answer 1

Yes, we read “Hot, Flat and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution and How It Can Renew America.”

Question 2

How many Pulitzer Prizes has Thomas Friedman won?

Answer 2

Three.

Question 3

Thomas Friedman appeared on Meet the Press 9/4/2011 (the day before the official release date for "That Used To Be Us") and posited "five pillars" on which America's economic success had been based historically -- if you didn't see Friedman on Meet the Press, what would you guess the "five pillars" were?

Answer 3

From the 9/4/2011 Meet the Press Transcript --

“[W]e didn't get here by accident as a great country. We, we actually won in every historical turn. How did we win in every history turn? Because we had a formula for success that you could actually date back to Hamilton, but you certainly see it in Lincoln. It was five pillars. Basically, educate our people up to and beyond whatever the level of technology is, whether it's the cotton gin, OK, or the super computer. Immigration, attract the world's most talented and energetic people. Third, infrastructure, have the world's best infrastructure. Fourth, have the right rules for incenting capital formation and risk-taking and preventing recklessness. And last, government-funded research. Put those together, stir, bake for 200 years, and you get the United States of America.”

Question 4

Does Friedman believe that it would be possible to restore the "five pillars" and, with them, American greatness?

Answer 4

Yes.

Question 5

Recent studies have shown that America ranks well behind Europe in social mobility -- is America's notorious lack of social mobility the inevitable result of its education system?

Answer 5

Yes -- read on!!!

Question 6

Jonathan Kozol, famous American educator, has chronicled America's refusal to educate its permanent inner-city under-class in a dozen award-winning books that have become classics over the last 54 years -- including "Death At An Early Age" (1967), "The Night Is Dark And I Am Far From Home: Political Indictment Of US Public Schools" (1975), "Illiterate America" (1985), "Rachel And Her Children" (1988), "Savage Inequalities: Children In America's Schools" (1991), "Amazing Grace: The Lives Of Children And The Conscience Of A Nation" (1995), "Ordinary Resurrections: Children In The Years Of Hope" (2001), and "Shame Of The Nation: The Restoration Of Apartheid Schooling In America" (2005). SEVERAL OF HIS BOOKS REFER TO THE PERSISTENT RESULTS OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STUDIES OVER RECENT DECADES THAT CONSTANTLY AND CONSISTENTLY SHOW THAT 30% OF AMERICAN ADULTS ARE ILLITERATE, AS DEFINED BY AN INABILITY TO READ THE WARNING LABEL ON A CAN OF RAT POISON!!! Is it any wonder that there is NO SOCIAL MOBILITY from the permanent American under-class/caste???

Answer 6

Of course it is no wonder!!!

And what is most appalling in this regard is that there are numerous studies, each of large groups of inner-city identical twins orphaned before their first birthday where one identical twin was adopted by another inner-city family and the other identical twin was adopted by a suburban family, and those studies consistently show that the identical twins adopted by suburban families develop typical suburban levels of measured IQ while the identical twins adopted by inner-city families develop typical inner-city levels of measured IQ.

Obviously, our permanent American under-class/caste is not the result of a lack of intelligence on their part!!! It is the result of our unwillingness to do anything about the perpetuation of our under-class/caste!!!

Question 7

The upper end of American society is anchored by institutions of higher learning that are private (e.g., Stanford, MIT, the Ivy League, etc.) and that cater to children of alumni, especially if their parents have sent their children to one of the elite boarding schools (Exeter, Milton, Groton, St. Paul's, Andover). [Full Disclosure = Yours Truly played that game on behalf of his children and salved his conscience by recounting, whenever challenged, that Thurgood Marshall (US Supreme Court Justice 1967-1991 and, in 1954 as General Counsel of the NAACP, the prevailing attorney in Brown v. Board of Education before the Supreme Court) always defended his decision to send both of his children to Exeter with the statement that every parent tries to do the best that s/he can by her/his own children.] BUT IS IT ANY WONDER THAT IT IS SO DIFFICULT TO BREAK INTO THE AMERICAN UPPER CLASS (AND UPPER MIDDLE CLASS) WHEN THE "ADMISSION TICKET" CAN BE PURCHASED ONLY BY THE WEALTHY WHO CAN AFFORD IT???

Answer 7

Of course it is no wonder!!!

Question 8

Would the French model for higher education be preferable?

Answer 8

Yes.

The French model is that all education, including all universities (both undergraduate and graduate), is provided free of charge by the government, and it is open to all based on competitive examinations.

None of the counterparts of Yours Truly in French society have to worry about any financial strain for providing an education for their children (or for medical care since France, like virtually all European countries, provides free universal health care). The resulting reduction in stress levels must be one of the reasons why Europeans have greater longevity.

Though there is one amusing footnote to all this!!! Just like many of the European friends of Yours Truly “game the system” by flying their wives to the U.S. to give birth so that their children have dual citizenship (since, as we have studied, the U.S. is the only country in the world that follows the bizarre practice of conferring citizenship on anyone born within its borders), quite a few of the French friends of Yours Truly send their children to Oxbridge or the Ivy League if they aren’t admitted to the best French universities/programs.

Question 9

Was the infrastructure that fuelled America's geographical expansion and industrialization financed/built by government?

Answer 9

No.

Railroads were the infrastructure that fuelled America’s geographical expansion and industrialization. And they were privately financed.

Indeed, it was not until the next century that the American auto industry importuned the American government in the 1950’s to begin building the inter-state highway system and to impose a motor-fuel tax to finance the new system -- much to the consternation of environmentalists who believed in shipping freight by rail vs. truck, and believed in moving people like Europeans and other civilized societies (i.e., by passenger train).

Question 10

In terms of economic stimuli, why do Congress and the Administration always talk about re-building "infrastructure" which they define as roads and bridges?

Answer 10

God only knows!!! (on both points!!!)

Question 11

Why don't Congress and the Administration simply raise the motor-fuel tax to finance re-building roads and bridges (if there is such a need, which only seems to be perceived whenever there is an economic downturn) -- and devote "infrastructure re-building" economic-stimulus funds to re-building (and, in many if not most cases, building) America's inner-city schools?

Answer 11

Because America’s permanent under-class/caste isn’t able to hire lobbyists to make “campaign contributions”!!!

Question 12

If Congress and the Administration were willing to devote "infrastructure re-building" economic-stimulus funds to re-building (or building) inner-city schools, wouldn't the new jobs be created in geographical locations where unemployment is highest?

Answer 12

You think???

Inner-city unemployment rates are always double the national average. And the unemployment rates for inner-city young adults are always in the 50% range.

Question 13

Why does Friedman think government-funded research was so important to America's greatness if the US government does not patent on behalf of America's taxpayers the inventions they have financed?

Answer 13

God only knows!!!

But we already recognized that Friedman is incredibly naïve when we studied Friedman’s “Hot, Flat and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution and How It Can Renew America” -- his belief in how a “Green Revolution” can “Renew America” was rooted in the naïve assumption that the Chinese would respect our “green” inventions rather than simply pirate American intellectual property as they have always done!!!

Question 14

How can US government financing of so much basic research benefit the American taxpayer who foots the bill if the inventions are freely available to both US-based and foreign-based multi-national companies -- both of which immediately locate any manufacturing based on the inventions in low-wage countries such as China?

Answer 14

Obviously it can’t!!! (Please see Q&A-17 for the solution to this problem that we have proposed in the past.)

Question 15

Why does Friedman think that immigration is one of the five pillars of American greatness? Isn't illegal immigration largely the re-institution of slavery over which we fought a Civil War???

Answer 15

As we have agreed in the past, illegal immigration comprises the practice of American employers (individuals as well as corporations) to violate minimum-wage laws by importing foreign laborers who will have no enforceable legal rights because they are afraid of deportation if they voice any objection to their maltreatment.

And we have agreed that the refusal of four American presidents to enforce against such American employers the criminal penalties that were enacted in the 1980’s for such behavior is disgraceful.

And we have agreed that the importation of de facto slaves is nothing more than out-sourcing American jobs that cannot be physically moved to low-wage countries (that is, bringing the slaves to the U.S. if the jobs can’t be moved abroad).

Yes, American employers often use the excuse that illegal aliens only perform work that Americans won’t perform, but “everything has its price” and in the absence of illegal aliens (aka slaves) the wages for such work would simply rise to the level at which either Americans would perform it or the employers would decide that the work wasn’t worth being done.

[With regard to this pitiful excuse of American employers who import slave labor, Jay Leno had a wonderful joke several years ago = Illegal aliens permeate the ranks of call girls but not to worry, they only “do” Americans that American call girls are not willing to “do”!!!]

Question 16

On the other hand, many politicians and commentators have proposed that the US government should attach to every Doctorate awarded by an American university to a foreign citizen a "green card" -- is this a good idea?

Answer 16

For the U.S., it probably is a good idea. [Obviously, from the viewpoint of the foreign country, it isn’t.]

Question 17

Does Friedman understand the 2008-201? economic meltdown any better than Alan Greenspan doesn't???

Answer 17

No -- please see Q&A-18 through Q&A-20.

However, in addition to the basic failure of Alan Greenspan and Thomas Friedman to understand the economic meltdown, Friedman’s notion that all you have to do is provide the best education and capital/infrastructure for your population, even if achievable politically, would still entail at least two problems.

First, as discussed in Q&A-13, Friedman is incredibly naïve to assume the Chinese and other renegade nations will respect American ownership rights in intellectual property.

Second, even though “identical twin” studies consistently show that there is no difference between the inherent intelligence potential of the permanent American under-class/caste and first-class American citizens, there is still a range of intelligence potential in both groups. And some kind of work should be provided for the lower end of the range in both groups. Which probably means that America should still engage in manufacturing. Which, in turn, means that the American government should patent on behalf of American taxpayers all inventions resulting from all of the basic research funded by the National Science Foundation, the National Institute of Health, the Department of Defense, etc., etc. -- and, in addition to collecting royalties from licensees, require that they locate in the U.S. any manufacturing that uses the inventions even if such a restriction means smaller royalties.

[NB: Our past six-degrees-of-separation e-mail campaigns on this subject have provided that the U.S. government should negotiate with its WTO partners that all WTO countries will ban imports of goods manufactured in violation of patents issued by WTO countries. And that if countries such as China violate WTO patents for manufacturing goods used internally by the renegade country or exported to non-WTO countries, then the WTO countries will charge a tariff on imports of other goods manufactured by the renegade country to pay for the royalties that should have been paid on renegade goods used internally by the renegade country or exported by it to non-WTO countries.]

Question 18

Does Friedman recommend that President Obama honor his 2008 campaign pledge regarding exporting American jobs to low-wage countries such as China?

Answer 18

No.

Question 19

Has the White House "inkled" that it is willing to exempt from US corporate income taxation the $2 TRillion of profits from exporting American jobs to low-wage countries such as China, which profits have accumulated in tax-haven subsidiaries of American corporations since they were given an 85% exemption from US corporate income taxation for the $4 TRillion of such profits that had accumulated in the tax-haven subsidiaries by 2005-6???

Answer 19

Yes.

Question 20

Can the American economy survive another $2 TRillion reduction in the payroll and capital expenditures of the chump American companies that did NOT export American jobs???

Answer 20

Probably not.

[For more information on this topic, please refer to the e-mail correspondence between Yours Truly and Cal Burgart that was posted on this bulletin board in the “Participant Comments” section for last month’s meeting, and the even-greater detail referenced in that correspondence and posted on our bulletin board in connection with our 5/11/2011 meeting.]


*****************************************
EXTRA-CREDIT QUESTIONS FOR FUN

Many of the 150 subscribers to our weekly e-mail graduated from the U/Utah which joined the Pac-12 this season. As an off-the-topic digression to Q-9 --

Question A

Why did Stanford University disallow the winner of the student referendum on what its new nickname should be when the old nickname "Indians" was deemed too insensitive toward Native Americans? How does the answer relate to Q-9?

Answer A

Irreverence for society is a Stanford tradition. Which includes (or at least used to include) regular “mooning” by the Stanford marching band of the crowds at Stanford football games.

So it was no surprise that when the Stanford Administration made the fateful decision to hold a student referendum to determine the new school nickname, the irreverent student body would organize a “write in” campaign for the nickname “Robber Barons” which would win the referendum overwhelmingly!!!

Leland Stanford, Sr., of course, was one of the railroad magnates who built America’s infrastructure. However, such railroad magnates were commonly called “robber barons” for reasons that are beyond the scope of these Q&As.

Question B

If any of our members who are U/U alumni meet at Pac-12 functions Stanford alumni who seem overly conceited, what are the two best responses?

Answer B

Most Stanford alumni are among the most charming and gracious people on earth!!!

But occasionally, you will encounter one who is both insufferably conceited and utterly oblivious to the fact that anyone else might have attended a respectable educational institution. If you want to go to the trouble “having some fun” with such a person --

(1) When informed of the person’s educational pedigree, exclaim as if involuntarily but in reverent tones: “Ah yes, the best Junior University in America”!!!

[The reason why that response is guaranteed to cause steam to emanate from the ears of your victim is that “Junior University” sounds like “Junior College” which, of course, is not the imperious impression your victim is trying to convey. Technically, the institution’s official name is “Leland Stanford Junior University” because it was founded by Mr. and Mrs. Leland Stanford, Sr., in honor of their son who died of typhoid at the age of 15.]

(2) After a brief pause for your victim to regain equilibrium, smile sweetly and say: “Perhaps as a Stanford graduate, you can answer a question that has always intrigued me because the Stanford campus is always called 'the farm' -- was Stanford originally a land-grant college?”

[The property on which Stanford is located is incredibly large, as well as being extremely beautiful. Before Mr. and Mrs. Leland Stanford, Sr., founded Stanford University, the property had been used as a horse farm for Stanford’s many champion race horses. Accordingly, it has always been a tradition for Stanford University “insiders” to refer to the Stanford campus as “the farm.”]