November 25, 2003
EXCEPTIONALER:
Refuting the Cynics (DAVID BROOKS, 11/25/03, NY Times)
[A]round the middle of the 1980's, the U.S. and Europe started to diverge. The American work ethic shifted, so that the average American now works 350 hours a year — 9 or 10 weeks — longer than the average European.American fertility rates bottomed out around 1985, and began rising. Native-born American women now have almost two children on average, while the European rate is 1.4 children per woman and falling.
Economically, the comparisons are trickier, but here too there is divergence. The gap between American and European G.D.P. per capita has widened over the past two decades, and at the moment American productivity rates are surging roughly 5 percent a year.
The biggest difference is that over the past two decades the United States has absorbed roughly 20 million immigrants. This influx of people has led, in the short term, to widening inequality and higher welfare costs as the immigrants are absorbed, but it also means that the U.S. will be, through our lifetimes, young, ambitious and energetic.
Working off U.N. and U.S. census data, Bill Frey, the indispensable University of Michigan demographer, projects that in the year 2050 the median age in the United States will be 35. The median age in Europe will be 52. The implications of that are enormous.
Well, the divergence began with the differences between the American and the French Revolutions, but the rest is valid. Posted by Orrin Judd at November 25, 2003 9:16 AM
"The median age in Europe will be 52"
One gets the sense that Brooks/Frey have somehow ignored the young, ambitious, and energetic Muslim populations of Europe.
Methinks they aren't the only ones.
Posted by: Barry Meislin at November 25, 2003 9:57 AMEven if they didn't, will those young, energetic populations be willing to pay the cost of the European social programs?
Posted by: jim hamlen at November 25, 2003 10:38 AMI thought we there were 30 million immigrants 1990-2000. I thought we absorbed the equivalent of almost the entire population of Canada.
He's wrong, isn't he?
Posted by: Sandy P. at November 25, 2003 2:08 PM