Columbia Professor Jeffrey Sachs Says America in Decline, Politicians Corrupt

[clifp]

I don't think that America is on the decline as much as the rest of the world is catching up. On a relative basis this bad for the US, but it is pretty good for the rest of the world.

Since retiring 11 years ago, I have been startled to read quotes in business publications from four different Intel colleagues, who have returned home to India, China, and Vietnam to start companies in their native countries. In every case these were people who had established roots in the US had lived here at least decade and all but one had a family here. They aren't the type of people the US wants to lose, with engineering and/or MBA degrees from top schools. Although, they weren't so exceptional that I didn't snigger a little when I saw CEO after their names.

Two of the guys had told me of their desire to return home, but the opportunities just weren't there in India, and Vietnam 15-20 years ago. I think opportunities in the US (certainly in California) have gotten worse in the last decade. But I think more importantly is that with internet, cell phones, and the embrace of capitalism (with an Indian, Chinese flavor) opportunities in the native countries have dramatically improved.

It is in unclear to me from the standpoint of the US, are we better off having these folks toiling away at some big tech company in the US. Or are we better off having these people back in their native countries, using their capital, expertise, and business knowledge, creating jobs and eventually consumers for US companies goods and services?. I can argue either way. However, it is clear to me that it is good for these countries that brain drain is slowing.

 

[Nords]

Columbia Professor Jeffrey Sachs Says America in Decline, Politicians Corrupt

I think Sachs is just [-]grinding his axe[/-] talking his book.

That headline is just as much "news" as if it'd been published in 1982, 1954, 1940, 1875, 1823, or 1796. Or some other number in between.

I think we Americans tend to forget what the rest of the world looked like in 1946. No wonder we had a 30-year head start that today makes us feel all "Pax Americana" and "The Decline and Fall".

Hunh. I guess that headline would've looked about right in 2nd-century Rome, too...

 

[photoguy]

It's funny how there is always a shortage of engineers and scientists willing to work for the ~$57k/yr salary.

At one of my previous jobs, we paid our grad student interns (usually cs) the equivalent of $72k+ /yr. I think that pay rate was acceptible but not particularly competitive.

 

[Independent]

At one of my previous jobs, we paid our grad student interns (usually cs) the equivalent of $72k+ /yr. I think that pay rate was acceptible but not particularly competitive.

What does one of my kids need to do to qualify for a $72k+ job as an intern?

 

[Westernskies]

What does one of my kids need to do to qualify for a $72k+ job as an intern?

... wear a blue dress?

 

[photoguy]

What does one of my kids need to do to qualify for a $72k+ job as an intern?

Basically be a smart, motivated grad student with a quantitative background and reasonable programming ability. A prototypical project would be go read research paper X, apply the ideas to problem Y, and by the way you'll probably need to do something about Z.

 

[Todd-O]

Did you know the numbers before you started school? That is, did you know that MIT grads typically got jobs paying $xxx but state school grads were happy to settle for $yy ?

(I'm claiming, of course, that the school should have told you as soon as you were a prospect.)

Well no of course not. I don't think any school is gonna tell you that, or even elude to it at all. I had to learn the hard way went I started in industry. The guys from the big schools also have better job security.

 

[Westernskies]

Well no of course not. I don't think any school is gonna tell you that, or even elude to it at all. I had to learn the hard way went I started in industry. The guys from the big schools also have better job security.

If you read your response carefully, you may find the answer you seek.

 

[Independent]

Basically be a smart, motivated grad student with a quantitative background and reasonable programming ability. A prototypical project would be go read research paper X, apply the ideas to problem Y, and by the way you'll probably need to do something about Z.

I was thinking examples of field, school, year. Like are we talking a near phd in chemical engineering at MIT? or a first year MS candidate in IT at Univ of Minnesota?

 

[photoguy]

Primarily computer science but also EE, would consider stats from top public / private schools. Some students from good but not top tier schools as well. Ranging from second year to ABD. Most students had research experience under their belt with at least one or two papers as lead author.

 

[Independent]

Primarily computer science but also EE, would consider stats from top public / private schools. Some students from good but not top tier schools as well. Ranging from second year to ABD. Most students had research experience under their belt with at least one or two papers as lead author.

That looked pretty promising up to the last few lines. I would have guessed that "one or two papers as lead author" pretty much meant post-doc. Maybe the "top" schools requirement means only 10 or so programs, and those get students into serious research as under-grads?

 

[Independent]

Forgive me for repeating/quoting myself, but as a non-USAmerican, this question fascinates me. Do you Americans feel that you're every bit as "free" today as you were 25 years ago? Do you think your country's signing forefathers would be proud of the "freedom" exemplified in the US today? Do you agree that the US is actually getting staggeringly bogged-down in freedom-eating regulation? If so, does it concern you, or does it comfort you? Or maybe you're concerned, but simply feel you can't do anything about it, so there's no reason to get yourself worked up over it?

How do you feel about the famous Jefferson quote about those who would trade liberty for security deserving neither?

Sorry for the slow response, don't know if you're still checking this thread, but here's an IMO response.

In certain ways we a a lot more "free". If I were gay/lesbian, I'd feel like I had many more options/acceptance, chance to just do what I want to do without losing something important, today than 25 years ago. Similarly, I think that women and African-Americans have more elbow room and choices, more real freedom.

There are lots of cultural things where its easier to follow your own preferences without worrying about the tyranny of the majority - from religion to food to health care to entertainment.

Economically, we've deregulated trucking, airlines, lots of financial services. It appears to be an article of faith with some people in powerful positions that in all times and in all places regulation is bad. Of course, there are others that are constantly coming up with ideas for new regulations. Frankly, I think the first group is winning, at least on the big ones, but that could be a recency distortion.

I see the tax code as a continuous encroachment on choices - many of the complexities are there to push us and pull us into behaviors that somebody in gov't thinks are the "right thing to do".

Our reaction to 9/11 seems much over done to me. I haven't been personally hit (other than airport stuff), but it's always been true that personal liberties take a hit during wars, we seem to be headed for an eternal state of "war on terror" which justifies more big brother gov't, and I have this feeling that's just fine with some people in DC.