From Reason Magazine:

Environmentalists and globalization foes are united in their fear that greater population and consumption of energy, materials, and chemicals accompanying economic growth, technological change and free trade—the mainstays of globalization—degrade human and environmental well-being.

Indeed, the 20th century saw the United States’ population multiply by four, income by seven, carbon dioxide emissions by nine, use of materials by 27, and use of chemicals by more than 100.

Yet life expectancy increased from 47 years to 77 years. Onset of major disease such as cancer, heart, and respiratory disease has been postponed between eight and eleven years in the past century. Heart disease and cancer rates have been in rapid decline over the last two decades, and total cancer deaths have actually declined the last two years, despite increases in population. Among the very young, infant mortality has declined from 100 deaths per 1,000 births in 1913 to just seven per 1,000 today.

These improvements haven’t been restricted to the United States. It’s a global phenomenon. Worldwide, life expectancy has more than doubled, from 31 years in 1900 to 67 years today. India’s and China’s infant mortalities exceeded 190 per 1,000 births in the early 1950s; today they are 62 and 26, respectively. In the developing world, the proportion of the population suffering from chronic hunger declined from 37 percent to 17 percent between 1970 and 2001 despite a 83 percent increase in population. Globally average annual incomes in real dollars have tripled since 1950. Consequently, the proportion of the planet’s developing-world population living in absolute poverty has halved since 1981, from 40 percent to 20 percent. Child labor in low income countries declined from 30 percent to 18 percent between 1960 and 2003.

Equally important, the world is more literate and better educated than ever. People are freer politically, economically, and socially to pursue their well-being as they see fit. More people choose their own rulers, and have freedom of expression. They are more likely to live under rule of law, and less likely to be arbitrarily deprived of life, limb, and property.

Social and professional mobility have also never been greater. It’s easier than ever for people across the world to transcend the bonds of caste, place, gender, and other accidents of birth. People today work fewer hours and have more money and better health to enjoy their leisure time than their ancestors…

Read the whole thing.

Contrast this record of human achievement not just against the doomsayers of today, but against the perpetual predictions of impending humanitarian disasters that have been with us always.

Stanford professor Paul Ehrlich is a good example. Today he is one of the elder statesmen of the environmental movement, lending his celebrity status to the cause of climate hysteria. Back in the 1960s he was a NYT best selling author, writing things like:

The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.

and

A minimum of ten million people, most of them children, will starve to death during each year of the 1970s. But this is a mere handful compared to the numbers that will be starving before the end of the century.

and

Our position requires that we take immediate action at home and promote effective action worldwide. We must have population control at home, hopefully through changes in our value system, but by compulsion if voluntary methods fail.

and

There is no sacred legal “right” to have children. The argument that family size is God’s affair and not the business of the government would undoubtedly be raised — just as it was against outlawing polygamy. But the government tells you precisely how many husbands or wives you can have and claps you in jail if you exceed that number.

and

A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. Treating only the symptoms of cancer may make the victim more comfortable at first, but eventually he dies — often horribly. A similar fate awaits a world with a population explosion if only the symptoms are treated. We must shift our efforts from treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions. The pain may be intense. But the disease is so far advanced that only with radical surgery does the patient have a chance of survival.

What the hell is he talking about? Humanity is a “cancer”? What “brutal and heartless decisions” must be made? Mass exterminations? Forced sterilizations?

In more recent interviews Professor Ehrlich betrays an antipathy towards basic human progress, saying:

Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.

and

We’ve already had too much economic growth in the United States. Economic growth in rich countries like ours is the disease, not the cure.

Professor Ehrlich obviously hates people. He feels an urgent need to set aside basic human rights in favor of an all powerful, coercive central authority. But he is no fringe lunatic. He is a a tenured professor and respected academic. A few of his awards:

• The John Muir Award of the Sierra Club
• The Gold Medal Award of the World Wildlife Fund International
• MacArthur Prize Fellowship
• The Crafoord Prize of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
• ECI Prize winner in terrestrial ecology in 1993
• A World Ecology Award from the International Center for Tropical Ecology, University of Missouri in 1993
• The Volvo Environmental Prize in 1993
• The United Nations Sasakawa Environment Prize in 1994
• The Heinz Award for the Environment in 1995 (as in Theresa Heinz-Kerry)
• The Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement in 1998
• The Dr A.H. Heineken Prize for Environmental Sciences in 1998
• The Blue Planet Prize in 1999
• The Eminent Ecologist Award of the Ecological Society of America in 2001
• The Distinguished Scientist Award of the American Institute of Biological Sciences in 2001

Ehrlich dreams of totalitarian utopia, and he’s willing to make the most absurd predictions under the guise of science to hasten the abandonment of individual liberties. He is not unique - university basements are full of passionate, bright, narrow, anti-social types who think the whole world should drop everything to support their vision. Political collectivists find natural alliances with such people, finding a common cause in promoting central authority at the expense of individual liberty.

From Macworld News:

The French Constitutional Council has approved a law that criminalizes the filming or broadcasting of acts of violence by people other than professional journalists…

…Anyone publishing such images could face up to five years in prison and a fine of €75,000 (US$98,537), potentially a harsher sentence than that for committing the violent act…

…Senators and members of the National Assembly had asked the council to rule on the constitutionality of six articles of the Law relating to the prevention of delinquency…

…The government has also proposed a certification system for Web sites, blog hosters, mobile-phone operators and Internet service providers, identifying them as government-approved sources of information if they adhere to certain rules…

Redolent of the Al Durah affair, in which two Frenchmen were prosecuted for criticizing a blatantly fraudulent anti-Israeli TV segment produced by state-owned France 2 TV.

We wrote about the problems at Airbus here a couple of weeks ago. Then we discussed what a disaster the A380 has been and how it its pulling the rest of the massive company down with it.

In the last week an American Thinker writer has printed two excellent pieces on the company, The Self-Humiliation of Airbus (2/20) and Brinksmanship at Airbus (2/26).

They’re both worth reading in their entirety. Some excerpts from the later:

When a political project like Airbus falters while competing with a commercial enterprise like Boeing, political considerations predominate in developing countermeasures. The turbulent events of the past week demonstrate that the European rival of Boeing is still guided by politicians unwilling to concede the need for painful but necessary remedies, and more interested in looking good to their constituents than in solving the problems at the company…

…The problems at Airbus now go beyond the row over which country will lose more jobs, and which country will build the next generation high tech model (with spillover potential for other high technology jobs)…Although France and Germany continue to paper over the developing crises, they cannot do so forever. An extraordinary set of problems is leading to a pattern of brinksmanship, deferring tough choices until they explode. Thereby magnifying the damage…

…Perhaps the most dramatic news to leak out of Airbus over the weekend following the Franco-German summit was notice that Airbus might ask its workers to put in a 40 hour week, instead of the 35 hours per week they have been working. For no extra pay…

…Retreating on the 35 hour work week would itself be a humiliating retreat for France and Germany, which have taken pride in their more civilized approach than the savage Americans. No doubt, vicious American competition would be blamed, but one wonders if other sectors of the French and German labor force would welcome such an increase in work at no additional compensation, just because their political leaders backed a grandiose airliner…

The article also discusses the collapse of the A380 freighter project, and highlights recent share purchases of Airbus’ parent company (EADS) by the governments of Russia and UAE, further complicating an highly political board.

We refer to our earlier Airbus post for discussion of how the collapse is impacting seemingly unrelated projects like the A400M military transport.

One of the sad things here is the impact on Europe’s previously dynamic aerospace industry. Dozens of smaller companies were jammed together to create EADS in a fit of socialistic central planning that had no economic rationale. Now the entire industry risks suffocation.

EADS is trying to manufacture incredibly complex A380 under a single corporate banner. At the same time Boeing has radically decentralized, outsourcing even fuselage manufacturing to subcontractors on other continents. May the best economic model win.

ht: SJS

From today’s NY Sun:

In a speech on Friday, the chief executive officer of Apple and Disney honcho declared: “I believe that what’s wrong with our schools in this nation is that they have become unionized in the worst possible way.”

The problem with unionization, Mr. Jobs argued, is that it has constrained schools from attracting and retaining the best teachers and from dismissing the less effective ones. This, in turn, deters quality people from seeking to become principals and superintendents. “What kind of person could you get to run a small business if you told them that when they came in they couldn’t get rid of people that they thought weren’t any good? Not really great ones because if you’re really smart you go, ‘I can’t win,’” Mr. Jobs said. He concluded by saying, “This unionization and lifetime employment of K-12 teachers is off-the-charts crazy.”…

…”Apple just lost some business in this state, I’m sure,” Mr. Jobs said.

The National Education Association is the largest labor union in the US, with 3.2MM members. Almost all of its funding (almost $400MM) comes from mandatory dues automatically deducted from teachers’ paychecks.

Jimmy Carter was the first presidential candidate endorsed by the NEA. Since then they have endorsed a Democrat in every presidential election. In the 1999-2000 cycle the NEA gave more money to state political parties than any other organization, 94% of it to Democrats.

Actual contributions may be much higher. The NEA is presently under investigation by the IRS for failing to report tens of $ millions in payments to the DNC.

Update 2/23/07

This morning’s WSJ opinion page followed up on the Jobs-NEA story:

If Apple CEO Steve Jobs had praised teachers unions as the backbone of public education in the U.S., it would have made the front pages. Instead, at an education conference in Austin, Texas, Mr. Jobs offered some constructive criticism of teachers unions and barely anyone noticed. Sounds like news to us….

…The latest National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) report was released yesterday. The dismal results are what we’ve come to expect from an elementary and secondary public education system in the vice-grip of the National Education Association and its political acolytes. According to the NAEP survey, nearly 40% of high-school seniors scored below basic level on the math test, and fewer than a quarter of 12th graders rate proficient.

Boasting about the US’ technological prowess relative other nations may be arrogant, but it is also generally supported by fact. Conversely, articles claiming the US is behind or falling behind other nations technologically are usually cherry picking data, using deceptive analysis, and/or expressing some other prejudice.

This piece from last week’s Information Week, provocatively titled When It Comes To Broadband, U.S. Plays Follow The Leader is a good example. It begins with a snarky lede:

The United States often views itself as a paragon of technology innovation and deployment. In some cases, that view is correct, but not when it comes to broadband deployment, where the country lags considerably behind other major nations. Here’s why.

 The basis for their argument is in this paragraph:

The United States currently ranks 12th in broadband adoption rates, significantly down from its ranking of fourth in 2001, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, a 30 member-nation group committed to the development of democratic governments and market economies.

Although the lengthy article is replete with numbers, references to studies, and hyperlinks to various sites, it never links to the actual source of the data. They also somehow avoid ever actually listing the 11 countries behind whom the US purportedly lags so badly.

I found the original OECD report here. Here is the list:

Every country above the US has a tiny population or is very densely populated. Most are both. The combined population of the first 11 is just 65% that of the US. Eight of them are less populous than the NYC metro area.

There are only two “major” countries on the list - UK and Korea. The UK’s population density is 8x that of the US. Korea’s is 16x. This is important for something like broadband penetration, since it is far cheaper and quicker to connect concentrated populations.

The article tries to preempt the population density issue:

One of the rationales often given for lower broadband penetration in the U.S. is that low population density makes broadband deployment, especially in rural areas, considerably more expensive in the U.S. than among more dense populations in countries such as Korea, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. That argument falters, however, when one considers that five of the 11 nations that lead the U.S. in per capita broadband penetration, including Iceland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, and Canada, have significantly lower population densities than the U.S.

This is a grossly misleading statement. If you take the population of Iceland (the size of Aurora, Colorado) and divide it by the total land area you certainly get a low population density. But 62% of Icelanders live in Reykjavik. A handful of Starbucks with wifi would be enough to connect most of the country. The same is true each of the five countries they name - large unpopulated land areas with most of the population crowded into a few small areas.

Canadians aren’t concentrated in one city, but 90% live within 100 miles of the US boarder. That sliver of land, about 6% of Canada’s total land area, has 55% greater population density than the US. As with most demographic statistics, Canadian broadband penetration probably matches that of bordering states like Washington, Minnesota, New York.

Going back to the OECD’s original list of 11 countries, its worth revisiting some data from the Timbro study we wrote about a few weeks ago. The study included this table:

Six of the 11 countries on the OECD’s list are in the table above. Note the Personal Computer line - each of the six has significantly lower PC penetration than the US. Denmark is at the top of the OECD list for broadband penetration, but the US has 50% higher PC penetration. What’s the relevance of high broadband penetration when so few people even have computers?

The US is the economic and technological engine that drives the world. Other countries benefit from our innovations at almost no cost. Our own diverse population has access material wealth unparalleled in any other large region, a direct result of our free economy and liberal political traditions.

“It’s a game-changing airplane. The only minor problem is that we couldn’t build it on time.”

- Airbus Chief Operating Officer John Leahy, referring to the company’s 3-year delayed A380

Spoken like a true apparatchik. Unfortunately for Airbus, in the commercial aviation market, as in any high tech industry, the difference between late and never sometimes doesn’t matter.

From the same article:

Announcing the latest production setback, Airbus parent European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. said last year that the accumulated two-year delay would wipe 4.8 billion euros ($6.2 billion) off profit by 2010. Last month the Franco-German defense group warned that the final bill would be higher, without giving a figure.

A lot has been written about the A380 fiasco. From engineering mistakes, to intramural dustups, to political meddling, there have been lots of small problems. But one big problem has spawned all others. Airbus’ parent company EADS is a socialist contraption, created out of national pride and confidence in central planning, but unresponsive to the market. Like the Concorde before it, the A380 is a white elephant, obsolete and irrelevant long before assembly began. 

A side story that gets less coverage is the impact of the A380 problems on the rest of EADS. EADS is a huge defense and aerospace conglomerate, and attempts to shore up the A380 have resulted in a irrational decisions that have rippled through to seemingly unrelated parts of the company.

 One example is the A400M, ostensibly an alternative to Boeing’s C-17 Globemaster III. I say “ostensibly,” because the A400M, a four engine turbo-prop, looks a lot more like the C-130 (first built in 1954) than the jet powered C-17. But we can only speculate on looks since no one has built and A400M yet.

Outdated or not, the A400M has been delayed 6 years. Now cost and job cuts with the A380 are cutting into the A400M program - new delays were recently announced.

Even though the most of the potential customers are EU member states, and thus EADS “partners,” they are starting to respond as customers should. The UK has 25 A400Ms on order to replace its fleet of aging C-130s. Facing a critical shortage of heavy lift capacity, the UK’s RAF recently bought several C-17s as a stop-gap measure. These were very expensive, since Boeing is winding down its C-17 production and will have to ramp up again for a short run of aircraft. With other erstwhile A400M customers lining up for C-17s, Boeing may need to keep that line open a little longer.

The government of the region including Paris is paying to distribute “free” software to kids.  From ZDNetFrance:

To help make kids aware of alternatives to proprietary software, the Ile-de-France, the political district of greater Paris, will give 175,000 school children and apprentices USB keys loaded with open-source software…

The president of the regional council, Jean-Paul Huchon, is a self-confessed “partisan of the rebalancing of the supply of proprietary and open-source software” who previously welcomed the launch of the Firefox 2 browser and led the support for a creation of a competitiveness hub based on open source.

Maybe this is why France has basically no software IT services industry.