Fareed Zakaria On The Post-American World

Fareed Zakaria on the future, as rising powers surge and the U.S. still stumbles.

Fareed Zakaria on the set of PBS' "Foreign Exchange with Fareed Zakaria." (AP)

Fareed Zakaria on the set of PBS' "Foreign Exchange with Fareed Zakaria." (AP)

Fareed Zakaria called it loud and early in his bestselling book “The Post-American World.” China up. India up. Brazil up. The U.S., treading water. And that was before the financial meltdown of 2008.

Now, he’s back with an update. What we call the global financial crisis wasn’t really global, he says. It was American-made and it decked the U.S. But rising competitors shrugged it off fast and have gone on rising while the U.S. struggles.

The “rise of the rest” — his phrase — raises big questions about exactly where the U.S. lands and stands.

This hour On Point: Fareed Zakaria, on the new world order.

- Tom Ashbrook

Guest:

Fareed Zakaria, host of CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS and editor-at-large of Time magazine.  He is also the author of the updated and expanded re-released best-seller, The Post-American World.

Excerpt: The Post-American World (PDF)
By Fareed Zakaria

Preface

The first edition of The Post-American World was written in 2006 and 2007, when America was at the center of the world. The American economy was booming and, despite the setbacks in Iraq, people could not but be impressed by Washington’s military power, which, since 9/11, had been deployed across the world on a scale unmatched in human history. American culture reigned supreme everywhere from Latin America to China. And whatever anyone thought of George W. Bush, there was still a general feeling that America represented the world’s most advanced form of capitalism, run and regulated in a sophisticated fashion. The book was published in the middle of 2008, when the financial crisis had just begun. The Bear Stearns bailout, in March 2008, seemed to have stabilized the system, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average crept up to 13,000. That fall, the financial system collapsed and with it the American economy, which contracted by 6 percent in the last quarter and shed almost four million jobs in six months, the largest such decline since the 1930s. The contraction in global trade was actually worse than that of the 1930s.

I would be lying if I said that I had predicted any of this. While I did mention the dangers of cheap credit and wrote about a looming financial crisis, I thought it would be the garden-variety kind most countries periodically go through, not the seismic shock that actually took place. However, contrary to most predictions by most experts, the effect of the crisis was to accelerate the forces that I described in the book. The financial crisis hastened the rise of the post-American world. Goldman Sachs has twice revised its predictions of when China will overtake the United States as the world’s largest economy, and it will surely revise them again in light of the slower growth rates caused by the crisis.

The conventional wisdom was that when the West sneezed, the rest would catch pneumonia—that had been the experience in the past. But this time, the emerging nations of the world had achieved a critical mass and were now able to withstand the dramatic decline in growth in the Western world. In fact, in retrospect, it seems wrong even to describe it as “the global financial crisis.” For China, India, Brazil, and Indonesia, this has not been much of a crisis. It has resulted in an acceleration of the power shift I described in the book, giving it new force and greater scope. In this edition, I try to explain the consequences of the financial crisis, the resulting changes in power, diplomacy, and national psyche. China is today a country very different from the one it was just three years ago.

One more big change: Barack Obama became president, and he arrived in the Oval Office with an awareness of the trends described in the book. That meant that the book needed to reflect the new political realities in Washington, some of which were positive, others as depressing as ever. I remain convinced that the United States can adapt and adjust to the new world I describe, but the challenges have become greater and more complex, and I outline them with some new research and reflections on the way technology and globalization have combined to create a real crisis of employment for Americans. I also remain convinced that the geopolitical challenge of living in a world without a central, dominant power is one that will be acutely felt everywhere, and this too has been amply illustrated over the last few years.

The new edition incorporates my views on the financial crisis and its effects, the challenges and opportunities for the American economy, and the nature of the new global geopolitics. They are worked in throughout the book, not in any one place. Nowhere have I altered my basic views, so a reader who thought I was wrong three years ago is unlikely to be persuaded that I am now right. I felt that it was important to preserve the basic integrity of the work. I still believe that the challenge for all of us in the twenty-first century will be to live and prosper in this new and very different world.

 
  • Cory

    The British empire…  The Soviet Union…  The Roman empire…   The United States of America.

    All once great civilizations who dominated during their heights and pushed the boundaries of science, culture, and education.

    All followed a similar path to the grave.  Far flung militarism causing financial crisis at home leading to a decline in education and internal investment.

    I just heard this morning that we have already spent over 100 billion dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan this year.  At home we are slashing school budgets, teacher’s wages and benefits, and witnessing skyrocketing tuition costs at colleges.

    It is as though we are blind to the lessons of history.

    • John of Medford

      I’ve noticed that America seems to be in a near permanent state of paralysis the past few years and virtually nothing seems to go forward.  Not surprising given that our political system is utterly broken and at war with itself.

      An interesting aside – I’ve read in a number of places over the past 18 months or so, that many of the very wealthy here in the US are quietly setting up homes and residency abroad as “insurance” if things go badly here quickly.

      • GLH

        Perpetual War= Perpetual Paralysis.

        Yep, you’re right John of M, Gladdie and I have an apartment in Geneva, Switzerland. Anyone with the means would be a fool not to book a lifeboat seat. I keep my Mae West close at hand.

        • John of Medford

          I agree.  But, unfortunately for most (myself included) either don’t have the means (not wealthy enough), or they are too old (over the age of 40), or they have commitments/obligations (caretakers of relatives) to book a lifeboat seat.

          If things go badly, it will be a repeat performance of the sinking of the Titanic.  The First Class will have the best access to the lifeboats.  Third Class (Steerage) will have very little or no access to secure a lifeboat seat.

          • Grady Lee Howard

            Passport fees have just gone up too. We might see a “refugee floatilla” leaving  for Cuba before too long. (They’re having a century record drought there and have no bath water.) Visit the “burning house” website to decide what to take.

    • Fredlinskip

      One correction- America IS blind to the lessons of history.Last night’s Fox news- that’s all the history I need.Never mind that Fox news has the exact same board of directors and chairman as the Wall St journal. There’s no connection there. Fox would NEVER let Wall St. interests influence their fair and balanced programming. Interesting recent article in Economist mag concerning Public Relations firms: there are now over 6 times the number of people working for PR firms than for news organizations. In other words there are 6x as many orgs whose employees are paid to misrepresent facts if it suits their interests, than there are news orgs who are supposedly attempting to report the facts.-No surprise so many are misinformed.

  • Gregg

    I would be interested to know how Mr. Zarkaria separates fair journalism from being a foreign policy advisor to the President. 

    • Jim in Omaha

      The president can get advice from anyone he wants, and you are not entitled to even know or find out who he’s getting advice from.

      See:
      Cheney v. U.S. District for the District of Columbia, 542 U.S. 367 (2004)

  • Jeffreysc

    We are paying a steep price for our politicians’ belief that they have unlimited resources with which to feed their egos.  Moreover, they rarely consider the consequences beyond the next election. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1125975244 Aaron K. Hallquist

    Good Morning Fareed;

    Is it fair or not to say that given the recent example of former Sen. Judd Gregg going to work for Goldman Sachs we are now without a doubt living in a plutocracy; aka “rule by the wealthy”?

  • Dacotahbuoy

    I blame the ideology of the Republican Right that has embraced a form of social Darwinism.  Somehow disconnecting the fate of the rich to the fate of the whole.  Further amazed that even in poor “Red” states, not so well off people seem to embrace and kick down on the lesser as the cause of their distress.  Now we all have to pay the price the supper rich of the world have a global nation of their own disconnected to us.

    • Ellen Dibble

      I am beginning to view the Republicans who want freedom from regulation, referring back to colonial economic realities, and religious values close to those that were the norm in that same era — I view them as the modern equivalent of the British empire we were trying to not pay taxes to.
            We don’t want to be fighting for that army.  We don’t want to be supporting their global empire.  We don’t want to be pushed around.  If they want to go and be glorious, let them.  We’ll go it alone.   Leave us be.  We’ll decide what we want to pay taxes for (and to).
           So I see such Republicans — the free enterprise, free to exploit slaves or cheap labor overseas, or to command Americans to have for-profit health care, etc., etc. — I see those as colonial Tories, who kept their heads down during the 1776 era.  Of I regard them as the British Empire, with Goldman et al as King George.   I pay taxes to bail the likes of THEM out!  Hah.  We’ll toss their tea in the Charles River rather than let the Republican legislature proceed with Too Big To Fail.
          But can we revolt against the empire in our midst, the corporate plutocracy that feeds off of us?  Not likely.
          But they don’t exactly reside among us.  They can off-shore themselves, move to Bermuda.  So there are possibilities.
           I am posing this hypothetically.  But my mindset is getting where I dress Republicans in Red coats, and the elephant in the room is more of a problem than the donkey, most of the time.

    • Anonymous

      When you take the Tea Party “principles” into account and the near absolute rule by Grover Norquist on taxes and “environmentalism” that prevents the country from doing anything positive for the future.

      When you look at Tea Party “leaders,” you find it populated with members of the John Birch Society. One of the best things that William F. Buckley ever did was to drive the JBS out of the Republican Party, but now that he is dead (27 February 2008) they are back stronger than ever, being allowed to be a sponsor of the CPAC meeting, basically run by the APU this year and, I think, last year also.

  • Banicki

    If America is going to regain its status, it must take back our free markets.

    Being too big to fail highlights the third leg of a three legged stool that supports a thriving society and government. That leg is Free Markets and in our country they are becoming less and less free. Without free markets goods and services cost more, there is less innovation, resources are allocated inappropriately, income disparity rises and society deteriorates over all.

    Conservatives in this country lambaste a central government, like China, having too much control over its industry and economic markets. They sight history saying when power gets too centralized, it is too far removed from the marketplace and citizens to make decisions in the best interest of society as a whole. Their personal self interest overrides the country that they are serving. http://goo.gl/MoLK0

    • ebw343

      The Republicans talk a good game of free-market, yet while they are the most guilty of insisting that no government seed money to to next-generation technologies, they also are the most vigorous defenders of the subisdies in place for old 20th century industries like oil.

    • Anonymous

      @1653fac76801ece7b1f69e3a67dbc984:disqus The same arguments apply against “free markets” being too free. We regulate traffic on the highway, we regulate the use of asbestos and its removal, we don’t allow fire hazards in residential or commercial areas. These are perhaps too simple to explain why some regulations need to be more complex, but when banks use our money to speculate on derivatives at high rates of leverage, so that when the house of cards collapses and the intertwined bank relationships threaten to bring ALL banking to a halt because NOBODY knows who is solvent and unwinding the relationships may take months or more, it necessitates a rescue from the federal government. This time the rescue left the bankers largely whole, but it caused a lot of people to lose their jobs as the mortgage defaults lowered consumer spending, causing companies to cut back, laying off workers and holding up other investments, leading to another round of layoffs and then more yet. This spiral that harms people who had NOTHING to do with causing it cries out for regulation so that the bankers or others who do cause financial disasters can be made accountable.

      Sure, such regulation will slow or prevent some forms of innovation. But while some derivatives serve useful purposes, but much of the excess use of subprime mortgages for derivates did NOT benefit society in ANY way; in fact it has cost the American economy $TRILLIONS. Other than that it wasn’t taken at the point of a gun, why wasn’t it THEFT (on a grand scale)? I know Alan Greenspan argued against enforcing anti-speculation laws, saying the “Market” will take care of it. Show me how the “Market” punished the bankers. You have to SHOW that the punishment would not have hurt a LOT of others in the process, also.

      Hopefully, and we won’t know until the regulations being written now to enforce Dodd-Frank, those regulations will allow individual banks to be taken over in a structured way, so the economy will not be devastated in the process.

      • Banicki

        Don_B1

        I think we are agreeing. The free markets need an umpire. Otherwise, free markets are choked by oligopolies and monopolies. Part of the problem is our politicans are also being bout by these oligopolies. Obama is a good example.  http://goo.gl/j68Wg

  • William

    He is pretty much of a liberal hack and not a very good reporter. 

    • Dan

      Zakaria’s not a reporter at all and has never claimed to be, but good try.

      -dan
      Boston, MA

    • Anonymous

      @0aeb1c67f759dc0e24a92a5eb0bf6a0b:disqus Just because what he says gives you cognitive dissonance does NOT make him a hack. He is someone who does not follow the herd of real hacks out there (call it the MSM), and does some really thoughtful analysis of global issues from a depth of knowledge that most reporters are too lazy, too self-satisfied, or intellectually handicapped to achieve.

      I do not agree with his every conclusion, but I CAN follow how he got there and recognize the factors that he weighs differently from how I do.

  • nameless

    Once again a neo-con spin artist adds a few words to a previously published book and republishes it and government radio gives him or her a few hour to peddle it.

    YOU GO, GOVERNMENT RADIO!!!!!!!  (And don’t forget to demand $$$$ fro m your listeners)

    • Dan

      You consider Zakaria a neo-con?  *How*?  How do you come to that conclusion?

      -dan
      Boston, MA

  • Buyers’ remorse in NJ and WI

    “The US became incapable of reacting” to the situation owing to the political process.

    Fareed, less false equivalency please. Somewhere Grover Norquist and Halliburton are getting stiffies.

  • Jtaylorvt

    Tom – Ask Fareed if some of this wasn’t part of the “glabalists’” plan all along.  The ides was always to move production from high cost countries to lowers cost. Eventually costs there would rise, wages in developed countries will drop and production follows.

    The gloabalists, including Clinton, exported manufacturing from America and opened the doors wide to imports in raw goods as well as manufacured. This has been the plan all along.  This is the tough time, wnile America adjusts and lowers its expectations.

    John
    Williamstown, Vt

    • Anonymous

      While somewhat different at the country to country level, the rough analogy that when an individual specializes in making something he does well and then trades his product with someone who has specialized in something he needs or wants tends to balance out favorably for BOTH parties. A major difference is that at the country level, some countries lose some industries to others, but in return gain jobs in other areas. Where the U.S. has fallen down is in developing ways to support and retrain the workers who have lost jobs in this process. While the Democrats have paid more than lip service to this, they have NOT done enough and the Republicans have been opposed to doing anything. One of the things that MUST be done is provide a more robust education for everyone so that even later in life they have the mental flexibility to learn new types of work.

      One of the things we should most want is for the standard of living in all countries to rise; the middle class, while too often stampeded into war (see the Bush administration’s fear-mongering from September 2002 to March 2003 to get support for its invasion of Iraq), is usually reluctant to take on foreign entanglements. The reason is that they have too much to lose. The rich think they will only lose a few trinkets and can gain a lot of control/wealth and the poor basically have only their lives to lose, and too often, they do not put that price as high as they should (see suicide bombers).

      When trade benefits BOTH the developing and developed worlds, which it can if structured properly, it should be pursued to avoid the envy-generated disruptions (Al Qaida?) that could be great disruptions in the future.

  • Bonnie

    The status quo in the U.S. is protected by policies which protect old technology (i.e. oil subsidies, corn subsidies, etc.) and which does not aid new business and technology to succeed.  And our politicians in Washington are busy arguing for trickle-down economic policies, which have shown over 30 year NOT TO WORK.  Have we lost all capability for critical thinking and logic????  Help us Fareed!

  • Ellen Dibble

    I heard Zakaria on Charlie Rose last night, and was impressed that he with vastly more knowledge than I, and wider experience, has approximately my perspective.  I’ll buy the book.
        What I’ve been thinking about is the point he’s making now about the need for more education in this country.  He was saying all the non-knowledge industries are permanently overseas.  He sees a few ways we can employ the 10 percent to profitable, tax-paying jobs and restabilize.
       I wonder, does he have evidence that the human brain can wire-up to achieve what he suggests?
        Personally, I think yes, a person with a low IQ can boost that by appropriate use of that brain.
        But I think he is assuming this.  I’m not so sure.

  • Jim

    I disagree with Fareed Zakaria’s premise that America was at the “center of the world” in 2006 and 2007. At that time country was in the midst of an unsustainable bubble, spurred by absurd tax cuts and massive governement spending on two wars.  America’s economic decline began earlier, around 2000 and 2001, and 9/11 pushed us over the edge by causing us to make the bad decisions of: absurd tax cuts while launching two wars.

  • Bill

    I get really tired of the “us” thing. If investors have a choice between getting 2% investing in ways that benefit the US middle class and 8% investing elsewhere while trashing the US middle class, it’s pretty obvious where the money will be going.

    • Alan

      Right on the money, Bill.

    • Jim in Omaha

      Absolutely right.  The problem is that, globally, capital (money) is totally unfettered while labor (people) is tightly regulated.  Maybe it’s time to place some equivalent restrictions on the flow of capital in and out of “our” country.   Or at least make it pay its fair share.

    • Anonymous

      @Bill That might be a good reason to tax the rich more and keep the money here, repairing our decaying infrastructure and doing the basic research to develop new technologies which will employ Americans. This will not be so detrimental to the rich because America will then remain the country where EVERYONE will want to live, instead of becoming something that looks like Haiti. (And I am not disparaging the average Haitian; they have faced a lot of outside interference, much of it from the U.S., which has supported their elites, who now have to live in “gated communities” but do not have the money or will not make the effort to generate enough jobs for everyone.

      Taxing them more would also restrict their inclinations to “gamble”/speculate with other people’s money like they did to cause the financial crisis.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Zakaria says that those who lost jobs and are self-employed make about $19,000 a year.
       I’d like to say been-there, done-that.
       AND I’d like to say some of us are trying to start new ways of doing things and find all the cards stacked against us.
        Everything about the tax code favors those with “regular jobs,” regular health insurance benefits, regular priorities (tax deduction for a mortgage for a house, which is not the first thing a business needs).  etc etc

  • Andy

    The state of affairs is so damned frustrating. The know-nothing attitude of the tea party (sponsored by the ultrarich) is killing this country. Why are they so hellbent to continue the tax and corporatist policies that have brought this country to its knees is mindboggling in the extreme.

    • Hillarion of Sudbury

      Look for aa article entitled “Dear Tea Party: You’ve Been Had”. Also, find out about how the Koch brothers hijacked the Tea Party.

      • Hillarion of Sudbury

        Sorry — “an”

    • Anonymous

      As I mentioned above, get a list of the leaders, foreground and background, and in their bios, look for John Birch Society membership, too. Or CCC membership. I suspect this may have some overlap with Hillarion’s comment and I will check it out soon.

      Note to Hillarion: you can use the “edit” box to change your original post and then again to delete your correction.

  • Dan

    I would like to ask Mr. Zakaria what he sees as the single most dangerous political force in America right now.  To my eyes, the United States’ problems are large but not insurmountable so long as our leaders can act like adults.  That hasn’t happened, and I’d like to know how Mr. Zakaria would apportion blame.

    -dan
    Boston, MA

  • Randyrinaldo

    “Contemplate
    the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say ‘what should be the
    reward of such sacrifices?’ Bid us and our posterity bow the knee,
    supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the
    avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in
    our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth
    better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated
    contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or
    arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit
    lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our
    countrymen!”. Sam Adams
     All the

    rich people now have all the money but don’t have a clue what

    their responsibility is to make sure their promise or “trickle down economics” is made good by
    making some kind of effort to redistribute wealth.

    It’s like the boy who been chasing his first girlfriend but after she’s caught he’s scared and doesn’t have
    a clue what to do it.

    All of your so-called genius wall street tycoons only know how to make
    money with money but as far as understanding WORK or MANUFACTURING they choose to run off in a
    corner and hoard their “in god we trust” money so now the TRUTH comes
    out.
    All of these so-called whiz kids experts and specialist (gamblers) are nothing a bunch of dumb down
    idiots and or “SPECIALIST or EXPERTS” that really don’t have a
    clue; to wit

    “those people who will not be turning a shovel full of dirt on this
    (Muscle Shoals Dam Project) or be contributing a pound of material
    towards it will collect more money from the United States than will
    the People who supply all the material and do all the work on it.”
    Thomas Edison

    “The boast of heraldry, the pomp of power,
    And all that beauty, all that wealth e’er gave,
    Awaits alike the inevitable hour:
    The paths of glory lead but to the grave.”

    The best thing to do is to print other currency the CONSTITUTIONAL WAT for “FOLKS’ who are
    capable of understanding how to run a business who know what LABOR and
    is on a personal scale and also have some AMERICAN SPIRIT about then and give the rich maybe 10%
    on a dollar for swapping a dollar for new currency that “we the
    people” print.

    These goof ball rich don’t deserve any money even less than the
    people who the republicans are trying to dupe out of medicare etc
    another big rip off by rich.

    So why are the rich bringing America down instead of bring the other nations up?
    Peace,

    Doc

    • Dan

      I think you’re my favorite.  Your capitalization is fascinating.

      -dan
      Boston, MA

      • Pancake

         When I caught my first girlfriend I knew exactly what to do.
        Maybe I should be in charge.

        • Randy Rinaldo

          Wrong answer; the CUSTOMER is always right. Now go SATISFY someone else; that the trick for return customers. I am of the opinion that “we” (the little people) are not here for “THEM” to be satisfied even though “we” are smiling while we take it up the wazoo beauty is only skin deep and the FEELING I get is that that’s exactly what is happening. “THEY” are having their way with us. Hey BTW here’s an invitation into reality. Oh, if you’re a professional, specialist, expert it might pay you to take an extra dose of Prozac, just in case. You see, “THEY” created all of us and “THEY” know us all better than “we” know ourselves and many of us don’t know that we’ve all been trained to take instructions and their is no “PRACTICE” anymore. Practice went out with the advent of public schools after THEY killed apprenticeship type education and the likes. Of course not too many understand that “we” are actors on the stage of life and as we merrily go along we are really “ACTING” out the script that THEY have prepared. Of course goosestepping is just for show and that “FEELING” I told you about, well maybe you can connect the dots. What is a system of support that is in a STRATIFICATION of one suspending another. Has it not occurred to the elitist corporations that without workers they are nothing therefore the judiciary who contends that corporations are people are in reality parasites and NOT like people parasites who are INDIVIDUALS who are capable of existence without a VICTIM to suck on. Our government has gone mad for a dollar and or graft and has lost it way and has deemed parasites to be the equivalent to a human beings. Yes there are “classes” and there are “CLASSES”!

          http://www.whale.to/b/gatto.pdf

          PS

          The very reasons “we” have been dumbed down; it was and is a scheme!

          We want one class of persons to have a liberal education, and we want
          another class of persons, a very much larger class, of necessity, in
          every society, to forego the privileges of a liberal education and fit
          themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks.
          “The Meaning of a Liberal Education”, Address to the New York City High School Teachers Association (9 January 1909).

  • Robert Hennecke

    The corporate model which would operate employee free if possible is the REAL problem as all government handouts to them are essentially bribes to get them to do things that they in reality don’t want to do. Worker owned co-ops and small independant owned businesspeople grouped together in craft guilds. The corporation didn’t exist in the time of Adam Smith and I strongly doubt that he would be a latter day proponent of forced labour of teenagers (Foxconn).

  • Alan

    How does Mr. Zakaria propose to increase U.S. manufacturing if we are not willing to pay workers $2/day to produce whatever widgets are needed? And if we are willing to pay those kind of wages, how do we maintain anything like the standard of living we’ve developed? Do we all return to the lower east side and live in tenements, five families to an apartment?

    • GlassIsHalfEmpty

      Not sure it is FZ’s point but implicit is my opinion that US standard of living is declining, for the majority, and in another generation will be noticeably worse. “Cheap” post-WWII education is a relic of the past, and the primary ingrediant in our late 20th Century economic success. Housing “improved” for many, but at cost of CDO debacle. Our out-sized energy consumption (25% of world’s usage but only 2-3% of total population — some is industrial capacity but lots is just plain luxury and wasteful) will become prohibitively expensive. The imported “brains” at MIT, Stanford, Ivies, Publics, etc., which has propelled R&D in nearly all industries up to now, are not coming here in anywhere the same magnitude — FZ even said the Chinese are educating millions each year at home, now, and building on a scale which is plain scary. US-trained PhDs are now beginning to return to PRC, or elsewhere, at rapidly-rising rates, b/c opps at home may be better than in the US.

      Meanwhile, poor balance of unions and govt workers’ demands with fiscal reality, and many non-unionized individuals too but both groups carelessly spending themselves into disaster just to maintain/improve status but without the “paycheck” to support the desire. GM had poor management, but union demands/labor costs helped drive that car in the ditch. There are many innovative areas (biochem, pharma, etc) which will do well for US, but our country’s predominant position on so many fronts is waning, and people had better get used to that fact. As developing nations grab for the brass ring with really cheap labor, autocratic governments (PRC’s solar panel subsidies, currency manipulation, or by cornerning the rare-earth metals market, or by purchasing 20% of one Brazilian state’s land to produce the ag crops so desperately China needs…), the US will not be able to maintain our edge for long unless we do some drastic fiscal planning, and re-engineering. And EVERYONE is willing to make some sacrifices: Defense, Entitlements, Mortgage Deductions, Higher Taxes, you name it. We all need to tighten our belts b/c the competition is fierce and only getting stronger.

  • Pancake

    “Colonized Mind” is the best accurate description of today’s talking head.

    • Dan

      Great Prince song, but I see absolutely no connection to what I’m hearing on the radio.

      -dan
      Boston, MA

  • Christine in Newton

    What are we to do about this unemployment crisis? Apple employs a MILLION people in China? Presumably, that is because it is so much cheaper to manufacture in China because of the low wages. Low wages are possible because of a lower cost of living, correct?

    • Dan

      Foxconn employs a million people in China, not Apple.  Zakaria was pretty clear on that.

      -dan
      Boston, MA

  • Marshall White

    It seems to me that the key here is jobs.  And while many like to blame the “illegal” immigrants for driving down wages here, and multinational corporations for outsourcing overseas for cheaper labor.  It seems that the most effective long term approach is to fight for higher standards of living and workers rights around the world.  We can’t exclude ourselves from the world economy, and since we clearly have no interest in lowering our standard or living, it seems the only path is to raise the standards of those around us (and by us, I refer to the middle class, those with much much more than the rest of us could probably do with less).

    • Dan

      “It seems that the most effective long term approach is to fight for higher standards of living and workers rights around the world.”

      That sounds lovely, but what, exactly, does that entail?  How do you get from here to there?

      -dan
      Boston, MA

      • Marshall White

        Practically speaking, it’s rather difficult.  Try to stay alert as to where your products and services come from, and as a result try to choose those companies that value their employees and their communities.  Like I said, difficult to execute.  But I think where it is useful is in changing the focus from demonizing the workers of the world, and seeing the systemic problems that result in people working for less.

        We would be better off making sure the produce we buy that says “grown in mexico” are from reputable farms, than building a fence across the border.

    • Anonymous

      Actually, as Fareed said China’s wages tripled over the last decade while our worker’s stayed basically flat. The effort by China to peg the renminbi to the dollar has led to inflationary pressures that many feel will cause China great problems within a year or so. Thus China will have to develop a growing internal consumer society to buy its products if it is to continue its rapid growth. This is how other societies will get higher standards of living.

  • Fgomez76

    I would like to ask Mr. Zakaria how much money are these emerging economies are investing in education in comparison to the United States.

    Felipe
    Boston, MA

  • Ellen Dibble

    Why did we have war bonds to fund World War I and World War II but not for the wars in the 2000s?  Zakaria says it’s lack of discipline.  Last night I heard him say we are fixated on the founding fathers and not agile and flexible enough to adapt our government.  Or was it too much campaign finance influence that he was saying.  Or all of that.
        But I think last decade’s war still has to affect the home front — with rationing and war bonds and all that.  I can’t see how not.  Has he thought about this?  I guess we need prescription drug bonds too, to pay for what the government provided in the past that we will never be able to pay for with regular taxes.

    • Dan

      In part, we never declared war in the 2000s.  And both of those earlier wars involved conscription, while neither Iraq nor Afghanistan did.  Apples and oranges.

      -dan
      Boston, MA

      • Ellen Dibble

        I actually suggested war bonds at a public hearing with Senator Kerry, and he said, “We’re doing it,” and I’m thinking he didn’t understand, because it didn’t happen.  As I understand it, Japan’s national debts are less risky because they borrow from the citizens (essentially war bonds), whereas the US borrows from other nations.  I am merely saying some of us are able to help out; why not let us.   Americans, if you give us a goal, a chart, we tend to “go at it.”

        • Dan

          I would guess he didn’t understand…that seems like an odd answer.  

          -dan
          Boston, MA

          • Pancake

            He thought she said “sailboarding” and he’s doin’ it!

  • Randyrinaldo

    Please read

    http://www.populistdaily.com/economics/who-stole-your-social-security-and-why.html

    snip
    In 8 years, the Bush Jr. Administration spent every single penny of
    the Social Security surplus, using it like a piggy bank to give huge tax
    breaks to individuals and to corporations, to start wars, to give
    lucrative government contracts…far beyond their value…to friends and
    associates. During that time, the Bush Administration drained $1.4
    trillion dollars, the entire surplus and used it to write down their
    additional national debt, which turned out to be…without the Social
    Security funds…a grand total of $3.4 trillion.

    In addition, the Bush Administration’s lax and incompetent management
    of the financial community added another $750 billion in a late 2008
    bailout to keep the financial community from completely dissolving. To
    keep the recession that came as a result of the partial collapse of the
    financial and housing markets from becoming a huge depression, has added
    $1.2 trillion more. So the funds from personal tax deductions paid by
    workers–the amount of money we call Social Security–has been completely
    looted.  And, by the way, we currently have additional debt from the
    last 8 years of $5.3 trillion dollars.>end snip

    • Anonymous

      @ecb3aff6ae5a973692a63fb737c3c495:disqus  It isn’t NECESSARILY lost; American voters have to throw enough Republicans out of office that the progressive Democrats and their “Blue Dog friends” get the spine to raise taxes on the rich to make sure the money will be there to pay the Treasury bond “IOUs” held by Social Security. That was how Reagan and Greenspan promised it would happen and what Republican would want to dishonor a Reagan promise?
      [Ans.: ANY Republican who thinks SS recipients will not remember or who thinks they can be fed a stream of repeated lies that that was not actually promised! And, unfortunately, there are a LOT of Republicans who DO believe one or both will apply, and they have a lot of successful experience in those fields.]

  • Jason B

    I have to take issue with something Mr. Zakaria said a moment ago. He claimed that Medicare was the single biggest problem contributing to our deficit. I would argue that defense spending is where we should start. We spend more on defense that all other countries combined and use I don’t happen to agree that putting all of our forces on the other side of the planet doesn’t make us safer. Let’s bring defense back to the job of defending the United States and cut that spending in half. 

    • Anonymous

      The war in Iraq IS being phased out and spending there is down a lot. In Afghanistan the problem is different; the U.S. is there BECAUSE of Pakistan; but with the death of bin Laden, it may well be possible to negotiate a faster withdrawal. These efforts may take a year or slightly more, but giving even a “psychological victory” to Al Qaida or just appearing to give up could easily lead other leaders (Chinese, Saudi Arabian, Russian) to consider us weak and try to step into what they think is a vacuum, to our future cost. Read “Berlin 1961″ and the Kennedy-Krushchev negotiations for an example of how that can work in the real world.

      Further cuts in defense spending should come from ending programs that provide unnecessary capabilities for an all-out war with the Soviet Union, which no longer exists.

      But even all that will not save much more than 2 or 3% of GDP, while we need to reduce spending by around 10% or so.

      But Medicare, with its near constant growth rate at least 3% ABOVE the rate of GDP growth will eventually outgrow any tax increase or cut of other spending. That is why Zakaria placed Medicare at the top of the problem list.

      Note that the PPACA builds in efforts to force hospitals to track the patients’ history from admission to FULL recovery (which will tie readmissions into a single case) and get better data on which treatments/procedures actually work, thus generating substantial savings with no degradation (or even an improvement) in care results.

      Note also that the Republican/Ryan “Plan” says to the patient, “Pay what the hospital/doctor charges, do without the treatment or figure out on your own how to improve your care.” Good luck on that when a study has shown that average citizens, including all age groups above 21-y-o, have great difficulty evaluating the relative advantages of different companies automobile insurance policies.

  • JasonB

    I have to take issue with something Mr. Zakaria said a moment ago. He claimed that Medicare was the single biggest problem contributing to our deficit. I would argue that defense spending is where we should start. We spend more on defense that all other countries combined and I don’t happen to agree that putting all of our forces on the other side of the planet makes us safer. Let’s bring defense back to the job of defending the United States and cut that spending in half.

    • Anonymous

      I would suggest Googling “The Chart That Should Accompany Every Discussion of Deficits” from the Atlantic.  It is informative.

  • Randyrinaldo

    It is NOT the working classes issue here! Who has all the money and how and why did THEY get it?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woIkIph5xcU

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1408098372 Mari McAvenia

    “Does the U.S. need to be number 1?”- Tom Ashbrook

    The U.S. will never be the supreme world power as long as it continues to breed ill will, globally, with its empire expanding wars.

  • Dan

    Woo current caller Steve!  Nicely done!

    -dan
    Boston, MA

  • Randyrinaldo

    INNOVATION is being choked by the powers that be; I can elaborate but the bottom line is that those at the top are in control of what hits the markets.

    http://www.valentintechnologies.com/

    Also google “Alcohol Can Be a Gas”

    I’ve been everywhere man and I can make the arguments that innovation is being bottle necked and manipulated to take the course of what a few men deem.

    ‘The real menace of our Republic is the invisible government, which
    like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy legs over our cities, states and
    nation. To depart from mere generalizations, let me say that at the head
    of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil
    interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally
    referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful
    international bankers virtually run the United States government for
    their own selfish purposes.

    ‘They practically control both parties, write political platforms,
    make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private
    organizations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for
    high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the
    dictates of corrupt big business.

    ‘These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests
    control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country.
    They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive
    out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the
    powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government. It
    operates under cover of a self-created screen [and] seizes our executive
    officers, legislative bodies, schools, courts, newspapers and every
    agency created for the public protection.

    This “invisible government”, Hylan and others – William Jennings Bryan, Charles Lindbergh Sr. (R-MN) – argued, exercised its control of the US Government through the Federal Reserve

  • Ellen Dibble

    Zakaria on our national legislature.  As I recall from Charlie Rose last night, he said, more or less, “No one pays $50,000 to have coffee with their legislature.  They’re not that interesting as people (that’s from his tone of voice mostly).  They pay that money ’cause they want a tax break, and that’s why we have a tax code of X XX volumes.  The tax code is legalized corruption.”
        More or less.

    • Worried for the country(MA)

      Starve the beast.  Surefire way to avoid government corruption; a massive restriction of revenues is needed.  We need more unemployed lobbyists.

      Look how greater DC has thrived during the downturn.  The only region in the country with housing prices increasing.

      • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/3ETFGMQ3B7VD4AAMILBBEVMCWE JasonA

        And more unemployed attorneys and consultants. The vast majority of Congress is comprised of law school graduates…sadly.

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/3ETFGMQ3B7VD4AAMILBBEVMCWE JasonA

      Someone from Africa once said…and I am paraphrasing:  “In our country we have bribes, in the USA you have lobbyists, attorneys, and consultants…all the same”.

      Lobbyist are another group deserving of long prision sentences for the crime of corrupting the entire political process. Congress is, of course, equally guilty for being bought off.

      • Ellen Dibble

        Jason, maybe my memory is playing games with me, but I think another industry that Zakaria was suggesting the USA could take the lead in, create jobs in, was — wait for it — LOBBYING.
            Is he for real?  I must have dreamed it.
            Nonetheless, “military advisors,” in Vietnam under Kennedy, were lobbyists of a sort, telling how is the best way to do this or that, creating connections between the industries and know-how that could bring about this or that result.
            Other lobbyists are the whole of the United Nations, whereby the know-how of the whole world can be brought to bear, say in a country that has been run by military junta for decades, or by American puppet, or what have you.  How to establish a banking system.  How to attract investment. How to bring clean water…
            This is so different from what Zakaria was saying is Pakistan’s approach to international relations.  He says that country is not a nation with a military but a military with a nation, and that they find they can destabilize neighbors (such as India, Bombay in particular) “on the cheap” through keeping terrorists sort of on the payroll.  He says this has to stop.  It will backfire.  It HAS backfired.  We have given Pakistan something like a billion dollars to beef up their military and STILL they keep the terrorists in the wings.
             Listen to Charlie Rose from last night.  I’m pretty sure that’s his take.  It seems a no-brainer that Pakistan will figure this out, but when.

        • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/3ETFGMQ3B7VD4AAMILBBEVMCWE JasonA

          You are taking my comment to the extreme. Using your logic, and in the broadest sense I could be “lobbying” if I say good morning to my boss. Let’s not parse words.

          It is obvious to me…and I think a good. and growing, number of other people, the negative effects lobbyists are having on corrupting the Congress and the entire political process in the US.

          When was the last time you were personally invited by your Congressperson into his/her office when writing legislation?  When was the last time a large corporation put its private jet fleet at your disposal?

          I have first hand knowledge that this occurs daily.

  • Jean

    Where are the customers for American stuff, if jobs like airplane pilot which used to get them a house next to the golf course and good schools for their kids is now just above minimum wage?

  • Mrsxray

    Concerning the comments of the caller who suggested rolling back all the Bush tax cuts, which would have added approximately a trillion dollars to the treasury….without them, would we have had the growth we’ve had? Wouldn’t we have sent more industry overseas? My husband is a physician and we have seen our income go down because federal (and subsequently insurance) reimbursements have decreased.  He is actually working harder and traveling to smaller hospitals to keep his income up.  There will come a time, however, if we lose the few tax benefits that we have, when it will not be worth it for him to work as hard anymore.  We are already in a 39% tax bracket; why work harder to give more money to the government and pay for people who are not working or putting in their fair share? Nevertheless, with two kids in college, one in graduate school, and two more at home, we’ll be working for years to come.

    • Pancake

      Why would some greedy cut-throat pursue a career in a helping profession in the first place? Didn’t they have aptitude tests back then? And woman, if you want more money, get it yourself! And pay your taxes!

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1408098372 Mari McAvenia

      Honey, maybe it’s time for you to trade up in the marriage market, if you still can. How much do you think it would cost (of hubby’s money) to get those implants and botox shots that would put you in the league of potential billionaire’s wives? Might be a worthy investment. 

    • Jim in Omaha

      There is no “39% tax bracket”.  It’s 35% on the income over $379,150 a year.  Y’all need a different accountant.

      The “growth we’ve had” was an illusion created by an $8 trillion housing bubble.

      If you refuse to make more money because it will require you pay taxes on it, you will be the first person I have ever heard of to do so.

    • Joshua Hendrickson

      poor baby

    • GlassIsHalfEmpty

      Mrsxray: Why did you have 5 kids? Why not go to work, yourself, to increase the household budget? What is the total sq. ft per capital of all your housing? Why is your husband scavenging around hospitals for patients — is his practice not naturally producing robust clientele? Or does he rely on someone else to do the managing, and he is simply doing piece work around the region?

      I appreciate you are paying full tuitions. I know your household is a big part of the US consumer economy. But, we have surgeon in our family — great practice; not moving around; excellent take-home. We buy things, pay high taxes, full tuitions, but we have no gripes. In fact, I think our family can do more. My dox’ biggest gripe? Insurance is staggering, and he would like to see some real “litigation-containment” for needless or frivilous lawsuits. If someone is basically way off base in suing, why not serve them with bill for all legal costs and lost income of dox, plus some penalty. If the dox are guilty of mal-practice, they should be out of business. But wasting tons of $$ on cases would decline and (good) dox won’t pay outrageous premiums while making people healthy.

      PS I am F/T MSW working with serious clinical cases; we have 3 kids, two of whom went to UMass system schools — was great fit for them and their experience was excellent. And great price. Graduate school is on their own ticket, they know. Start teaching your kids full independence right now. And stop grousing about your high (marginal income only) bracket. It used to be 90%!

  • Randyrinaldo

    The truth is useless. You have to understand this right
    now. You can’t deposit the truth in a bank. You can’t buy groceries with
    the truth. You can’t pay rent with the truth. The truth is a useless
    commodity that will hang around your neck like an albatross all the way
    to the homeless shelter. And if you think that the million or so people
    in this country that are really interested in the truth about their
    government can support people who would tell them the truth, you got
    another thing coming. Because the million or so people in this country
    that are truly interested in the truth don’t have any money. [edit]

    Jeb Bush:

  • Ellen Dibble

    It seems to me the competitive American capitalist who sees “freedom” as the freedom to exploit, for commercial profit — that spirit wants the world divided into friends and enemies.  A strong world, with strong trading partners, thriving economies able to buy our exports, that world is not a world torn in two with X contesting Y.  
        We should want the diversity.  Who wants to be a bully?  Not me.  I want to be a team player.  The “team,” as a global family of nations, is inchoate, but not impossible to imagine as a goal.

  • Webb Nichols

    This is an extremely important conversation. the United States has becoome an undisciplined, some what lazy, complaining about trivia nation expecting somehow that it will all work out without us bending together to the task.

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/3ETFGMQ3B7VD4AAMILBBEVMCWE JasonA

      The Republican party, in particular, acts as if it is 1945 and we still had all the money and power. What aarogance.

  • frank

    With these large populations, shouldn’t we be looking to our agricultural potential to help our economy reduce the trade  deficit ?

    • Pancake

      We prefer coal exports: much lower labor costs.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1408098372 Mari McAvenia

    Thank you, Fareed, for stating that the Soviet Empire collapsed largely due to its bloated military. We are headed towards a devastating cultural collapse now, too, for exactly the same reason. 

    • Pancake

      Don’t forget nuclear meltdowns and weather related disasters, and oil spills, and fracking. (an army runs on its gas tank)The Russians at least had some muddy potato fields to dig when the end came. Look for Blackwater to shoot our starving gleaners in the back. No taters for you!

  • Chad

    Don’t let Zakaria fool you. He fails to draw a distinction between the budget and the deficit when talking about how Clinton “balanced the budget.” Clinton is the same camp as Bush in that both ran away with government spending that continued to contribute to our National Debt.

  • Jay234wer-gen

    No Republican has acted responsibly paraphrasing  a quote Tom made of a listener.  Fareed agreed with the commentator except perhaps Romney.
    Paul Ryan is chairman of the Budget Committee, his plan was approved by the House of Representatives.  Tom shouild asked about the Ryan plan approved by the House.

  • Jeffreysc

    Revive manufacturing, I’m not sure what that means.  We manufacture more now than we ever have.  Moreover, he notes that all the economic growth is elsewhere, outside the US, so why would manufacurers want to locate here. 

    • Ellen Dibble

      I listened last night to Zakaria on Charlie Rose, and he set out some of the industries he thought America could encourage that could NOT be more profitably be outsourced to places like China.  He did not think manufacturing jobs would come back.  So I’m wondering what you heard today, or what he was referring to.  I recall auto parts, as an example of something that once outsourced is unlikely to come back.  I can’t recall all the “industries” that he thought we could educate people to jumpstart for the new century.   One of them was news reporting, and he might know something about that, given his experience.  TV network news reporting might be receding, but the gathering of information, the evaluation and interpretation of it, and dissemination of that is already way, way ahead of what it was a couple of decades ago.   Consider the wallpapers of tweets.  Consider instant (sort of) digital translation.  Consider Wikileaks. Consider instant searching online.  Consider changing standards of transparency worldwide.  Just looking at my local paper, they have a different approach to what readers might be thinking about and what that newspaper might be able to find and print that would complement what I can find elsewhere.  It takes much, much more help in digesting all that info if democracies around the world are to be able to assimilate it, who need to discuss it meaningfully among those who need to help decide.  If he thinks America can help in this “industry,” sure.  Maybe not all 10 percent of those currently unemployed, but some.
           Also, he was saying that America is not easily motivated into caring about the wider world.  It takes a big dose of fear to make us feel like global citizens.
           This I heard after watching an hour documentary about cemeteries around the world of soldiers who have died defending a large part of the globe.  Interviews with those who have adopted gravesites of Americans who died fighting for them, which they knew had guaranteed their freedom, and which they have no adequate way to convey thanks.  So they weep.
          This was a curative show, because nowadays it seems wherever Americans fight, we are seen as the aggressors, the enemy.  As of yesterday, we have new senior military advisors in the White House, so — we’ll see.

      • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/3ETFGMQ3B7VD4AAMILBBEVMCWE JasonA

        But we have been the aggressors, thanks to the failed policies of Bush/Cheney. They out to be in prison for what they have done to this nation.

      • Jeffreysc

        He responded to Tom’s closing question, and I’m quite sure I heard him say manufacturing.  Information is a commodity, the value-added would be in the analysis or repackaging but I’m not sure whether people will pay much for that and, in any case, technology maximizes human productivity in the commodity, minimizing the need for human involvement. 

    • Anonymous

      Really? Compared to the 50′s and 60′s, that makes no sense at all.
      We have lost millions of jobs and our education system is in a shambles, as is our infrastructure. When I hear folks like you go on I want to ask you what do you propose we do? Nothing?

    • Zing

      I’ll make a suggestion:  forget a few hundred thousand high-pay union jobs that liberals will pass out to liberals…this country needs millions of new or restored minimum wage manufacturing and maintenance jobs for those at the bottom to get them back in the system working toward a future…I call it the trickle up theory…it worked before.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/3ETFGMQ3B7VD4AAMILBBEVMCWE JasonA

    The first step is to punish the criminals on Wall Street and in the board rooms, and CEO suites. Trials, stiff sentences of hard time, and total forfeiture of stolen money is the only want to put corporate credibility back on track.

    • Fredlinskip

      All remaining meaningful regulation was stripped away during W administration. Corporations could do virtually whatever they wanted with little consequence. GOP gets it’s way there will be even less. No regulation- no laws.   No laws- no crime. We are living in a Plutocracy. Kings and princes.   Get used to it.

  • E. Jahn

    Although I enjoyed Fareed’s comments in general, not once
    did he suggest that the problem with the deficit is the huge
    and outsized military spending. Now apparently we will drop
    bombs down someone’s smoke stack if we suspect they
    committed a cyber attack on the US. Making more war and
    bombing everyone will not give us a very bright future.

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/3ETFGMQ3B7VD4AAMILBBEVMCWE JasonA

      Bloated military spending, never ending wars, and a war like aggressive nation is what the USA has become. The flag, the military, patriotism, and religion are all being wrapped into one by the corporate media and the MIC (military industrial complex). The US is well on its way to becomming a military state…the Sparta of the 21st century.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1408098372 Mari McAvenia

        …If Sparta had legions of sedentary cheerleaders who never fought, themselves, or contributed their fair share of personal sacrifices…

        • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/3ETFGMQ3B7VD4AAMILBBEVMCWE JasonA

          Or were on the payroll of corporate influence peddlers, as our Congress is.

    • Anonymous

      There was the point made that strong and large military≠strong and large economy.  Less Sparta and more the British Empire would be our unlucky fate without change.

      • Jon

        I thought he did mention it, but contradicted himself. He pointed out that almost every technological innovation that has driven our economy came from military spending. Then he turns around and says that military spending does not lead to economic growth, but the other way around. Which is it? 

        • Anonymous

          Gah, I’ll have to re-listen to the program. 

        • Anonymous

          I think you misunderstood what he was saying. HE was talking about government spending on R&D and in the past a large part of tha was for the military and NASA. He was not advocating that we should do that now. Quite the contrary Fareed Zakaria was advocating for investment in our infrastructure.

      • Fredlinskip

        Fareed- “A strong military is the consequence of having a strong economy, not the other way around- it (strong military) is not the cause.” Paraphrasing a little- “Eventually a strong military can be a drain (and have) caused weak economies to collapse (I.e. Soviet Union and Britain)”. “In fact, it (strong military) distracts from the core challenge. In Britain’s case, because they had enormous political and military all over the world, they thought they were the leading power & running the world. Meanwhile they were not able to raise up to their core challenge of” (again paraphrasing) “tending to their own economy instead of falling behind other rising nations.”

    • Anonymous

       Actually if you listened he did bring it up.

  • Remek Kocz

    One of the little discussed issues is the fact that the US has not converted to the metric system.  We are hobbling along with our customary measurement system, a relic of the colonial past that we’ve appropriated as our own, “exceptional” way of dealing with measurement.  Our insistence on feet, pounds, and gallons is making us increasingly less competitive in terms of global business and trade, as many US companies are unwilling or unable to work in metric, they loose contracts. 

    • Robert Hennecke

      Machining wise imperial is no big deal, actually inches divide up very niceley into thousandths and there are conversion tables. I seriously doubt that the imperial system is responsible for outsourcing of jobs. MANY items spewing forth from the forced labour camps in the PR China are made to imperial specifications so I fail to see how it is a hindrance to the US ability to mfr as Canada adopted the metric system in 1976 and it was hardly a manufacturing bonanza as a result. There many machining and welding standards that incorporate both imperial and metric applied the world over with engineers and technicians using them as a linguist would switching between languages. Once tooling has been fabricated it becomes a robotic affair and imperial or metric is of trivial concern. Moving away from the top down corporate model and onto co-ops and guilds would be a major step in the right direction as the corporate model is more about profit maximization at the EXPENSE of employment; government handouts/bribes/corp. extortion be damned.

    • Hstimpson

      Yes, that’s a small part of the problem–we should conform to the rest of the world, but it seems it will never happen.  Federalism is also a problem.  National businesses, for example, have to comply with 51 sets of workers’ compensation laws. 

  • Zvayman

    North America  along with other Germanic superstates is a leader in our world-to-be in the foreseeable future

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/3ETFGMQ3B7VD4AAMILBBEVMCWE JasonA

      You are living in the wrong decade….

  • Able

    How can I get a the text of Tom Hanks address. I thought it was terrific. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Zakaria as well. 

    abe

  • Rick

    Contrary to Fareed’s hour long assertion, the U.S. or at least the Obama administration does have a long term economic stimulation plan. It’s Obamacare. Pour gasoline, i.e. the health insurance premiums of 30 million new insurance clients, onto the already hyper-inflationary fires of America’s sick care system. 

    At 18% of GDP the medical industrial complex continues to consume an ever bigger share of the GDP. And if you are paying health insurance premiums you are paying for sick care whether ever see a doctor or not. Your cigarette puffing, burger snarfing, beer swilling, couch potato neighbor thanks you for paying to keep him alive. 

    • Anonymous

       We already pay for all the folks that stumble into the ERs across the nation because they can’t afford health insurance.  I’d much rather be paying for my couch potato neighbor, knowing that he can go see a doctor regularly, and that his pay outs may one day cover something unforeseen in my health, despite my lack of burger snarfing. 

  • Jeffreysc

    Big money interests are behind the curtains at a political party, you heard it hear first.  See my blog to find out which party…

  • Jeffreysc

    The US government, as crazy as it is, can still borrow money with abandon and the lenders only want a 3% return over the next 10 years.  It doesn’t seem like these people are too concerned about our impending demise, at least for the next 10 years. 

    • twenty-niner

      It’s called desperately seeking alpha. Money managers are getting out of equities and oil and you can’t put billions underneath the mattress, so you park the money in the biggest, most liquid market in the world – the 10 year. No one, except maybe grandma, actually holds on to these things for 10 years.

      “We’re on the verge of a great, great depression.”

      http://www.cnbc.com/id/43236764

  • Jeffreysc

    the big money interests removed my original post, they are everywhere

  • SIMON HOPKINS

    Any chance for him to run for President. But there again not being born here that rules him out. But there again why not, we import everything else we think we need, and not what we need.

    He definitely is a bonus import, pity they couldn’t find a place for him in the cabinet; instead of just reporting from Washington.

  • Anonymous

     Fareed Zakaria was breath of fresh air and reason. What I heard today was a rational person making some very intelligent observations.
    It was interesting to hear how some of the callers and some of the people on this forum, can’t seem to get their minds around what he was talking about. He laid it out in simple rational terms and I still heard people talking rubbish. Amazing. Again, thank you Fareed Zakaria for giving an example of rational critical thinking, something missing on all sides of the left, right divide these days.

  • Evelyn

    I am a third grade teacher who is deliberating the idea of year round school with my students. They are looking at the pros, cons, tradeoffs of stakeholders in each position: long summer vacation or smaller vacations throughout the year. My third graders “get it” that a longer school year will promote a better work force! I’m going to share this program with them tomorrow…they’d be thrilled to hear your opinion (they’re taking home surveys as we speak)!

  • Helmuth Von Longschlonger

    Wow.  Just caught your program for the first time on Interlochen Public Radio’s new Harbor Springs, Michigan tower… or the tree the repeater is hanging from.  Fareed was amazing and your handling of the incoming callers/emailers questions encapsulated their individual “soapboxes” well.  Thanks to you both.  On your content Fareed, right on.  It’s a huge deck of cards we’ve built and the un-fragile nature of kicking out it’s base has created collapse.  We had the bills paid in 2000.  Then spending with no income.  Seems simple, we’ve all done it.  Long before that, the sell-out of the blue collar middle class, slow and insidious.  Plus the desire for the “Ozzie and Harriett” world, where America is #1, no matter what.  Great show fellas…   

  • twenty-niner

    China’s economy is on fire building ghost cities:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbDeS_mXMnM

     

  • guest

    Fareed’s logic:  Government programs like the military (and wars) are needed to promote technology and economic growth that will increase tax revenue that can be paid to government programs (social and medical welfare) that is generating our debt.

    The government is a bloated parasite that sucking the life out of the economy. 

    Fareed mentions: China is in better standing than many believe because the government does not provide welfare and the people save money to care for themselves. 

    No bloated parasite in the middle. 

    Fareed believes: President Bush caused the problems with tax decreases and wars.

    Besides retoric, how has Obama been different?  Besides more wars, more welfare state, more QE.

    Frankly, as an Demoncrat (then), I hated Bush.  Unfortunately, Obama is worse.

    The free market has not be taken too far.  It has been stiffled by government regulations designed to provide favor to special interests and itself 

       

    • Fredlinskip

      After going on 40 years of “trickle-up” borrow and spend policies begun by king B&S’er Reagan (or should I say king BS‘er), it’s amazing to me how many people still don’t get it. Wages stagnated for all except the wealthy. The wealthy call the shots- no regulation. How else would we possibly have had such a colossal financial/housing meltdown? Let corporations regulate themselves, Greenspan advocated. Brilliant!! Sometimes it’s hard to figure which is more frustrating- That we’ve had class warfare for past 40 years and the wealthy have “cleaned house” (as Buffet has said) or that majority of Americans still don’t get it.

    • Anonymous

      Man are you wrong. What do think just happened here with our economy? Everything you wrote seems like cut and paste libertarian and republican sound bites.

      • Gregg

        To me “Guest” sounded like a rational Democrat who is not blinded by ideology.

        • Jim in Omaha

          Then we finally agree on something.  Bush’s economic policies, which doubled down on “Reaganomics”, were a total fiasco, especially when coupled with  a neo-con driven  “I-support-the- troops-but-refuse-to-pay-for-them” philosophy.  And Obama’s continuation of the trend, after the fruits of Rand-Greenspan economic deregulation blew up in our face, has been disastrous.

  • Pschweid

    Fareed,I am always amazed that no one with all our knowledgable
    economists, have ever mentioned that the real problem with
    America, is that the entire nature of Capitalism has radically changed ! It is not the Capitalism of the 30s,40,50s or 90s.
    We have now in 2000 “Neo-Capitalism”! Neo-Capitalism is the
    trading,buying and acquiring of world resources. Currently the
    US and the rest of the world is completely absorbed and involved
    in this form of commerce regardless of their politics or social
    model for themselves. We don’t produce anything except food,
    guns, armaments(military weapons-which we are the world’s
    largest provider of). This is why the energy problem will never be
    dealt with–the oil companies and a host of supporting players
    trade, buy and sell it like a commodity and commodity trading.
    Recently the oil companies globally among themselves have begun
    to tap into natural gas and will soon be providing it like oil on a
    commodity basis on the guise it will lower our energy costs and be
    more effective than oil——it will be exactly the same—monopolistic,insulated against any restrictions or govt. supervision,
    and benefit a few already wealthy elite,which is the only group
    that is growing—yes employment will be created but not enough.
    Your statement about Germany producing things is true but most
    Americans would never do what the Germans do and buy only
    the products their country produces to insure their prosperity and
    the other producers or manufacturers are China,India,Far East,
    Japan and South America and most of that is attributed to minimal
    pay and benefits their workers receive and OUR OUTSOURCED JOBS.
      This is the same reason (Neo-Capitalism) that we have the financial organizations and community speculate and trade with
    no supervision, guidelines or legal ramifications- for theft, bribery,
    and fraud in stock,derivatives,banks and most noticeable-RealEstate. Since we will never generate enough jobs and thus
    tax payers to support the country ever!!!!! We need a flat tax for
    everybody 15% would do it—everyone- allcorporations,individuals,
    etc. no exemptions and no loop-holes—everybody pays the same
    That type of equality and fairness would work. We are all treated
    the same and the social contracts of Social Security,Welfare, single
    payer Health Care and Nationalized Childcare could be paid for
    and everyone in the US would benefit—-instead of the in-fighting
    separate but not equal and the decimation of the Middle Class
    with the apparent country’s new philosophy “The Most for The
    Rich and The Hell with everyone else”. Funny the Middle Class and
    the Lower Class is the only ones paying taxes and sending our
    children off to fight our wars-some how we have forgotten that !!
    No political group or party as things stand now can change what
    we have done and where we have arrived. Only the populace can,
    when we start to be truthful and describe– that we have changed-
    and this is what “Neo-Capitalism” is and to survive as a country
    in our present global community we must accept it and move
    forward- not talk around it, do nothing, ignore it or fight among
    ourselves as a way to cover it up and not deal with it !
    Peace & Hope
    Paul W. Schweid
    Teacher,Educator,Environmentalist,Parent and Grand Father.

  • onpointfan

    If someone has brought this up already, I apologize, but I was struck by his comment that part of China’s advantage stems from the fact that their government can do long term planning that our system doesn’t allow. Anyone think it would be worthwhile to consider extending term lengths for our elected officials? Maybe congress 4 year terms, president 6 years (or even 8 with no re-election possible) and the senate staying at 6? It seems to me that this would reduce lobbyist influence AND give increasingly uncooperative political parties more incentives to work with each other. 

  • Fredlinskip

    Interesting recent article in Economist mag concerning Public Relations firms: there are now over 6 times the number of people working for PR firms than for news organizations. In other words there are 6x as many orgs whose employees are paid to misrepresent facts if it suits their interests, than there are news orgs who are supposedly attempting to report the facts.No surprise so many are misinformed.

  • Fredlinskip

     Fareed- “Bush administration destroyed U.S. economy” “Through the tax cuts, prescription drugs for the elderly, and two wars: and the fact that none of this was paid for- he destroyed the federal budget and created a very difficult economic situation for U.S.”      I believe the sooner majority of Americans come to except these statements, the sooner we as a nation have a chance to heal and to resolve our problems.

    • Gregg

      I heard Mr. Zarkaria say that. It’s an absolutely pathetic display of journalism at its worse. The case cannot be made. I happen to believe the wars were going to be fought no matter what and the idea that it was all optional and money down a rat hole is inaccurate. That would be the stimulus bill that added MORE to the debt in one fell swoop than years of both wars.  The prescription drug bill came in 40% UNDER budget although it was spending I would not have endorsed. But the tax cut thing borders on insanity.  The tax cuts brought in more revenue as I’ve written and proved before.  When Bush was overspending revenue was strong. Now revenue is weak and Obama ha quadrupled spending. Look at these latest numbers:
      http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/01/in-pictures-why-debt-discussions-wont-die-down-anytime-soon/

      Notice in the second chart the crash in revenue corresponding to the bursting dot com bubble on March 10, 2000.  Also notice even at the peak revenue of the Clinton years how much higher it would have to be to match todays spending. Notice the bottoming out after the devastating and always unmentioned economic disaster on 9/11. Then look at the rise after the tax cuts in 2003. How did that cost us? It didn’t, it saved the economy.  That’s not the whole story. Look at how the lines grow closer together after the tax cuts and how far apart and the direction they are going now.

      Now, these numbers are from the CBO and the OMB. If you care to cipher the numbers into graph form from the speadsheet then they are available but you will find the graph accurate, That will not stop some from dismissing the truth entirely because the graphic comes from Heritage and the reporting comes from Hot Air.  Well, if someone can find a left wing think tank that would dare show you these numbers then please post it.  You won’t find it.

      • Fredlinskip

        Gregg,You’re like the guy standing in the middle of the desert still denying there’s no such thing as Climate Change.Bush was a Reagan wannabe. Like Reagan, W didn’t read or bother to research, other than the newspaper. They both surrounded themselves with subordinates, listened to their opinions and made decisions. Reagan’s subordinates were a little less partisan and a little more informed than W’s, but not by much. Bush even copied the chopping wood at the ranch bit and GOP ate it up. Even though W was elected by minority he chose the most divisive policies possible and drove the nations economy into the turf. He was able to do this by exploiting the “political capital” gained after 9/11 mostly by exploiting America’s fear of terrorism. Reagan exploited the “political capital” gained after he responded heroically to being shot by Hinkley or he would never have been able to adopt his policies of lowering taxes, greatest peacetime military spending in U.S. history, claiming all the while that deficit would decrease and economy would improve. Stockman, his budget director kept telling him there was no way it was going to happen. It didn’t. A recession occurred in short order and deficit rose 400% under Reagan. W’s administration was one of “deficits don’t matter”, and was the height of irresponsibility. And MOST Americans have paid dearly.The mortgage/financial meltdown was so much more significant than Dotcom bubble, there’s no comparison. As Ultrexx poignantly pointed out to you, there was only one year that revenues during Bush exceeded any of Clinton’s years and that was at he height of an enormous mortgage/credit/derivatives-induced stock market bubble.Had Clinton’s tax policies continued I guarantee revenues would have exceeded Bush.Although it is difficult to look at anything Heritage Foundation has to offer as their mission statement is the same as Rush Limbaugh’s, I did look at your link.Yeah the graphs presented there don’t paint a rosy future. My overall point is that if we do not learn from the past and choose to keep crashing into the same walls, America as we know it, for all her resources, will be left in the dust bins of history. Later.

        • Gregg

          Please Fredlinskip, your all over the park. I don’t get the Bush bashing. Why aren’t you complaining about Clinton who was elected with 43% of the vote? He got 44,909,806 votes, Bush was elected with 50,456,002. Over 5 1/2 million more people voted for Bush than voted for Clinton. You really are not being honest with your analysis. Let’s not get into climate change, you are misrepresenting what I believe and it’s irrelevant. Bush surrounded himself with a diversity of opinion. Did Rumsfeld and Colin Powell agree on anything? Who isn’t a “yes man” in the Obama administration? Who was pro-life in Clinton’s cabinet. Again, I don’t know why you want to go down that road because it’s just a talking point that does not hold up under scrutiny. 

          Now you can say all day long that, “Had Clinton’s tax policies continued I guarantee revenues would have exceeded Bush” but that is a wildly speculative opinion. Look at revenue crash after March 10, 2000 when Clinton was still President and his tax policies in place. His rates were fine for the time but not after the bubble burst followed by 9/11. You are rewriting history. You can say Bush believed “deficits don’t matter” but compare the deficits to Obama’s. Why complain about Bush, he’s not President?

          I gave you the numbers. It’s what happened. I have no idea why you repeatedly refuse to acknowledge the dramatic rise in revenue combined with the falling unemployment rate after the tax cuts. The numbers are the numbers and not ideological.

          • Gregg

            One more thing, I don’t know the significance of comparing the dot com bubble to the housing bubble. I am looking at the policies of two administrations (Bush, Obama) to address the economic issues of their times. The numbers suggest Bush’s policies worked and Obama’s have thus far failed. I suppose that is why you are left with claiming Obama’s situation was worse. But is that true? The NASDAQ lost 78% of it’s value after the dot com bubble. Revenues plummeted. That’s not the whole picture though. Bush didn’t merely have to deal with the dot com bubble he had to deal with 9/11. Obama has faced nothing of the sort. Why don’t you ever mention 9/11?
            Most economist are saying gird your loins for a double dip recession.  So, after two and a half years of failure, if that happens will you still be giving cover to Obama or will you begin to question his miserable policies?

  • Gregg

    One thing Mr. Zarkaria endorsed was returning to Clinton’s tax rates, all of them not just the rich. I’m glad he said it because it highlights two things: 1) The tax cuts were not only for the rich, they were for everyone and, 2) it gives me this opportunity to show what those who believe Mr. Zarkaria’s delusions are advocating. 

    More than 7 million of the poorest people had their tax burdens completely erased under Bush’s tax cuts. Mr. Zarkaria would put them back on. The 10% bracket would disappear and the lowest bracket would be 15% which would mean the poor would get a bigger tax hike than the rich. The 25% bracket would be raised to 28%, the 28% bracket would be raised to 31%, the 33% bracket would be raised to 35%, the 35% bracket would be raised to 39.6%.

    How can people pay taxes when they are out of work? These are not the days of 5% unemployment as they were in the Bush years. How does this man keep a job?

    • GlassIsHalfEmpty

      Gregg — I appreciate all you said; unsure what FZ’s full tax prop was but anyone NOT working would NOT pay income taxes, right?

      Even if he did think “wise” to raise rates on those at the “poorest” levels (assuming they are somehow above poverty level), perhaps he thinks that is ok b/c they are getting lion’s share of entitlements?

      Finally, those rates all look “SO Terrible!” yet each rate is on the wage-earners MARGINAL dollar — they pay at lower rates all the way up the table until they top out. It is really not a bad system. Besides, most of my father’s generation remember when that top rate was in the 80s and even reached 90% (again, on the marginal dollar). There were ways to plan around it, of course, some of which have been tightened, but Dad does not recall anyone “not going to the office” (or OR or manufacturing line) because they lost their incentive to work. Let’s face it, we all want our Soc.Sec, Medicare, Mortgage deduction, Charitable Gift tax break, and strong public colleges, national defense, and subsidized oil/gas, Ginnie/Fannie loans (even to really credit-risky borrowers) etc.

      Just one problem: no one wants to pay for it — let alone the “other guy’s” need(s). We are (becoming?) a pretty short-sighted nation of spend-thrifts, not to mention plain ol’ greedy.

      • Gregg

        Thanks for the reply GlassIsHalfEmpty. FZ was very specific about returning all of the rates to Clinton era levels. I was trying not to give editorial comment and simply clarify what he was advocating.

        My rhetorical question about people out of work paying taxes was to illustrate a larger point that I wasn’t clear on. This is not Clinton’s GDP, unemployment rate or revenue stream. Raising taxes in this climate would be highly counter-productive to a struggling economy.  The view seems to be, “Everything was peachy under Clinton so all we need to do is go back to his tax rates.” That is a very shallow view in my opinion.

  • kcarmo

    Is the music playing before commercials “The Album Leaf:?

  • Kevdog33

    Apples and oranges. This discussion points to a problem with both parties and the system as a whole.  Corporations seem to be the blame and Washington has done little to nothing.  If Apple employs 50,000 here and its sister manufacturer employs close to a million in China then why do we continue to blame Presidents.   

    • GlassIsHalfEmpty

      Not sure you can blame corps, alone. Consumer “forces” them to use cheap labor so we keep buying their ever-discounted products. US Labor (organized or not) demand high pay to match very high quality of life. No one wants to give up the golden age of post-WWII dreams and creature comforts, even as global economy changes the paradigm. For ex, if you were in Western PRC, living on $2 a day, and a factory job making XXXX on the eastern seaboard comes along, would not you consider it? That is what is causing the shift — it is huge benefit for developing economies and workers, and PRC does not provide even remotely-basic support of indigents, etc. Slam dunk.

      On the other hand, most US buyers rarely look to see where something is (primarily) manufactured, much less willing to pay premium for more US-based product. Case closed.

  • Pierre

    1) You can’t pay off debt with debt, so Mr. President, stop borrowing from the Federal Reserve

    2) Zarkaria stated the 78% of those polled would not want to relinquish Medicare (or Medicaid) accessiblity -and who in their right mind would?  People want to live, you know, and insurance is as high as hot air balloons can go. Plus, many of those on it are WORKING POOR.

    3) Why didn’t he get into all the -illionaires that were caught with Swedish investments that harbored their monies from taxes about a year ago? … They tipped away only paying fines.

    4) What’s most important to ask is how a system of infinite growth can survive off of FINITE RESOURCES???  Bring back manufacturing, and when the raw materials are out, then what?

    • GlassIsHalfEmpty

      Great reminder, Pierre — 52k US “filers” had secret accounts at UBS, ALONE! Only about 4-5k settled, last I read. That means, US “settled” for whatever they thought was $$$worthwhile, or for those the Swiss willing to sacrifice, if they could keep the others and the significant revenue banks earn on them.

      Imagine how many more accounts there are in Swi$$Land? Or for that matter in tax havens in the Islands or elsewhere. Bet there is fair amount of loose change to prop up entitlement bulge here…

  • Pingback: links for 2011-06-02 « Lasting Impression

  • Anonymous

    Appreciated caller Steve in Middleton’s comments. If only the red state conservatives got themselves passports and traveled abroad, their so-called world views would be more in tune what’s actually happening in the world and the US infrastructure situation, biomed/biotech lag due to “providence” driven regulations and restrictions, our broadband and mobile access failings and on and on…

    Also, I’m thoroughly disappointed in the lack of a conversation on the subject of ecology and global warming as the driver of future domestic and foreign policies of each and every G20 nation. Neither Europe, China or the US is doing enough about this other than accusations and recriminations while we inch closer and closer toward that +3 degrees redline. This is the most critical longterm issue facing the US, China and India.

  • Drpmdp

    If there is less food and more people to feed,either ration the food or reduce the number of people needing food. If there are less jobs and more people seeking jobs, the working hours for most people will have to be reduced. It may be necessary to encourage people with rare or exceptional high talent to work more,but other people cannot be kept idle and it would be wrong to entertain them to keep them in good mood.

  • Gregg

    Early in this thread I asked for elaboration about Zarkaria’s foreign policy consultant job with the White House. Jim in Omaha replied: “The president can get advice from anyone he wants, and you are not
    entitled to even know or find out who he’s getting advice from.
    See: Cheney v. U.S. District for the District of Columbia, 542 U.S. 367 (2004).
    I have no problem with that but I was not criticizing Obama, I was criticizing Mr. Zarkaria and On Point. If FZ is going to advise Obama and simultaneously shape public opinion for the policies he advises on with statements like: “Netanyahu Should Have Thanked Obama for Mideast Speech” then we have a right to full disclosure. I may have missed it so I should be fair and ask, did Tom Ashbrooke explore this avenue? If not then its just the kind of propaganda most liberals rail against.

  • Slipstream

    Lately I find myself wondering how America got into the current mess, and my thoughts keep coming back to the Bush tax cuts and other decisions that were made by that administration (and the stupid decision of many Democrats to support them, something the Republicans did not do in the wake of Obama’s triumph).  I am certain that future historians will regard Bush Jr. as one of the worst presidents in our history, and I say this as someone who found myself liking him more as time went on.  I also think Obama’s caving in to the Repubs on the tax issue is hurting the country – and if they can’t raise taxes, then they need to make some cuts to the military and other federal programs.  So I agree wholeheartedly with Zakariah’s comments.  Unfortunately in today’s charged atmosphere, things like that will get him labeled a partisan instead of a serious thinker whose views should be taken seriously. 

  • alex

    i was wondering how to download it ? its quite really hard .. direct download seems like not working
    thanks 

ONPOINT
TODAY
May 16, 2012
Photo Illustration (Alex Kingsbury/WBUR)

Democrats charge Republicans with being prisoners of special interests. A young conservative turns that charge around.

May 16, 2012
Lizz Winstead (credit: Mindy Tucker)

Comedian Lizz Winstead, co-creator of “The Daily Show” is with us, on the truth in humor.

RECENT
SHOWS
May 15, 2012
Time magazine May 21, 2012

A breast-feeding three-year-old – and mom – on the cover of Time Magazine. We’ll talk with the guru of “attachment parenting.”

 
May 15, 2012
People arrive at JPMorgan Chase headquarters in New York Monday, May 14, 2012. JPMorgan, the largest bank in the United States, is seeking to minimize the damage caused by a $2 billion trading loss, disclosed Thursday by CEO Jamie Dimon. (AP)

Two billion dollars lost in a flash by JP Morgan. Is this an argument for the Volcker rule – cracking down on speculative bets by the banks?

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Literary On Point
Monday, May 14, 2012

Enjoy Toni Morrison? Check out these On Point interviews with…

More »
1 Comment
 
Baby Names
Monday, May 14, 2012

The Social Security Administration released today its top 1,000 baby name list for 2011.

More »
Comment
 
Toni Morrison Stuck In Traffic
Wednesday, May 9, 2012

What happened to Toni Morrison?

More »
5 Comments