Contrasting the earthquake in China with the hurricane in Louisiana and Mississippi may seem silly since the United States is the most technologically advanced, wealthiest and efficient nation on earth while China is a nation struggling to keep its people fed under a communist dictatorship while also battling outmoded machinery and top-heavy bureaucracy. Right?
After an aftershock frightened survivors of a major disaster, the Chinese government managed to evacuate 800,000 people from the threatened area while still searching for possible survivors and laying out plans for rebuilding three weeks after the tragedy. In New Orleans, after three years, hundreds (the luckier ones) are still living in tent cities while thousands have been forced out of their makeshift mobile homes by poisonous amounts of formaldehyde. While hundreds of thousands of Chinese young people are giving up free time to administer aid to the homeless of Sichuan province, organization or provision for help by U.S. students was late, listless and lax.
President Bush's man on the job (several days after) was political appointee Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Michael Brown. Just preparing a list of screw-ups by Mr. Brown would require another column, but before he was removed from the scene, (not fired), the president made his immortal comment, "Bronie, you're doing a hellova job." This was while some bodies still had not been recovered.
So does this mean that China has finally succeeded in rubbing our noses in our own inferiority, or does it signify that we had a lousy leader and, with someone competent, we sould have done it as well as the Chinese? The Bogus Economist, as usual, has a view.
First, I have to concede Goerge W. Bush's response to emergencies is about as fast as reaching Customer Service. On September 11, 2001, he spent seven minutes in a semi-daze as he continued reading "A Pet Goat" to a bunch of kindergartners. When Katrina struck the Gulf Coast, he decided to continue his vacation, visiting the Pueblo El Mirage RV and Golf Resort in El Mirage, Ariz.
The Chinese don't work that way. "Losing face" is an unforgiveable thing to do, so if for no other reason, Chinese leaders had to act - and act fast - to convince the people they knew what to do and how to do it. Apparently, in the U.S., our leaders don't feel the need to convince people except around election time. As far as losing face, they can always blame it on somebody else. This is one reason why Congress has an approval rating of 11, twelve points under President Bush.
Another factor is what happens to crooks in China as opposed to over here. We've seen countless instances of manipulation, kickbacks, fraud and graft with the only consequences being a slight slap on the wrist, a golden handshake or two and good old Chapter 11. In China, when the government says, "Heads will roll," one gets the feeling they aren't kidding.
Now, the Bogus is not advocating mass executions for the weasels who ignored scientific data about the New Orleans levees or the sloppy work done by overpaid private contractors to milk every possible buck out of the taxpayers. I would be happy, though, if some of them were wearing numbers across their chests. I'm not holding my breath.
I'd be even happier if we were living in a country where contractors, builders, doctors, teachers, mechanics and major corporations set aside their drive for money and said. "It doesn't matter where the disaster struck - it's part of my country."
That was a quote I heard last night from a Chinese high school girl.
Maybe we've been innoculated so many times with the confusion between money and virtue, we no longer can tell the difference. You'll remember how America was #1 in the estimation of the world after 9/11 and you may reflect on where we are now. In response to the Chinese disaster, the United States has contributed under three billion dollars. Saudi Arabia has given over fifty billion. If we spent one-tenth of the money we're spending on killing people to help people, we might earn the respect of the world as China, with the echo of its Tibetian policy still fresh in our minds, is doing now.
Hell of a job, China.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Saturday, May 17, 2008
The Glories of Competition
The Bogus Economist
May 13, 2008
The news story about the couple from Mumbai, India, who were planning their dream home, a 400,000 square foot skyscraper costing about two billion dollars and employing a staff of six hundred, precipitated huge screams of protest from the Left and vast approval from the Right. The Bogus Economist finds himself, as usual, somewhere in the middle.
Sure, there is a somewhat gritty taste in the mouth at the thought of something like this in the midst of some of the most crashing poverty in the world, but everyone knows India is profiting mightily as the Best and the Brightest, having gotten a fine education at American colleges and universities, journey back to the Land of the Ganges to make some serious money at companies that have deserted the U.S. for even lower taxes and even cheaper labor.
One of the more serious consequences of the George W. Borrow presidency has been the upending of the traditional world view of America as the land of innovation and experimentation. As we relied more and more on foreign banks to prop up our unending pursuit of profit, we have employed less and less of the priceless "American Know-How" that once set the pace for the world. Whereas we once relied on the competitive spirit to produce products that could change and improve the lives of our citizens, we now prooduce carbon copies of what has already proven successful, adding only the phrase "all-new" to the ad copy.
Consider our automobiles, once the standard of the world. When I was a kid, I prided myself on being able to tell the make and year of almost anything on the road. Now, they all look basically alike, primarily because they're mostly made in the same place - somewhere else - and/or owned by multinational corporations who are scared crapless to do anything new until polls have assured them the public will buy what they're selling. Next, they have to buy enough legilators to make sure that the government (taxpayers) will reimburse them if they make a mistake and lose money. The easiest way to get this done is to pursuade the lawmakers to consider alll those poor workers who won't be able to support their families if, for example, Bear Stearns is allowed to go under. Considering the poor CEO, who walks away with a few million dollars worth of golden parachute, doesn't enter into it.
Competition, except among the super-large corporations, is mortally ill and in danger of extinction. This is why the two billion dollar home in Mumbai is just what the system needs. Think of it this way:
We seem to be living in a society where there's a one-to-one relationship between human worth and net worth. The more you have, the better you must be. The guy with the Bentley wants the Rolls. If my car costs $150,000, it must be better than yours at $125,000. Yachts keep getting bigger since 150 feet is better than 100. Therefore, when word of the two-billion buck pad starts spreading, the old competitive juices start flowing. If Man A is the fifth richest person in the country and builds a 400,000 square-foot house, the guy who is the fourth richest starts thinking, "Four hundred thousand? That's a doghouse! He wants big, I'll show him big!" Whereupon he assembles his architects to start designing the 600,000 square-foot residence across from the Taj Mahal in the shape of a gigantic "I."
The third richest, looking on with interest, decides building something that big takes too long, so he simply purchases the Los Angeles Colliseum and has it shipped.
The second richest, sensing that he's in danger of being eclipsed, buys Australia and has a dome put up over it.
By the time the contest is finished, hundreds of thousands of people are employed by some of the richest people in the world whose main desire is only to get richer than the next guy. The system benefits immensely since an entirely new layer is constructed over the old, tired labels of "millionaire," "dekamillionaire," "centimillionaire" and "billionaire." Now we can have "mansionnaire," "chateauner," "palacite," "skyscrapian" and "trumper."
As for the richest guy, he has to think a lot, but finally comes up with his own solution. Above the entrance to his own, private city-state, he puts up a sign:
"Let Them Eat Cake."
-30-
May 13, 2008
The news story about the couple from Mumbai, India, who were planning their dream home, a 400,000 square foot skyscraper costing about two billion dollars and employing a staff of six hundred, precipitated huge screams of protest from the Left and vast approval from the Right. The Bogus Economist finds himself, as usual, somewhere in the middle.
Sure, there is a somewhat gritty taste in the mouth at the thought of something like this in the midst of some of the most crashing poverty in the world, but everyone knows India is profiting mightily as the Best and the Brightest, having gotten a fine education at American colleges and universities, journey back to the Land of the Ganges to make some serious money at companies that have deserted the U.S. for even lower taxes and even cheaper labor.
One of the more serious consequences of the George W. Borrow presidency has been the upending of the traditional world view of America as the land of innovation and experimentation. As we relied more and more on foreign banks to prop up our unending pursuit of profit, we have employed less and less of the priceless "American Know-How" that once set the pace for the world. Whereas we once relied on the competitive spirit to produce products that could change and improve the lives of our citizens, we now prooduce carbon copies of what has already proven successful, adding only the phrase "all-new" to the ad copy.
Consider our automobiles, once the standard of the world. When I was a kid, I prided myself on being able to tell the make and year of almost anything on the road. Now, they all look basically alike, primarily because they're mostly made in the same place - somewhere else - and/or owned by multinational corporations who are scared crapless to do anything new until polls have assured them the public will buy what they're selling. Next, they have to buy enough legilators to make sure that the government (taxpayers) will reimburse them if they make a mistake and lose money. The easiest way to get this done is to pursuade the lawmakers to consider alll those poor workers who won't be able to support their families if, for example, Bear Stearns is allowed to go under. Considering the poor CEO, who walks away with a few million dollars worth of golden parachute, doesn't enter into it.
Competition, except among the super-large corporations, is mortally ill and in danger of extinction. This is why the two billion dollar home in Mumbai is just what the system needs. Think of it this way:
We seem to be living in a society where there's a one-to-one relationship between human worth and net worth. The more you have, the better you must be. The guy with the Bentley wants the Rolls. If my car costs $150,000, it must be better than yours at $125,000. Yachts keep getting bigger since 150 feet is better than 100. Therefore, when word of the two-billion buck pad starts spreading, the old competitive juices start flowing. If Man A is the fifth richest person in the country and builds a 400,000 square-foot house, the guy who is the fourth richest starts thinking, "Four hundred thousand? That's a doghouse! He wants big, I'll show him big!" Whereupon he assembles his architects to start designing the 600,000 square-foot residence across from the Taj Mahal in the shape of a gigantic "I."
The third richest, looking on with interest, decides building something that big takes too long, so he simply purchases the Los Angeles Colliseum and has it shipped.
The second richest, sensing that he's in danger of being eclipsed, buys Australia and has a dome put up over it.
By the time the contest is finished, hundreds of thousands of people are employed by some of the richest people in the world whose main desire is only to get richer than the next guy. The system benefits immensely since an entirely new layer is constructed over the old, tired labels of "millionaire," "dekamillionaire," "centimillionaire" and "billionaire." Now we can have "mansionnaire," "chateauner," "palacite," "skyscrapian" and "trumper."
As for the richest guy, he has to think a lot, but finally comes up with his own solution. Above the entrance to his own, private city-state, he puts up a sign:
"Let Them Eat Cake."
-30-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
