http:/.nytimes.com/2010/02/21/opinion/21friedman.html?emc=eta1/www
When Thomas L. Friedman writes something, we tend to notice. We're not sure that there are that many people who own 3 Pulitzer Prizes (perhaps, nobody else) - that's right: "THREE"! Whether he writes about the Middle East or economics, he's clear and he makes a point. We don't always agree with him but we listen. His article from a few years back predicting Russian economic and political "growth" (or lack of same) based on where "oil prices" go is an absolute classic.
This time, Friedman is telling us that the "Fat Lady Has Sung". His article starts by telling us about Tracy, California where they now have to "pay" every time they call 911! In Tracy, you get "financial options" for this: residents can pay a $48 "voluntary fee" for the year (so one can call 911 as many times as one wants to), OR, one will be charged $300 for a single 911 call.
So, we have met the future, and Friedman calls it: "The Lean Years". Just as California was ahead of the rest of the U.S. in many progressive areas since WW II, it would appear that California is now leading us into a bleaker economic future.
Friedman gets a little help in describing this new era from Johns Hopkins University foreign policy expert Michael Mandelbaum who refers to it as a time "where the great task of government and of leadership is going to be about taking things away from people." To quote Friedman: "We've gone from the age of government handouts to the age of citizen givebacks, from the age of companions fly free to the age of paying for each bag."
Friedman joins most people in praising the Greatest Generation for bequeathing to us the prosperity we have enjoyed, and "we" have practiced what Kurt Andersen calls "Grasshopper Generation" behavior: eating thru the prosperity we were given like hungry locusts.
What "we" (really the children and grandchildren of that Greatest Generation) do about that is up to us. Can we do more with less? If any country can, it's us.
But, we would suggest that putting an observation deck on a space station for $400 million is probably a place to start. We didn't need that (or the expensive trip up there to do it). Say "no" to NASA. We're not picking on NASA but it's a good example.
Friedman does an excellent job of describing his impression of President Obama's problem: he has shown up just as we have moved from the fat years to the lean years - that's an excellent historical perspective. What most baffles Friedman about Mr. Obama is how a politician who speaks so well, and is trying to do so many worthy things, can't come up with a clear, simple, repeatable narrative to explain his politics when it's so obvious.
As we have said many time here, and in our classes, we don't stand for any political ideology (we are not Republican, Democrat or Independent). We are about business and the infrastructure that surrounds it. Friedman is about the sociology of our world and his description of what has happened to President Obama is a classic, and it follows:
"Alas, though, instead of making nation-building in America his overarching narrative and then fitting health care, energy, education reform, infrastructure, competitiveness and deficit reduction under that rubric, the President pursued each separately. This made each initiative appear to be just some stand-alone liberal obsession to pay off a Democratic constituency - not an essential ingredient of a nation-building strategy - and, therefore, they have proved to be easily obstructed, picked off or deligitimized by opponents and lobbyists."
So, advocating the right things the wrong way doesn't get you the votes you need, as they would say on the street. So, the President has to persuade the country to invest in the future and pay for the past at the same time. Friedman doesn't spare the Republican party either, calling them "irresponsible" for their refusal to take any responsibility for the deficit and lack of enthusiasm for raising taxes (where that is needed).
Lastly, in describing the sociology of what we are facing, Friedman goes on to say that "We simply do not have another presidency to waste ... If Obama fails, we all fail."
Friedman is right.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Incredible concepts here.
ReplyDeleteI think the hardest thing is gonna be to "persuade the country to invest in the future and pay for the past at the same time", specially with "Republicans refusing to take responsibility". Sad to be in a time where political ideologies are completely opposite just for the heck of it; nothing good ever comes out of that. Reminds me a little bit of my country, where partisan interests have prevented important changes for years...
Awesome post, Mr. Hazz!
I love the term "Grasshopper Generation"! I think one place where this is particularly evident, as Friedman mentioned, is our educational policy. In the past, education was viewed as a public good, and the government heavily subsidized public colleges/universities because people who graduated from those institutions would give back to society in the form of better jobs, higher taxes, and more stable social networks. Now, the government has cut (and is still cutting) funding for education which means that only the relatively wealthy can go on to get an education, even at a state institution. This not only decreases the amount of educated individuals we have in our society, it also futhers the divisions between the rich and the poor.
ReplyDeleteThis is not just limited to higher ed, but also affects the public school system in the country. Fewer funds have to be stretched further to meet accountability goals (i.e. NCLB) - for things like increased teacher training, student development, and record keeping. Data collected by international organizations (like OECDs PISA study) show that we are not doing so well, even with NCLB. We placed in the middle of the pack in both reading and scientific reasoning and in the bottom third in math. This is an alarming trend and not likely to get better given our current attitudes about education.
How do the top rated countries (like Finland, Netherlands, South Korea) come out on top? They take education very seriously - they attract and keep quality teachers by treating them as they would other professionals (like lawyers and doctors) with pay that reflects their importance. They put an emphasis on a well-rounded, some would say "global", education. They teach students how to reason, not how to take tests.
These are the "ants" - countries that have invested in their youth and will likely weather the global recession and come out on the other side in good shape. Given our short-sighted policy, we will likely suffer the fate of the poor grasshopper and have many lean years to come, if not outright starvation.
Great blog CH! Very thought provoking!!
You know, as hard as it may sound, I think some "lean years" wouldn't hurt. For the time before the "fat years," the generations before worked their behinds off to create an amazing economy. They weren't given everything by the government, and they didn't ride off other's successes. If you wanted something great, you had to go out and make it for yourself. That's how we saw the industrial revolution happen, and amazing stories like Andrew Carnegie and others.
ReplyDeleteMy generation, Gen Y, has been characterized as the lazy and apathetic generation, and it is absolutely true at times. We have been given everything by our parents who were given everything by their parents. So many people just go through the motions and we don't see as much bona fide hard work and innovation.
Having some "lean years" where you really have to work hard to create something amazing and memorable to make some money is only good - it will foster innovation, and help bring our country back to the forefront of innovation.
In the end, I think for so long we have been riding off the coat tails of past generations, this is our generation's chance to take hold of these hardships and stimulate true change. Let's not lean on our government to do it for us.
Great comments! Thanks so much to PoNCh, Tracey, and Marcelo! Each of your comments should be a blog post. PoNCh, I thought about Mexico when I was creating the post. As a country, we haven't dealt with immigration (especially the H1B group limitations: 65,000 per year?) and that is going to come back at us as our demographics catch up and we don't have enough people for the jobs available in the not too distant future - we worry about unemployment now, but that will "reverse" when my generation goes out of the workforce (2020?). Tracey, wonderful input - thanks so much! It was an education to read it. Marcelo, thoughtful, as usual. Thank you for reading and contributing.
ReplyDeleteMarcelo - I completely agree with you that having some lean times is a good thing for us. You can look back to the Greatest Generation and the things that stand out were things that implied planning and conservation: victory gardens, commitment to the greater good by rationing, and saving for the future. The last few gens (X, Y, and Mil) have had it easy. We were more concerned with the "now" and not too interested in saving for the future because it seemed certain.
ReplyDeleteIn a previous blog comment, I wrote that having to deal with these problems was a good thing because it could cause a reversal in our behaviors - from spenders to savers and it might help us become more connected to our local communities, connections that have been lost in the last few decades. I also agree that it will force us out of our comfort zone and may cause us to reconnect with our history of American ingenuity and innovation!