dagblog - Comments for "Thomas Friedman, Michael Bloomberg, and the Coming Implosion"

I refuse to read Friedman

acanuck — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 07:01:19 +0000

In reply to Being the first mover isn't

I refuse to read Friedman these days but I'll stipulate that he's delusional about the benefits of a third-party candidacy and, no doubt, the Chinese economic model for the U.S. (He's deluded on most things.)

But direct comparisons of standards of living in both countries are equally off base. China's economic infrastucture got its start (its start!) barely 30 years ago. Prior to that, you had a crumbling empire, foreign domination, rule by warlords, war and civil war, and disastrous ideologically driven policies -- Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution -- capped off by a famine that killed tens of millions.

That's the base they started from. Yeah, rural poverty remains a problem. But people live at least twice as long as they did in the '30s, and everyone can eat. Not everyone owns a home or a car, but millions do. And they're working on their telecommunications-access problem.

This article notes the high

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:20:08 +0000

In reply to Being the first mover isn't

This article notes the high buildup of major highway & railway trunks, while only slight increase of lower quality rural roads.

http://www.gerhard-k-heilig.com/pdf/Poverty_5.pdf

Being the first mover isn't

Michael Maiello — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:33:42 +0000

In reply to I was going to do this as a

Being the first mover isn't always an advantage. I'm fine granting that China's major cities and the regions between them have better wireless coverage than you'll find in the U.S. But which population, on average, has better personal access to telecommunications in general? These comparisons tend to forget the vast rural wasteland of poverty that's part of the China story that nobody talks about.

Which is not to say that China can't catch up and surpass us by intelligently implementing new technologies while our old stuff rusts, breaks down, falls apart or just plain becomes obsolete. China gets to skip the Ma Bell buildout the way many American cities got to skip building roads for use primarily by horses. China has the advantage of being able to operate largely by decree, but the disadvantage of having to deal with an extremely large population and land mass.

There's no doubt that the U.S. needs to do better at shoring up, modernizing and improving its own infrastructure. A lot of Old Worlders probably, wrongly, said that back in the 19th Century that the U.S. would never catch up. But the vision of China that one gets from Friedman columns is almost certainly incomplete.

I was going to do this as a

Donal — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:49:59 +0000

In reply to Thomas Friedman, Michael Bloomberg, and the Coming Implosion

I was going to do this as a post, but it kinda fits with the Friedman piece. In their haste to advocate privatization, About Those Better Roads in China, the American Enterprise Institute misses the point about infrastructure.

While the president apparently takes it as a given that Chinese infrastructure is better than America’s, the reality is otherwise: U.S. roads, bridges, airports, and the like are leaps and bounds above what the Chinese have. A closer inspection reveals that China suffers from a serious lack of infrastructure that threatens to throttle their long-term growth prospects.

They go on to argue that America still has far more of everything than China, which is true to a point. But President Obama didn't say better, he said newer. An even closer inspection reveals that our infrastructure—while certainly far more extensive—is falling apart, and the funds to maintain it are not being allocated.

They argue that China's investment in high speed rail will never pay back. I'm fine with regular speed rail myself, but no one's funding that either.

Roads and bridges are also commonly managed by private operators throughout the world, who earn a return by charging tolls. The value added for consumers is that, increasingly, the tolls are levied so as to minimize congestion on the roads, resulting in vastly faster traffic as well as a marked reduction in emissions.

What is the value added for consumers that can't afford the tolls, and instead drive on secondary roads?

What's the cheapskate doing

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 05:21:45 +0000

In reply to Thomas Friedman, Michael Bloomberg, and the Coming Implosion

What's the cheapskate doing taking mass transit? Tell him to pony up for a limo, or at least give a cabbie his due.

Mass transit works in China because 1 billion people don't have cars. (30 years ago they were all on bikes - a friend described it as a flock of birds - the lead turns, they all turn).

They have good cell phone coverage because the government knows which oligarchy they're backing and force them to provide service. With ours, we favor Verizon's madness, but pretend it's a free market. Okay, we'll get LTE coverage, but the costs for basic phone ownership have been outrageous.

But it doesn't matter when little Tommy 7-years-old favors all foreign wars and all the budget-busting defense expenditures - of course Tommy can't have phone in metro - he bought his big Mattel rat-a-tat-tat bunker buster - did he forget? Wait till next Christmas, Tommy, just wait. Spare us the tantrum or we'll put you to bed. And don't forget, bi-partisan Jesus will save you.

The 'stashe don't sweat

jollyroger — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 05:21:22 +0000

In reply to And unless someone fixes that

The 'stashe don't sweat it...he married very well...

And unless someone fixes that

Aunt Sam — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 05:11:51 +0000

In reply to Thomas Friedman, Michael Bloomberg, and the Coming Implosion

And unless someone fixes that problem.....

I'm pretty much over the generalities without specifics. Everyone complains and offers a better destination, but very, very few give up any specific road map with twists, turns and exactly how to overcome the obstacles in place.

The 'someone' needs to be a team effort by many rebels with a positive cause. There has to be a willingness by the majority to plot the realistic path to a better destination or else we're going to still be going nowhere, most likely crashing and burning in the process.

It's so easy to critique without any of the responsibility of 'doing and achieving'.

Friedman jumped the shark, but he hasn't offered up anything original or helpful. tsk. tsk. A hack on attack is his current state, hopefully he'll find his way back.

Honest to god you got me

Richard Day — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 05:11:04 +0000

In reply to Thomas Friedman, Michael Bloomberg, and the Coming Implosion

Honest to god you got me laughin again!

And I apologize, but I got nothin except this tribute to Bloomberg:

TWO MINUTES AGO: The break

jollyroger — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 03:30:07 +0000

In reply to Thomas Friedman, Michael Bloomberg, and the Coming Implosion

TWO MINUTES AGO:

The break of a thirty-six inch water main adjacent to the New Jersey Turnpike has opened up a sinkhole that is presently a ~~half~~ mile across, ~~200~~ 400 feet deep and ~~is threatening to swallow~~ has swallowed up Perth Amboy.

Company authorities said that the valve necessary to shut down the flow had rusted open.

]

Friedman's lede was an

Michael Maiello — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 01:36:03 +0000

In reply to Thomas Friedman, Michael Bloomberg, and the Coming Implosion

Friedman's lede was an embarrassment -- a rich man complaining about his commute and, of course, if you're one of his regular reasons, you know that his subtext was that trains are faster and cell coverage better inside of China's major cities. He never thinks to mention, of course, that a vast portion of China's population lives at subsistence level poverty. We Americans would be fools to trade a better city to city express train with Wi-Fi for the lot of a contemporary Chinese citizen.

As for the rest of it... it's all just his fantasy that Bloomberg will spend the money necessary to push... Thomas Friedman's ideas to the point where they will become truly mainstream. One of the funny things about this column is that Friedman, for once, couldn't reach 850 words without acknowledging that Obama basically represents everything Friedman might want, but that he simply hasn't achieved those things because of the opposition Congress.

Now, he goes after Obama for the "small ball," Buffett tax idea. I don't love the Buffett tax either. I'd rather see a more progressive tax code with capital gains and dividends taxed more like wages. So would Friedman. So, I gather, would Obama. But nobody can make that happen with the current Congress. Somehow, Friedman thinks that Michael Bloomberg has the charisma necessary to motivate the electorate to push the Republicans to adopt or at least accept these ideas.

Given that Obama is exactly a million percent more charismatic than Bloomberg*, and failed at this, it's certainly an odd claim.

In the end, Friedman wants us all to shut up and listen to him. The Bloomberg candidacy idea is just a polite way of saying it.

*Wikipedia