Re: Candidate's ed policy

[QCao009@aol.com]

In a message dated 5/1/2008 10:54:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
gbracey1@verizon.net writes:

He does  need some schooling himself, though.  The McKinsey global institute  
estimates that 90% of China's "engineers" would not be sufficiently  
competent to work for a multinational corporation.  Partly it's  language. 
Partly it's that China is its own world and no other nations  works that way 
(recall we're dealing with entrepreneurs who are still hard  core 
Stalinists).
Until these candidates have a better understanding of what moves the  global 
economy, their "education platform" remains mired in a "us vs them"  model.  A 
nation which has always prided itself on producing the most  creative and  
the most competitive learners has gradually allowed its  politicians and 
businessmen to braindrain itself and empty the system from  inside out.  
 
As you point out, Jerry, language can be overcome.  Culture is another  
matter, and China has the same problem the US has.  Its strength is its  diversity 
and yet it insists on being monolithic.  The size of its  population makes its 
centralized policies less conducive to quick  industrialization and dynamic 
capitalization. On the other hand, the  culture of its people makes falling in 
line and operating in tandem more  possible.  If China can learn from Hongkong 
and Singapore, it will continue  to do well.  If it makes all the social 
engineering mistakes the US has  been making and shoots itself in the foot, the 
whole world will feel that  pain.  Unfortunately, the US no longer holds the 
moral or economic high  grounds to say much of anything to China.  
 
Quan



**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car 
listings at AOL Autos.      
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)