Is Fareed Zakaria the smartest guy on TV?

[killarney_sailor]

I think Zakaria's point is that, for whatever reason, the infrastructure and the educational achievement have declined very significantly and these issues are not getting the attention they deserve. Consider the discourse (I used the term broadly) around the Republican nomination - I can't remember this being discussed at all.

I think you are reading way too much of your personal biases/agenda into what he said. No one suggests solving these problems is easy, but the first step is realizing that they are crucial problems that are hurting economic growth. Once that crucial step occurs, the discussion of what to do about it can begin.

You mention Singapore - what this tiny country has going for it is a clear national purpose articulated and enforced by a largely benevolent dictator. There is little to be gained by trying to compare it to the US.

[danjarch]

Originally Posted by killarney_sailor

I think Zakaria's point is that, for whatever reason, the infrastructure and the educational achievement have declined very significantly and these issues are not getting the attention they deserve. Consider the discourse (I used the term broadly) around the Republican nomination - I can't remember this being discussed at all.

Zakaria's point is the same as Bill O'Reilly's point which is the same as Rachel Madow's point. And he achieved it. Your going to tune back in and tell your friends to watch as well.

Originally Posted by killarney_sailor

I think you are reading way too much of your personal biases/agenda into what he said. No one suggests solving these problems is easy, but the first step is realizing that they are crucial problems that are hurting economic growth. Once that crucial step occurs, the discussion of what to do about it can begin.

Really, a good example of the recent politics misrepresenting the facts was Michelle Obama's push for better school lunches and more exercise. She conveniently skipped over the part about how the Federal government only gives schools $1.35 per hot lunch. We spend about twice that much for the cold lunch we send in with are daughter to preschool.

A good comparison would be McDonald's. It has every reason to keep it's prices down and it charges $4 for a kids hot lunch. If the Dems and Reps were interested in governing, they would triple the rate the federal government pays for hot lunches.

If Zakaria, O'Reilly, or Maddow were interested in fixing the situation, they would go into details like these. But that doesn't feed your bias, so they skip them. O'Reilly focuses on the conservative bias, Maddow focuses on the liberal bias, and Zakaria focuses on those that believe themselves to be independent. Pick your bias but all the cable channel are more or less infotainment.

Originally Posted by killarney_sailor

You mention Singapore - what this tiny country has going for it is a clear national purpose articulated and enforced by a largely benevolent dictator. There is little to be gained by trying to compare it to the US.

I didn't bring it up, Zakaria did. In fact all the countries that he named fall into the relatively tiny and homogenous range. That's another reason I call him a showman. There are few good comparisons to the US as a whole but countries like France, Canada, and Brazil are better comparisons then the Nordic countries and Singapore. He could have used those but chose to use countries that aren't good comparisons.

So his whole program was about highlighting bad comparisons then skipping over the actual politics and facts involved in what he thinks we should refocus on. You still think he was trying to improve the debate or improve his market share.

[killarney_sailor]

"You still think he was trying to improve the debate or improve his market share."

Does it have to be an either/or situation? I don't think so. I think that trying to improve your market share by providing reasoned analysis is sadly lacking in most political discourse in the US - both by media and by politicians.

It was only about two minutes long and all he was saying is that this vital matter is being ignored and is deserving of attention. If you are reading more into than that, it is your problem not his.

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by danjarch

There are few good comparisons to the US as a whole but countries like France, Canada, and Brazil are better comparisons then the Nordic countries and Singapore.

Dan, since you recognize that, for such purposes, Canada is, at the least, a decent comparator to the USA, why can you not see that MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, some of our choices, processes etc. are better than yours and should be emulated by you?

I'm thinking right now about our banking and financial services reg's. They kept us from experiencing the heavy hits you took from the criminals activities but they seem to be viewed as "pinko" or something by the right wing in the States.

Is it just the old American NIH (not invented here) syndrome? Is it so hard to concede that someone, somewhere else might have accomplished something better than you?

[danjarch]

Originally Posted by killarney_sailor

"You still think he was trying to improve the debate or improve his market share."

Does it have to be an either/or situation? I don't think so. I think that trying to improve your market share by providing reasoned analysis is sadly lacking in most political discourse in the US - both by media and by politicians.

It was only about two minutes long and all he was saying is that this vital matter is being ignored and is deserving of attention. If you are reading more into than that, it is your problem not his.

You asked is Fareed was the smartest guy on TV. My answer was no. There are plenty of smart people that appear on TV. Even some that appear on the cable channels. But they are most definitely not the hosts. There have been a few hosts that I wouldn't call the smart guy on TV, but I would call sincere and dogged pursuers of the truth. Barbara Walters springs to mind. O'Reilly in his first years, but not since. Too many to name and too many that once were good but have long since been phoning it in.

From what I've seen of Fareed, I would not put him in that category. He could have sounded just as insightful doing two minutes on the need for America to improve it's water and sewer systems. And he would have again skipped over doing the hard lifting of explaining the politics and history that are behind the current water and sewer systems. If he really wants to add to the discourse, he could follow in the footsteps of past greats by bringing on both the smart people and the influential people and keep them on the spot until they answer honestly.

[danjarch]

Originally Posted by SloopJonB

Dan, since you recognize that, for such purposes, Canada is, at the least, a decent comparator to the USA, why can you not see that MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, some of our choices, processes etc. are better than yours and should be emulated by you?

I'm thinking right now about our banking and financial services reg's. They kept us from experiencing the heavy hits you took from the criminals activities but they seem to be viewed as "pinko" or something by the right wing in the States.

Is it just the old American NIH (not invented here) syndrome? Is it so hard to concede that someone, somewhere else might have accomplished something better than you?

Jackdale would be a better one to ask but I'm pretty sure we routinely plagiarize Canadian laws. You haven't known me long enough but I regularly use Canada to show an example of better banking and housing policy.

You can believe what you want about America, but we're far from the NIH syndrome you think we have. We're just quite adept at stealing other countries ideas and making them sound like our own.

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by danjarch

You can believe what you want about America, but we're far from the NIH syndrome you think we have. We're just quite adept at stealing other countries ideas and making them sound like our own.

I thought that was Japan.

Personally, I found fairly early in life that it didn't matter WHERE the idea came from - if it was good, I used it. I never needed any patented info so I never had any ethical problems.

I recognize that NOT learning things the hard way is a difficult lesson for many, if not most people. My own son just seems unable to learn how to handle money even though my wife & I both worked in the financial industry and started teaching him at an early age - we're pretty good teachers too - it IS him.