http://www.aps.org/programs/honors/prizes/prizerecipient.cfm?name=Kevin%20Aylesworth&year=1996

Just train thousands of bored ghetto kids in science and you will produce Einsteins by the boatload! And, of course, there is a great market in the US for such talent (facetious!). So why are there postdocs floating around in job purgatory while lawyers get starting salaries over $ 200,000? Hire more gym teachers to “teach science” and America will beat back the Yellow Peril!

As for the science to get to the moon wasn’t around in 1958 – did that blathering fool ever hear of Sir Isaac Newton? Amazing how political asses who know NOTHING about science can prance around like self-anointed experts because they are the Johns who control the pursestrings to America’s Scientific whores.

http://www.windsorstar.com

In the BUSINESS section, there are two headlines leading into Countries that will prosper from oil at $100 / bbl and Countries that will not. It’s an interesting read especially when the U.S. is being directed back to the Stone Age’s Fuel of Choice: weeds, wood, and cow dung.

I do not hold the view that China is an emerging “capitalist” society. Neither do I believe that Chinese President Hu Jintao is “capitalistic.”

Last year, Hu encouraged local Shenzhen cadres to “push forward the construction of the system of socialist core values, firm up beliefs in socialist ideals with Chinese characteristics, and to popularize patriotism, collectivism and socialist ideas.” In 2008 Hu said that the Chinese Communist Party “’never copies the political system and model of the West’” – and that it must avoid the ‘deviant path’ of capitalist values.” (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LI30Ad01.html)

In his book “Socialism” Ludwig von Mises observes: “Production can either be directed by the prices fixed on the market by the buying and by the abstention from buying on the part of the public [consumer sovereignty]. Or it can be directed by the government’s central board of production management. There is no third solution available. There is no third social system feasible which would be neither market economy nor socialism. Government control of only a part of prices must result in a state of affairs which—without any exception—everybody considers as absurd and contrary to purpose. Its inevitable result is chaos and social unrest.”

The truth is that China remains socialist. The CCP Politburo remains in firm control. Chinese economic reforms are less a “liberalization” than a change from a bureaucratized Soviet-style socialism to a top-down socialism of the German pattern. Either way the “inevitable result” will be “chaos and social unrest,” which is evidenced now in China by rampant corruption, stunted innovation, malinvestment, both subtle and obvious, and a bifurcated society of “haves” and “have nots” (i.e., those who have political influence or connections and those who have not).

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/KC20Ad01.html

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LD22Ad02.html

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=559685&p=2

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1339536/Ghost-towns-China-Satellite-images-cities-lying-completely-deserted.html

http://www.china.org.cn/opinion/2010-09/03/content_20859345.htm

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/KE16Ad01.html

Recognizing that “Chinese expert” may be an oxymoron, here’s one expert’s opinion:
http://www.fpri.org/footnotes/1220.200706.friedman.livingwithoutfreedomchina.html

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international-business/State-companies-lead-Chinas-growth-charge/articleshow/6464918.cms?curpg=2