How America Can Rise Again | Hacker News Reader

How America Can Rise Again

theatlantic.com

47 pointsrobg22 comments

Wow, this is a great read. It's long, but full of gems and interesting talking points.

>> “I think it would be easy for common-sense Americans to draw up a list of big things that would seem to demand concerted effort. Deficits are too big. Health costs are unacceptable. Oil. And yet we have a political system that seems to be constantly consumed with trivial things. We cannot seriously grapple with the big issues. Tactics consume strategy.

Probably true, but the question is just how many common-sense Americans do we have? I live in Boston now, but I'm originally from a suburban town in Georgia. When I visit home, people commonly express to me their fears of impending terrorist attacks, their theories about how drugs and atheism are corrupting society, etc. Then these same people hop in their SUVs and drive 90MPH to the nearest McDonald's.

Average people don't like to worry about reasonable long-term problems. It's just too boring. They'd rather fret over the remote possibility that some Islamic extremists will fly planes into their homes. Thus, we spend trillions of dollars and thousands of lives fighting in the desert while our economy tanks.

>> the most worrisome symptom was the relative shortage of a jeremiad theme under Presidents Clinton, George W. Bush, and now Obama. This he attributed to Ronald Reagan, “who managed to equate criticism with anti-Americanism, and render unintelligible bad news about America.”

I can't count how many times I've heard, "If you don't like it then you can find another country," in response to criticism of American government. Yuck.

Yes, because driving an SUV and eating at McDonalds are really where our concern should be. The truth is you're no better than the anti-drug, terrorism mongers.

Rush Limbaugh tells them to fear terrorists so they line up to do it while NPR tells you not driving an SUV is bad so you line up to condemn it. Same sheep, different Sheppard.

In the end their not realizing the low statistical chance of a terrorist attack is just like you not realizing the scientific theory you've deified might not be correct and if it's not we'll have done nothing to find out how to actually deal with the problem.

I like your non-partisan approach. At the same time, I wonder; if people who worried about teh terrorists also worried equally about SUVs then maybe their breath would be watered down enough that it wouldn't support encroaching government expansion in either direction. The argument works in the reverse direction as well.

That's a pretty aggressive reply, almost to the level of flaming.

The point is that random theories of drugs, atheism and terrorism are made up problems that average people can't do anything about. Discussing security is important and being aware of potential threads is necessary and important, but to a limit.

Taking care of the environment, eating healthy, saving money, improving things in your surroundings are things you can do to improve your life and your community.

The sheep/shepherd argument is too simplistic and while it's something to think about, it was formulated in a way that it stops the conversation, instead of moving it forward.

I actually think most Americans are common sense Americans, but when you consider everyone as a crowd, the individual traits and intelligence is lost.

You single a guy out and he/she'll tell you an awesome plan to get America back on its feet. You ask a crowd to give a suggestion and it's silence or bickering.

"Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule."

Friedrich Nietzsche

This from a man who had a mental breakdown and was probably at least a little insane before then. ;)

Yeah, but he recognized the rarity of his situation.

The United States needs to learn to function as one power in a complex system that it can neither escape nor dominate. It also needs to view other nations successes in pulling their citizens out of poverty not as a threat but as an opportunity and it needs to ask a lot of questions.

    - Why are we in Afghanistan, Iraq?
    - What we learned from Vietnam?
    - Why is the Palestinian problem not solved?
    - How can we stop large oscillations in our Economies?
    - Why are our friends trusting us less?
    - Why is our infrastructure aging?
    - Why did we export manufacturing to cheaper labor overseas and not imported
       the labor?
    - How much of our large Service Industry can go the way manufacturing did?
    - Why is Health Services and Insurance so expensive?

I can fill a few pages with questions. America certainly has the brains to answer those questions, but not the will to implement the answers.

"- Why did we export manufacturing to cheaper labor overseas and not imported the labor?"

That is a very interesting suggestion. But how would we get rid of minimum wage,health care costs,unions,cost of living to actually lower the cost ? Other countries have an advantage as the minimum wage is lesser and human rights activists are not as vocal. Maybe if people think more deeply about it they will have a solution.

> "What we learned from Vietnam?"

Apparently nothing.

> "Why is the Palestinian problem not solved?"

Because the U.S. continues to supply arms and funding to Israel.

> "Why did we export manufacturing to cheaper labor"

I think you answered your own question here: because it's cheaper.

While there are some interested points about the national psyche, to me, you just can't ignore the deficit problem. Endlessly spending more money than you ean will eventually cause problems, whether you're an individual, business or government. I don't know if the problem will be this year or in 50 years, but something has to give somewhere along the line.

If the deficit is spent on infrastructure improvements that support greater prosperity in the private sector, then in the long run the country’s tax base expands and that debt can be paid off.

(On the one hand, in theory, if the people buying our debt are convinced that the government is using the borrowed money for that purpose, then they won’t bid our interest rates into the stratosphere as happened with Argentina et al. On the other hand, I’m not 100% sure how well that theory applies here, because a lot of the national debt-holders are foreign institutions that may be making geo-strategic calculations as well as profit-making calculations. On the other other hand, if our economy goes tits-up it’s not going to be good news for China, either.)

If the deficit is spent on infrastructure improvements...

Sure, if. Is it being spent that way? Not even remotely.

So, we can "rise again" by fixing some nit-picky things like filling potholes and giving California (a bankrupt entity) more US Representatives. Thanks for the tips. Actually, the roads around where I live are pretty good.

the absolute pillars of American strength: continued openness to immigration, and a continued concentration of universities that people around the world want to attend.

Whatever you think of immigration, there's really a logical problem with the above thought. America is a place that consists of people, who are solely responsible for America's greatness...NOT theoretical future inflows of other people. His assertion can't be tested. It's a guess, no different than saying: "My upcoming policy of betting red on the roulette wheel is the source of my wealth. Because it worked before."

China and India are the countries on the ascendancy right now [1] and they are not rapidly replacing themselves with other nations, and would probably not appreciate the suggestion that doing so would be the "pillar" of their strength. This writer, of course, had to say it because it's ideologically required thinking.

[1] The US's ascendancy can be roughly marked from 1920 to 1965, a period of very low immigration.

Re: immigration...some folks appear to believe a population Ponzi scheme is just the carpet under which to sweep the fallout from decades of [government] financial Ponzi schemes.

Just to pick on one point: what conceivable moral logic leads one to choose democratic representation based on the financial health of their existing government? I just can't see where that comes from. What's next: people with net credit debt are worth 3/5 of a non-slave?

> Just to pick on one point: what conceivable moral logic leads one to choose democratic representation based on the financial health of their existing government?

Wasn't the idea to give each state to senators so that populous states do not encroach on less populous states?

If California gets many senators, they will surely vote to get federal money to fix their deficit.

While the article gives you the feeling of a very in depth article, it looks at certain very important things in a very shallow way, and in the end doesn't offer much.

The article forgot technology.Technology plays a huge role in the economic changes affecting America, and the world. It enables shifting jobs around the world, automating jobs , and driving rapid change everywhere.It seems that these abilities would be only getting stronger in the future.

It also focused strongly on the value of america's world leading education sector as an economic engine. But the fact of the matter is , that most workers are average, and in order to replace them , china and india's workers might be just good enough.

Saw another similar article recently: http://www.newgeography.com/content/001296-dont-give-up-on-t....

America's been failed by its leaders. It isn't a partisan thing because the problem has been with both parties.

The assasinations, riots and corruption at the highest levels in the sixties and early seventies tore at the very fabric of our country.

But we found great leadership and came back. We will do it again, stronger than before.

Contrarian reads such as this lead me to believe that we've already made the turn.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com