Losing Grip on Reality: What Ails the American Economy Runs Deeper Than the Credit Crisis
In an effort to shore up the failing economy we've now seen the government pump hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars into corporations in what is either the largest socialization of the free market or the largest raiding of the public trust in history, depending on your perspective.
This emergency response may stop the bleeding, but it does little to tackle a major cause -- inadequate investment in producing new economies as our old ones mature. As a result, we're running on fumes and debt.
Where do those new economies come from? For the last sixty years they've come from a major investment in education and basic research. Science and technology are responsible for half of our economic growth since World War II. But while the U.S. once produced half of the world's science and engineering PhDs, it's now only 20%. And a 2005 Business Roundtable report projects that by 2010, 90% of all scientists and engineers will live in Asia. If that projection turns out to be even close, it represents a major shift in the underpinnings of the American economy.
What are our politicians doing about it? Despite a landmark report by the National Academies warning of a clear and present danger to the American economy, Congress failed to fund most of the America Competes Act. Our public investment in basic research is falling at the very time that other nations are ramping up. It's a similar story in education. A recent comparison of 15-year-olds in 30 wealthy nations found that average science scores among U.S. students ranked 17th, while average U.S. math scores ranked 24th.
If we're not embarrassed by these facts we should be alarmed. The standard of living Americans enjoy today is the direct result of public investments in basic research and education a generation ago. They have been our most reliable economic engine. And yet in recent years we have failed to maintain that engine and to refill our tank. We now import $53 billion more in advanced technology products than we export, and that number is rising every year.
Some say the government just needs to pass more R & D tax credits and get out of the way. But it's difficult or impossible for corporations to tackle this in today's economy - you can't justify carrying a decade or more of basic research on your balance sheet; you have to focus on applied research that you can turn into money in a three year window.
Compare that to the transistor, which produced a multi-trillion dollar computer and communications industry. Or the internet, an obscure government network for scientists to share data. Or take E.W. Davis. Here's a guy the University of Minnesota funded in the 1920s, 30s and 40s. Giving him a lab at an astronomical cost of, let's just say, a hundred thousand dollars a year. In today's politics that would be called a boondoggle. What did Minnesota get for that ridiculous expense of taxpayer dollars? Davis figured out how to take the waste rock of taconite and turn it into steel. To this day, sixty percent the steel in every America car, ship, plane and bridge comes from Mesabi Range taconite in Northeastern Minnesota. What do you get? You get entire economies.
America was founded by scientist-statesmen like Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. Science is a part of who we are. But since the fall of the Soviet Union we have lacked a national competitor in science, and research and education have suffered as a result. We've gotten spoiled, fat and lazy, and increasingly out of touch with reality. Our economy has shifted from making things to serving each other to finding increasingly complex ways to game the system and move paper. Lacking powerful emerging economies we have taken on massive debt to fund ongoing spending; and a political class has risen that combines overconfidence with prideful ignorance and a disdain of science.
But in a world economy completely dominated by innovation in science and technology, this trend is dangerous. It should concern everyone that a proponent of teaching creationism in science class is an endorsed major party candidate for vice president of the United States. The president doesn't deal with school-board issues like the creationism v evolution debate, but the president can influence the discussion by setting the tone. The president needs to assert that while citizens can believe what they wish, it is inappropriate to use public money from taxpayers of all faiths to teach a religious doctrine as if it were fact.
But more important than tax fairness, Governor Palin's views suggest a willingness to sacrifice the competitiveness of the nation for the benefit of religious ideology. This stance raises legitimate concerns about the ongoing integrity of American research and education, and thus our economic wellbeing. A scientific theory is the best, most rigorously tested explanation of reality that we have, based on all available evidence. It has been confirmed and reconfirmed by experiment after experiment. In the case of evolution, this reconfirmation has happened over and over for nearly two hundred years. It is as scientifically strong a theory as the theory of gravity. Without it, we would not have modern biological science, genetics or medicine. So to teach students in science class that evolution is on par with religious creationism, that they are both "just theories," is a craven disservice to students and to the nation's ability to compete. Do we all need to know this? No. But when people lack first-hand knowledge, they rely on authority figures to steer them truly. The president and vice president can and should set the standard of commonly agreed-upon reality for the good of the nation, and place country first, ahead of politics. Sarah Palin as the nominee should repudiate her past anti-science stances.
Democrats are not immune to this problem either. The Democratic congress failed to fund the America COMPETEs act last session, citing relatively minor funding disagreements with President Bush, leaving the future of American research hanging in the balance.
This has always been the paradox of America. We are still the most scientifically advanced nation on earth, yet despite its profound impact on our economy, environment, health, education, national security and everyday lives, we regularly elect leaders who seem clueless about science's role in our wellbeing and about the importance of objective reality in our decision-making. Perhaps it will all be okay. Perhaps we just happen to be living in one of the many cyclical times in American history when the forces of regression and retraction from knowledge are in ascendance. But the stakes are higher now than at any time since Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence. There was only one change from his brilliant first draft: Benjamin Franklin suggested replacing "we hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable" with "we hold these truths to be self-evident".
The American economy cannot continue to coast on the fumes of yesterday. We need to get a grip on reality, reengage our scientific engine and take control of our destiny, moving forward into a healthier world with renewed opportunity, freedom, hope and prosperity. That is what America is about, that is the promise of science, and science has always delivered for America. We're fools to turn our backs on it, and that's a truth that should be self-evident.
Shawn Lawrence Otto is a Hollywood screenwriter and a cofounder and CEO of ScienceDebate2008.com, a non-partisan citizens initiative to elevate science issues in the election, supported by the presidents of over 100 leading American universities, dozens of Nobel laureates, major CEOs, and nearly every major American science and engineering organization. You can read Obama and McCain's answers to the 14 top science questions facing America at www.sciencedebate2008.com
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
One basic problem is that multinational corporations will be quite happy to draw their intellectual capital from nations where its cost is significantly lower. So don't expect them to back or fund educational reform, except for shallow public relations gestures, tech "camps" and other drivel.
They are quite proud of the fact that they are "beyond" national borders (except, of course, when the need the US government to defend their interests. Then they have a country.)
Many of these companies will be quite satisfied with a large, sparsely educated, cheap, domestic "third world" labor force which will still be required to do manufacturing and service jobs here. The fact that this will require the crushing of the "American dream" scarcely bothers them.
Let me be clear. I sincerely hope that Obama is elected and effectively restructures the economy, and saves capitalism from itself just as Roosevelt did. I dread the social upheaval -- Americans have 200 million guns and I frankly don't want to live through a revolution.
But this is going to requires much, much deeper action than "education reform." We need to restructure our national industries and deliberately create new ones that will employ highly educated Americans.
Not "make work" industries, but the kind of new energy industries that Obama speaks about.
One basic problem is that multinational corporations will be quite happy to draw their intellectual capital from nations where its cost is significantly lower. So don't expect them to back or fund educational reform, except for shallow public relations gestures, tech "camps" and other drivel.
They are quite proud of the fact that they are "beyond" national borders (except, of course, when the need the US government to defend their interests. Then they have a country.)
Many of these companies will be quite satisfied with a large, sparsely educated, cheap, domestic "third world" labor force which will still be required to do manufacturing and service jobs here. The fact that this will require crushing the "American dream" scarcely bothers them. They will, however, eventually notice the uprisings that will target them, their privileged children and their easy-to-find gated communities. They don't see the danger, they don't think that far ahead, especially when they can see billions of dollars.
Let me be clear. I sincerely hope that Obama is elected and effectively restructures the economy, and saves capitalism from itself . Americans have 200 million guns and I frankly don't want to live through a revolution.
But this is going to require much, much deeper action than "education reform." We need to restructure our national industries and deliberately create new ones that will employ highly educated Americans. Not "make work" industries, but the kind of new energy industries that Obama speaks about.
yes... somehow in our times we have become greedy... research and science depend on hope, there is no sure return on an investment.. we have no jobs for the same reason... there is a cheaper labor market overseas... we have killed our home market and that is why we now have the "crash" ... because the majority of us have no money.
I know I am simplifying things greatly. But any government, any educational institution, any human social function at all cannot succeed in the presence of hate and greed ... capitalism might be great in theory, democracy might be great in theory, democratic republics, and socialism and even communism might be great in theory, even christianity might be okay in theory, the reason none of them are working is because of hubris and greed and hate... and what to do about that is the question we have to ask ourselves.
One last thing that noone has mentioned, and ironically the writer here
is a "Hollywood screenwriter".
There's an obvious anti-science bias in most popular entertainment
starting from children's programming on up to blockbuster movies.
The unpopular 'geeky' kid and the evil scientist stereotypes are ubiquitous.
Lately, they are counteracted somewhat by the DIY sub-culture where
geeky is now cool.
But still mainstream Pop culture is anti-science and it's totally acceptable
and normal to consider oneself to be 'bad at math'.
See reality TV = glorification of stupidity.
I agree that the US needs more investment in education and R&D, but it seems to me that our economy has been stripped of blue collar jobs that the working class can live on. We've replaced factory work with fast food work and cut wages in half for people without a college education.
It's only logical that if you gut the income of the middle class in your country, the day will come when they can't support your economy on their spending.
I'm bracing for a long recession with inflation at the levels we saw in the 70's.
Those "factory" jobs had been more than replaced by construction jobs through the first six to seven years of this decade. Construction jobs have dwindled in the last two years but there has also been substantial job growth in the energy and health care sectors. I'd like to see an increase in the military personnel, where there were huge job losses in the 90s.
The military is absolutely unproductive. The sole purpose of the military is to destroy the enemy. But while it waits for a chance to do that it keeps destroying the financial basis of the country it is supposed to protect.
LouisvilleLiberal ... you are correct. I have said the same thing... for the last seven years our "blue collar" wages have flatlined or declined as our manufacturing base has been sold to the lowest labor market... The hard working middle class in this country has been left to work in retail and other service industry jobs... in other words we are now competing with teen agers for jobs. Construction is slowing as the blue collar workers have no more money to spend on things... The "ownership" class in this country has starved it's clientele - if only a few are earning more than a minimum wage then no one is left to buy things. We do not have a credit crisis ... we have a job crisis ... yeah, they tell us to become entrapeneurs (however that is supposed to be spelled) but not all of us can do that, perhaps we just have to let it fall and go back to bartering for goods ... some of us can at least make ourselves useful because we can "make things"
Absolutely! The growing exclusion of history and science, even rational, deductive thought, from our public and social institutions has tangible consequences. Our true, mystical natures will win in the end and take our little empire with it down the drain of world history.
Renewable energy development could have been our 21st century 'transistor' but a large portion of stupid America chose ideology over progress and voted for Bush, whose administration has been about returning to the 1950s as much as it possibly could.
America, learn this lesson: countries cannot be run by stupid people and keeping people stupid cannot be one of our goals. Let's get the smart folks in office and start being adults again.
people don't have enough money to buy stuff, so they just borrowed money (from home equity and credit cards). this was unsustainable and we have the mess we have. until we get an equitable distribution of wealth wherein people have real income (money we earn by actually producing something) to buy stuff, we will not get the economy fixed.
People in the US have enough money to buy "stuff". If you need proof go to the mall. What people in the US haven't done is to buy a little less "stuff" and invest their money in long term infrastructure and education.
I went to the mall and observed about seven kiosks on a Sunday afternoon while my wife bought a couple of clothes. For 30 minutes, only one person stopped to look at something on one of the kiosks. She did not buy anything. People are buying a lot less stuff.
In our mall several jewelry stores have closed already. Other stores have going out of business signs. Linens N' Things is closing nationwide.
Re your comment to Dugan (below). You're absolutely right, but the problem is in the transition. Taking away retail sales does not equal productivity. In fact, in an ideal world, productivity, rather than credit, drives retail sales.
Thank you for this energetic focus on the truth.
One solution is to increase the number of H1-B visas so we can bring the best foreign talent in math and science here to the US. The problem is that too many conservaties are filled with anti-immigration sentiment because of Lou Dobbs and others. We need to get away from the racism and bring the best talent here.
H1-B visas are just slave labor for US corps. Encouraging permanent immigration of highly educated tech people would help. Most H1-B visa people just want to make the money and then go back home.
No, they aren't. I was here on an H-1B until I got my greencard. I was paid the same as my American colleagues and more often than not I had the better jobs and the higher recognition from my peers.
And most H-1B visa holder stay in the US. You got all your facts wrong. Is that because you want to get them wrong or you just don't know better?
When I began my Bio science study in the 50’s, I was fortunate enough to have support for basic research from the National Science Foundation as well as the National Institutes of Health. As a consequence, I had a productive career in research and teaching and had many students who went on to careers in the sciences as well. Some stayed in basic research while others strayed into areas of applied research and to the development of a number of commercial products.
During the early post WWII years no product of basic research developed during those times has the potential to affect our lives and well being more profoundly than the DNA model proposed by Watson & Crick in 1953. Their model, based on the fundamental x-ray diffraction studies of Rosalind Franklin, led to a staggering array of processes and products that have altered everything in our lives from the food we eat to the ability to manipulate our genetic makeup.
These advances did not arise out of a vacuum. Many were enabled and strongly supported in the US by NSF and NIH, (mostly during the 50’s-70’s) in the form of grants for basic research.
We desperately need to realign our priorities to bring Science Education near to the top of the list. Failure to do so will simply allow the Asian Science community to assume the position once held by the US and we will become nothing more than a third rate science pretender.
The problem is much more basic than education or funding or programs or the use of computers or everything you are all talking about.
The basic issue is the wholesale rejection of KNOWLEDGE as a GOOD THING by our culture.
Look around you, all you will see are advertisements and movies and music and radio and television programs that celebrate IGNORANCE as a VIRTUE! (McCain/PALIN, I'm looking at YOU!)
After World War 2, our nation hungered for knowledge and education and prized it above all other things. This was because we learned the hard way that the underlying cause of the rise of Fascism was IGNORANCE and the FEAR and INTOLERANCE that it breeds.
The G.I. Bill allowed millions to get a college education and it built the middle class, which was the engine of economic growth for our society. New discoveries from this investment in knowledge filled our coffers with riches never before seen. Society began to change rapidly.
The Reagan-Conservative movement exploited the fear of rapid change and promoted BLIND FAITH as more important than KNOWLEDGE. A shift began in society and our hero became the Uneducated Lout as opposed to the Knowledgeable Scientist.
We are now at a crossroads, we can choose the path of Enlightenment visualized by our Founding Fathers, or we can choose the road of darkness and ignorance that they rejected.
Knowledge is Power, Ignorance is the enemy.
Choose.
Actually pornography, illegal drugs, and gambling are the most reliable engines of the economy.
Not pornography. There's too much competition from amateurs for anyone to make a living at it anymore.
This is really an important blog. As a retired scientist and science teacher, I obtained by advanced degree via the National Science Foundation grants that came to the fore as a response to sputnik. A whole generation of scientists was trained. But those days are gone as the nation becomes more anti-science and anti-intellectual while taking pride in it out of some sort of bizarre religious fundamentalist mentality. Science education in our public schools is disgraceful despite the efforts of the overwhelmed science teachers who try their best. We cannot hope to solve our environmental, energy and economic problems until we have a basic level of scientific literacy in the general populace and more of our best majoring in science and engineering instead of business and law. I wish I had an answer.
It is difficult for credentialled scientists to resist the clarion call of money. It takes a dedicated scientist to stay in teaching given the disparity in salaries offered between academic and non-academic employment. But given the sacrifices in years and earning capacity for attending grad school, I cannot fault those seeking non-academic employment for their choices.
But we are now reaching the stage where we are producing so few scientists these days and India is producing so many, the shift in intellectual capacity is rapidly moving to Asia, to China for applied sciences and to India for theoretical and basic scientific manpower.
The US, with the exception of some medical research, is now pretty much out of the picture.
I am not sure you are well informed about the realities of academic life. Each year there are many more scientists who would like to teach in academia than there are positions to be filled. We have never suffered from a lack of applicants, and we rarely suffer from a lack of qualified applicants. What we do suffer from is a lack of research funding to cover the work of those who could very well qualify for academic research and teaching positions. In science the dollar speaks louder than anything else.
I don't know which country you are from, but there is no such thing as an officially "credentialed" scientist in the Western world. Whether you are a scientist or not depends on whether you know how to use the scientific method or not and on whether you do. A science title is not a matter of credentials, it's just something that one picks up along the way of becoming a scientist more or less automatically. It is, so to speak, the least of ones concerns.
Although I agree with the author's ideas, that the U.S. should have funded more R&D. I think a key opportunity within R&D was missed. The U.S. ushered in the computer age, and should have followed it up with more development of educational software to REPLACE traditional educational institutions and methods. The speed at which computers have transformed society is not easy to grasp, but I believe part of the mistake was trying to preserve traditional educational methods, and preserve teacher's status and that of educational institutions, instead of adapting the learning process to software and moving forward.
Less advantaged countries such as India and China, see both computers and education as an opportunity, whereas in the U.S., the entertainment and social aspects of technology have served to distract. Traditional education has gone stale.
You clearly do not understand the value of personal interaction with GREAT teachers. I can only speculate that you never had any. Let's just say that a great teacher can not make a congenial person any smarter, but they can advance most reasonably smart people to way beyond where they can go all by themselves.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
