Coronavirus Brings American Decline Out in the Open
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
> With its high housing costs, poor infrastructure and transit, endemic gun violence, police brutality and bitter political and racial divisions, the U.S. will be a less appealing place for high-skilled workers to live
The above is a "concern" but it's not quite an "urgent issue" within the tech world. Cries to bring our public transportation into the 21st century go unheard (we can all afford to drive a nice car to work, so no need for urgent change), along with cries to improve educational standards for those who aren't upper-middle class (just pay for better schooling or simply move to a nicer neighborhood, no need for urgent change). Racial disparities and police brutality generally go ignored until there is overwhelming proof (well it looks like the only ones getting it bad are people who seem to deserve it, no need for urgent change). And then there's health care, which is tied to your employment (but if you have a nice gig compared to the masses, why would you want anything to upset the status quo?).
Perhaps the threat of industry moving away for good will be an incentive to take notice.
"The US is a 3rd world country with a Gucci belt."
Healthcare: - In the US it is expensive but you get decent care. If you are not making enough you get medicaid or subsidized healthcare that actually works (even in most rural areas). - In for example Ukraine, technically there is socialized healthcare, but you still have to pay due to corruption. For the average Ukrainian, it's not an unsubstantial amount. They don't have the newest drugs, technology, or that sorts. I'm using Ukraine as an example but also applies to other developing countries generally.
Infrastructure: - US has bad infrastructure compared to Japan. But the roads are generally paved (even in most rural areas), there is normally some sort of government that fixes the infrastructure. Sure there are cases of the dam breaking, but there are many, many examples of the government building parks, dams, paving new roads, fixing things, etc. - In developing or even worse in an ldc, the rural roads are not normally paved except for 'main' roads. Outside major cities the road quality, building construction rapidly deteriorates. China is an exception to this, but I could talk a bit about China and how it is unique.
Water: - In the US water is generally safe. You are able to point to Flint, Michigan which has a population of less than 100k, and a few others. - In developing countries the water is bad. For instance when I first went to Moldova I got a very itchy and weird rash. When I started drinking bottled water, it went away. In other countries you can get parasites or diarrhea from drinking the water. This is not normally an issue in the US.
Corruption: - In the US you can go to the government and not worry about bribing or corruption in general. The police will not stop you and ask for money. The opposite is true in many developing nations.
Internet: - In the US, even in rural America, you can get Internet that is somewhat acceptable. Most Americans can visit Google and watch YouTube without major connection issues or that sort. Many places in rural areas of developing countries have bad connections at best.
Banking: - In the US you have FDIC, many banking regulations, solid legal framework, trusted institutions. It's a bit sketchy in other countries, though might be because I'm a foreigner. Banking fees are much higher from what I have seen, especially in Argentina+Chile. I was blown away when I was there.
These are just some of the things I could think of from the top of my head. There are many more things and experience I could talk about, but this is a good start. There is a reason why millions of people try and immigrate to the US each year, that's not just random. I'm sure you could point of exceptions to what I laid out, but those are just exceptions.
Per 100,000 people, the US has 655 of them in prisons. The UK, Canada, France, Italy, Germany, and Japan have 140, 114, 100, 98, 75, and 41 respectively.
Could anyone believe an article like this would be published in a major news org before Corona? It was unthinkable.
But now we all see the governements blundering from one incompetent stupidity to the next. All western governements, not only the USA.
Before Corona, people knew but didn't care much. Apathy and cynicism everywhere. But now, reaction is building. Slowly, but at last something is moving.
I think we need a rude wake up call. I just hope this is rude enough.
Yes it could. It wasn't unthinkable at all. In fact the entire campaign of the current president was based on the fact that the USA is not as great as it once was, that it is in need to be made great again. So yes, this sentiment was very much spread all around before the pandemic, with widely different ideas on how to correct the trajectory but that's beside the point.
And people were aware and complaining, but not doing much themselves. That's what changing now.
At least the first five of these seem to mostly be a problem in New York, where the author is based, and similar cities, not “America” writ large. For example, the author complains about the housing costs, but the national home ownership rate in the US is about the same as the UK or France, and substantially higher than Germany. (And the median American home is twice as big as in those countries.) The author complains about the lack of transit, but the median American commute is among the shortest in the OECD. The homicide rate in my Maryland county isn’t great (about 2 per 100,000) but it’s closer to say Canada or Belgium (1.7-1.8 per 100,000) than those countries are to Sweden (1.1 per 100,000). Racial divisions are a challenge throughout America, of course, but that’s true all over the world. France’s Macron is talking about a government takeover of Islam: https://www.ft.com/content/88c1e898-5269-11ea-90ad-25e377c0e.... And Macron is the liberal! Le Pen, a far right candidate, is polling dangerously close to him at 45-55. As a brown person, I’d much rather be in America right now even with Trump than in France.
What the recent situations are bringing out is not that “America” is in decline, but that “American cities” are in decline. The mayor of Chicago, Lori Lightfoot, recently said that cutting police funding was impossible, because given the union contracts the city would have to lay off mostly black and Hispanic officers! This is a police force that was running Abu Ghraib-style interrogation centers. For what New York is spending extending one subway line a few miles, cities like Copenhagen have built entire new, fully automated, lines. New York City spends $25,000 per student, or about 44% of the city’s median income. London spends just 15% of the city’s median household per student.
You can’t fix a problem unless you can properly identify the problem. Articles like this are willfully blind to the problem.
So if New York can’t build transit because it costs ten times as much per mile as in Germany, or New York can’t properly educate its kids even though it spends twice as much per student as other developed nations, or New York has high housing prices—is that a problem with “America” as the article claims? Or is it a problem with New York?
No, but it’s a strong indicator that housing costs are not unaffordable nationwide, but merely in some high cost cities where most people don’t live.
> A lack of transit options is not the same thing as the length of commute.
Talking about “transit options” presupposes a solution to a problem. The problem is getting people to places, not transit per se. The US has chosen to prioritize direct car travel over potentially indirect transit, and the result is that Americans spend less time commuting than almost anyone else in the OECD. Put differently, for most Americans, the fact they have a 25 minute auto commute instead of a 45 minute train commute is not a sign of America being “in decline” but rather an advantage.
As to homicides, other countries do not have the same massive differences in homicide rate between cities and suburbs as the US. My county includes a small city (the state capital). The homicide rate in the nearest big city, 30 minutes away, is almost 15 times higher. By contrast, the homicide rate in London is only 50% higher than in the UK as a whole. Toronto’s homicide rate is actually lower than Canada as a whole. The differences are small enough to ignore for purposes of the point I’m making, which is that many parts of America are quite safe. Large cities have stratospheric levels of violence, but most of the population doesn’t live there.
The vast majority of global economic activity now happens in Asia. Tech was one sweet area dominated by the US but even that seems to be sliding (happily being enabled by the administration).
Once these economic activity participants figure out a way to avoid the dollar, they will (there is no goodwill with the dollar). When this happens, its done. We are busted.
That said, nobody is moving away from the dollar soon. However, we need to elect representatives who don't jeopardize this. Being the global reserve means moving in lock step with the world. It doesn't mean reneging or bullying.
As part of a bigger picture, it's a reflection of society. There is real fear that the US government is just incompetent and gun violence is part of that jigsaw puzzle of deciphering if the US is actually going to grow in the future.
I'm not sure your statement is accurate
Notwithstanding GDP being kind of a BS metric.
This can be easily deducted from population. More population == more haircuts overall. There is no way the US is getting more haircuts than China or India.
GDP (PPP) is a much better metric for economic activity overall. In this China has the US beat and India is third. Makes sense with so much population.
Without technological lead, the US is much like Brazil, which is a middling nation with lots of natural resources.
It would seem that our currency is overvalued then if our true output is skewed by our currency exchange rates?
How does that reconcile?
Basic supply and demand. If demand for US dollar reduces (say all Asian countries band together like EU to form a megacurrency), they will stop keeping too many dollars in reserve and demand will drop, thus currency value will drop and the US will drop in GDP rankings.
For production, yes. For consumption, no.
Take away American consumption, and lots of countries will fall into decline very quickly.
Sadly I might be proven correct in the next 12-24 months.