Suchergebnisse

In an op-ed piece entitled "What You (Really) Need to Know," published on January 20, 2012, in the New York Times , former president of Harvard University Lawrence Summers called upon American universities to revamp their curricula in order to better prepare their students for the twenty-first century. Among his propositions, Summers made the case that the study of foreign languages represents a waste of time. As more and more people acquire English across our increasingly interconnected globe, he argued, mastery of foreign languages will become less and less necessary. Colleges and universities should instead teach their students leading-edge skills better suited to an increasingly competitive employment marketplace.

In an op-ed piece entitled "What You (Really) Need to Know," published on January 20, 2012, in the New York Times, former president of Harvard University Lawrence Summers called upon American universities to revamp their curricula in order to better prepare their students for the twenty-first century. Among his propositions, Summers made the case that the study of foreign languages represents a waste of time. As more and more people acquire English across our increasingly interconnected globe, he argued, mastery of foreign languages will become less and less necessary. Colleges and universities should instead teach their students leading-edge skills better suited to an increasingly competitive employment marketplace. Cost-cutting university administrators have been putting this modest proposal into practice in institutions across the United States for some time now. It is tempting to dismiss this trend as the work of barbarians inside the academy's hallowed gates, bent on doing away with the humanities. Given the purchase such ideas currently have on education decision makers, however, Summers's arguments merit serious attention. Adapted from the source document.

With a steep recession in full swing, it's French-bashing time again on the editorial pages and in the business sections
of American newspapers. As the Obama administration frantically weighed policy options, pundits agonized over the
prospect of the U.S. government's taking stakes in banks, and automakers contemplated France with a mix of horror
and resignation. When, last February, the Washington Post dared a tentative endorsement of government takeovers,
it did so apologetically, reassuring its readers that it shared their distaste for Gallic planning: "We can understand why
talk of bank nationalization freaks out the stock market: The very notion is so, well, French." The New York Times's
economics columnist David Leonhardt called for temporary nationalizations, but he took pains to distinguish them
from the nefarious takeovers inflicted by leftist ideologues.

Chastises critics of France's economic model as having it wrong & suggests that if the US is moving in that direction then France's experience with nationalization deserves closer scrutiny. A historical overview of the French experience with nationalization since the end of WWII is provided, noting its politicization by the 1980s. A shift toward privatization on the part of the French Left is noted, asserting that its impetus is born of specific political choices. Attention is given to the performance of nationalized companies, state rescue of struggling companies via nationalization, the success of Renault & Air France, & examples of mismanagement & government use of public companies for political purposes. It is contended that French nationalization has worked well, with broader benefits than merely profits, & the US ought to consider seriously the possibility of a larger state role in the economy. Adapted from the source document.