Book Report Blog #2

“The World is Flat” by Thomas Friedman

In the first part of the book Friedman repeatedly states that the “flattening” of the world, outsourcing, and off-shoring will be good for the world and therefore good for the United States. It is sometimes difficult to see how sending so many jobs out of this country can possibly be good for it, and the picture of the near future for the United States that Friedman paints has some grim aspects. He addresses this in the next part of the book and reminds us that there was fear and trepidation around all major advances. I am reminded of one of my marketing professor’s favorite examples, buggy whips. Makers of buggy whips wanted to think of the automobile as a passing fancy and continue to manufacture what they always had and continue to be prosperous. While there is still a very small market for buggy whips, the people who jumped on to the new transportation technology and found other products and services they could offer, certainly weathered the change much more prosperously and painlessly than those who clung to what they had always done.
Friedman accurately points out that all of the things that can be invented have not yet been invented and as technology continues to advance it is creativity and ingenuity that will determine who will thrive and who will suffer in the changes to come. These are areas where the United States still has a major advantage—at least right now. The playing field is being leveled and our advantage is likely short-lived, especially if we don’t recognize this.
I appreciated that Friedman was quick to point out that the infrastructure to help people to adapt to the new skills and technologies that will be and are required to continue to compete successfully is sorely lacking. We, as a country, need to realize that our advantage has passed and it is time to put the necessary funding into education, especially math and science. I find it disheartening that even in the math course that we must take in order to teach elementary education there are people constantly grumbling about why it is necessary. Friedman reminds us of our government’s response to Sputnik. Instead of just rolling over and allowing the Russian’s to dominate the space race, we stepped up our efforts and had a clear goal in mind and the funding made available to reach it. He makes a valid point when he discusses the lack of response from our current administration to the deficiencies in our math and science education programs. Right now, the United States is moving ahead at a pretty slow pace compared to nations such as China and India.
While quick to say that there will always be winners and losers in trade, Friedman also stresses the need for social conscience and there must be reeducation and training programs in place. We must prepare for the future now. Parents must take action and help their children learn responsibility, ingenuity, imagination, and ambition. Teachers need to challenge and hold high expectations for their students. Curriculum must be designed to promote creativity, problem solving, and get students excited about math and science. Our country must rally around these ideas or be left behind by those countries who do. At first I found Friedman’s ideas somewhat chilling, but I think he is largely correct and we must not try to ignore what is happening, but see it as a call to action.