Reply Form - New York State Assembly Home: Fill & Download for Free

I was born in the Deep South Bronx. I know of no other person who has reached some degree of prominence in our world who was born in the Bronx south of where I was. (I talked to Colin Powell once, and he said was born about a half mile north of my birthplace.) I used to walk to the baseball games of the NY Yankees (I saw Micky Mantle hit three home runs in one game!), and once I saw Willie Mays make a great catch in the Polo Grounds.Neither of my parents finished high school, but my mom never let us know. From the time I was a toddler, I knew that someday I would go to college. (When I met with a group of poor kids from Oakland, we didn’t hit it off until I mentioned that fact.)To qualify to be an announcer at the Columbia radio station (WKCR FM— reaches all over New York City) I had to expunge my Bronx accent. The lasting consequence: when I met Rosemary she accepted my invitation for a date. Later I learned that she hates the Bronx accent. So these days I use it only to tease her. (I can bring it back at will.)Until recently, I played racquetball several times each week. I easily beat my students who were on the Cal football team. But against someone on the racquetball team, I was dead meat.I love the wilderness and backpacking. My wife’s colleagues in architecture used to think she was poor because most of our vacations were in the “inexpensive” wilderness.I did poorly in my last year at Columbia, probably because I was suffering from depression. Fortunately for me I had been accepted into graduate school at Berkeley. My first graduate year there I did very poorly, but afterwards I flourished.From 4th grade through college, my lunch every day was a peanut butter and jelly sandwich on raisin bread. Skippy’s smooth peanut butter.At the Bronx High School of Science, I was on the “Protozoa Squad” as an extracurricular activity. (I loved my microscope!) I took frequent trips to Van Cortland Park to find new animalcules.I was also the manager for the Bronx High School of Science bowling team.I was arrested and jailed in the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley. I was convicted of resisting arrest (I went limp and was dragged down the steps of Sproul Hall), illegal assembly, and trespassing. Later, I still got very high security clearances.For 34 years, I was a very active member of “Jason”, a group of academics who spent their summers working on issues of US national security. For the last two decades, much of my work went into counter terrorism. But it was during a Jason summer study that I came up with “Muller’s Theorem”, the theorem which shows that the integral of the square of intensity of an image reaches its maximum value when all optical aberrations are removed.In 1963, I climbed to the top of George Washington’s head at Mt. Rushmore. Park Rangers took me into custody, but released me after I apologized.Recently I fulfilled a long-term dream by actually flying around the world on one trip: US to Turkey to India to Cambodia to Singapore to US.I once was lost in a cave in Pennsylvania. I and my companion could not find our way out. We knew we had people outside waiting for us, and indeed, when we failed to show up after several hours, they sent in people to search for us, and we were found.I know the standard repertoire of classical music and can recognize composers from the “texture” of their music. But I cannot play an instrument and am a terrible singer.Photography is a hobby I take very seriously. I produce a family calendar every year from the photos I took, and give copies as Christmas presents to my family members (including some distant one). It includes all birthdays and anniversaries of the people it goes to.Every year I send out a celebration message to hundreds of my friends telling them not to forget 11–9, the date when the Berlin Wall fell. It includes the ditty: Remember, remember, the 9th of November / the death of the cold war threat /— don't fail to recall / the fall of the wall, / a climax to never forget!I celebrate Good Friday every year, along with my children, by noticing the beauty of the ordinary. (This was inspired by Wagner’s Parsifal. In that opera, Parsifal asks Gurnemanz why the world is so especially beautiful that day. Gurnemanz replies, “That’s Good Friday’s magic, my lord. )I’ve posted a list of “Muller’s Theorems” which consists of a set of both deep and lighthearted observations I’ve made over the decades. It can be found at Muller's Theorems by Richard Muller on Rich Muller's Quora BlogI’ve been married for over 50 years (to the same woman!). Family gives me greater joy than does physics.Now that I have retired (I am professor of physics emeritus) I am working harder than ever. I have a new startup company that I expect will have revenues of $100 million or more within a few years. (That is realistic; if I were being optimistic, I’d say $1B/yr.) I’m doing this together with my daughter Elizabeth, who is also very active on Quora.I wrote a poem about the Big Bang. (It is in my latest popular book.) Originally I wrote this for my (then) young daughter. I had been reading a child’s version of Genesis to her, and she asked me if it was really true. I told her that people used to believe it was true, but now we know it wasn’t. She then wanted to know the truth, how did the universe really begin. I told her the story of the Big Bang. Next night, when I was putting her to bed, she asked me to tell her the Big Bang story again.I founded (and initially led) two projects that led to Nobel Prizes, but not for me, but for the younger members of the team who took over after I went on to other projects.I am hooked on the TV series The Americans. I’m watching back episodes, and am currently in Season 4. (Season 5 is the most recent.)I cook dinner for my wife 4 nights every week; she cooks three, and then makes special weekend breakfasts. On Sunday night, I make dinner for her, my daughter, her husband, and my two grandchildren.We created a restaurant we named “Inn Season” and operated it for 6 years, until we finally sold it. (The buyers changed the name.) It was operated by my sister.Is that 20? Gee—I thought it would be hard. This is an interesting exercise, and I could keep going…

Yes, like a reign of terror but not like THE REIGN OF TERROR. There were many unnecessary deaths, beatings, and other abuses mostly in areas of Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York where patriot control was questionable.At least 105 loyalists were sentenced to hang in New Jersey alone. This rather ruthless attitude on the part of the patriots of New Jersey may have been in response to the fact that there were so many totally disaffected communities in the state. Many loyalists, and patriots for that matter, found themselves victims of lynching without the formality of a trial. Such incidents often reflected local hostilities. At the least four persons were hanged in a series of associated incidents predated by vendettas and personal petty hatreds in New Jersey involving two opposing groups, one ardently loyal and the other equally dedicated to the rebellion. Serving as ad hoc "irregulars," each used the pretext of the war to execute members of the opposition with no justification other than revenge.Delaware, only recently torn from Pennsylvania's governance, was composed of three counties: New Castle, Kent, and Sussex. In Kent County, the Tories held a nominal majority, but in Sussex they may have made up 90 percent of the residents. Only in New Castle County did the Patriot Whigs hold a slim majority, 52 percent. The patriots held the state only by actively suppressing the rest of the population. Congress instructed the Committee of Safety to disarm all the loyalists in the state whom they deemed hostile.In April 1778, an armed group of 150 Tory insurrectionists led by Cheney Clow marched on Dover. Clow's men were then defeated in a brief battle with an equal force of patriot militia. Clow was executed. Patriot forces pursued these Tories into the swamps, and 37 men were arrested and tried for treason. Found guilty, they were sentenced by the court to the most hideous punishment of being hanged, drawn, and quartered. However, all the prisoners were later paroled by the General Assembly.It was obvious that the vocal mob would show no mercy to any person who spoke for the king or against the American cause. As a result, the majority of loyal persons “preserved for the most part an arrogant silence toward the arguments of the opposition” and kept their political opinions to themselves.[i] It was very difficult to do so.One woman living “between the lines” in Westchester County in New York was awaken in the night by British soldiers demanding entrance to her home with the question, “Are you King’s men, or Rebels?” The woman replied calmly that she was “a friend to humanity.” The soldiers, ignoring her reply, ransacked the house, stole some items, and went off .[ii][i] Van Tyne, 7.[ii] Elizabeth Lummis Ellet, Revolutionary Women in the War for American Independence: A One-Volume Revised Edition of Elizabeth Ellet’s 1848 Landmark Series, edited and annotated by Lincoln Diamant. (Westport: Praegar Publishers, 1998) 84.Joseph Galloway, a delegate to the First Continental Congress refused to be seated at the Second Continental Congress, and his open disaffection forced him to leave Philadelphia for rural Bucks County (PA) where he remained for some time. Yet he found himself in the “utmost danger” from the mobs of radicals that threatened “to hang him at his own door.” In 1776 he fled to the British Army in New Jersey for protection.Forced by the persecution of the radicals into being a Loyalist, Galloway became an active adviser to British Gen. William Howe, and in 1777 he was appointed superintendent of police in British-held Philadelphia. When the British abandoned the city in the face of the French alliance, Galloway became dispirited, and he fled to New York and ultimately retired to England where he wrote several pamphlets defending the actions taken by American loyalists and criticizing the British prosecution of the war on land and sea.After the revolution in 1788, Galloway penned The Claim of the American Loyalists, Reviewed and Maintained Upon Incontrovertible Principles of Law and Justice, a call for the crown to indemnify Loyalists for their losses during the revolution. “Their claim of justice has not been fulfilled, discussed, or even examined. Hence, it is, that their minds, before too much oppressed by their misfortunes, have remained in the most painful and distressing uncertainty, suspense, and anxiety,” he wrote. [iii][iii] Callahan, 100.Israel Williams, an elderly Tory in Boston, was tied in a chair by a mob. With the doors and chimney of his house closed, a fire was set in the fireplace, and the poor old man was smoked for several hours before being released simply because he refused to take the oath to the united colonies. Daniel Leonard, another Tory advisor, avoided the mobs but had several musket balls shot through his windows.When her Philadelphia neighborhood fell into British hands in 1777, Esther de Berdt (Reed), found her family and herself threatened by the very Royal institutions that she had looked to for support and security in England. She reported that personal violence in Philadelphia was rampant, and gentlemen went armed in the streets. “Folly on one hand and fanaticism on the other put in jeopardy the lives of distinguished citizens.” Young Quakers, members of the Society of Friends, found the antiwar sentiments of their parents hard to follow in an era of political revolution. Quakers in PA were abused and arrest by both sides for maintaining their antiwar sentiments.It seemed impossible to maintain any semblance of neutrality or moderation in a country so charged with hatred. The vast majority of uncommitted persons “rested content in a state of indolence and languid inactivity,” failing to enlist in volunteer companies of like-minded persons and take up arms, as had those who had aligned themselves with the rebellion in its earliest days. Some persons were loyal because their family or friends chose the side of the king; others, because their personal or political enemies had chosen to be rebels. Family loyalty and kinship bonds were very important in determining which side, if any, an individual chose; and political feuds and personal antagonisms often carried more weight than the less substantial issues of taxation, representation, and the rights of Englishmen.It seems clear that the patriots were unprepared to found an entirely new form of government when the war ended. The immediate reaction to victory was one of sometimes violent retribution directed at the loyalist population. At least 100,000 loyalists fled to England or Canada during the course of the Revolution. Many waited until 1782 to take ship with the last of the redcoats to leave New York City, hoping in vain for a positive turn in British fortunes. One historian, Claude Halstead van Tyne, has noted, "The formation of the Tory or Loyalist party in the American Revolution; its persecution by the Whigs during a long and fratricidal war, and the banishment or death ... of these most conservative and respectable Americans is a tragedy but rarely paralleled in the history of the world."Most Americans today, who believe in traditional American government, would probably find themselves loyalists if they lived in 1775.—Claude Halstead van Tyne, Loyalists in the American Revolution (Ganesvoort, NY: Corner House Historical Publications, 1999), 182.—Dorothy Denneen Volo;James M. Volo. Daily Life During the American Revolution (p. 342). Kindle Edition.

1 Introduction The broad Answer to this question - whether “China’s population being 4 times* that of the United States and high economic growth will allow China to become the world’s sole superpower” is “Yes.” But it is not just high population plus Chinese economic growth that has and is producing that result, because several other factors are involved.*It should perhaps be noted that the question is not quite accurate. According to the CIA World Factbook, the July 2018 population of China in 2018 was about 1,384.7m, about 4.2 times the July 2018 US population of 329.3m.2 Why has China become, and is still becoming, the world’s greatest economic power ?There are perhaps five major comparative factors:The superior Chinese understanding and practice of Shimomuran-Wernerian macroeconomics (the macroeconomics of the Tokyo Consensus Zone Economies) compared with the inferior American practice and promulgation of Washington Consensus macroeconomicsThe highly effective meritocracy of China vs the less effective “democratic” US GovernmentThe Chinese Government understanding of, and application of the “Mandate of Heaven” vs the American adoption of the “rule by the rich”The Chinese understanding, development and application of the leading economic computer-modelling assembly-line-control technology in the form of MadeInChina2025 which is the Chinese version of Germany’s Industrie04 which the German Federal Minister has described as “the Fourth Industrial Revolution” and the American lack of any such programmeThe willingness of the Chinese Government to learn from best practice elsewhere in the world compared with the American lack of such learning and the American assumption that US economic decline is the “fault of other countries” when it is largely home-grownLet’s examine these aspects of each of these issue in turn in sections 3.1 to 3.5.3.1 The superior Chinese understanding of Shimomuran-Wernerian macroeconomics compared with the inferior American practice and promulgation of Washington Consensus macroeconomics. SeeThe Rough Guide To Shimomuran Economics – George Tait Edwards – MediumAnd for a Committee-produced and not well informed view of the significance of Dr Osamu Shimomura see one of the the Springer BriefsThis book tells you a lot of background information about Dr Osamu Shimomura(1910–1989) the economist but it does not mention how Shimomuran economics works, and I think that’s a enormous and major omission. There is now a recent but not very well informed Wikipedia entry about Dr Osamu Shimomura at Osamu Shimomura (economist) - Wikipedia. That entry manages to get many of the facts about Shimomura’s career wrong and is based upon an article in the Tokyo Shimbum. Perhaps a lot may have been lost in translation. I note with interest that two of the referenced articles are mine. For a more comprehensive Answer about Dr Osamu Shimomura (1910–1989) the economist Shimomura seeGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to Why is there so few information about the Japanese economist Osamu Shimomura in the English speaking internet, even though the Japanese government has created a fellowship named after him? Even Wikipedia listed him as a chemist and not an economist.Of course the questions should ask not “why is there so few” but “why is there so little” and should recognise that Dr Osamu Shimomura the investigator of green bio-luminesce is a different person from Dr Osamu Shimomura (1910–1989) the economist. My reply above discriminates between these two very different different Shimomuras.AndShimomuran Economics is the Most Significant Advance Ever Made in Economic Understanding and the West Still Doesn’t Get It and noteGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to Why do Western economists ignore the writings of Dr Osamu Shimomura who is called "Japan's most influential post war economist"?Shimomuran Macroeconomics produces the goods. The average economic GDP PPP growth rate of China has been about four times (c10% pa) the American growth rate (c2.5% pa) from 1975 to 2014 and over three times (or 6.7% pa) the US growth rate (c2.2% pa) from 2015 to 2017. See George Tait Edwards's answer to What's Wrong With Washington Consensus Macroeconomics? (WCM)WCM fails to produce the goods either domestically or internationally. Three economists at the IMF have recognised that. See the June 2016 article by three IMF economists at Neoliberalism: Oversold? which has the frontspieceThere is as yet no sign as yet (January 2019) of any change in US policy. The idea that an “evolution” of that policy is possible and interesting, but completely unfounded and undefined. Nobody so far has ever managed to fit retrospective realistic foundations under a castle in the air. I wish Maurice Obstfeld and the IMF good luck with that attempt.3.2 The highly effective meritocracy of China vs the less effective US GovernmentThe required qualification for membership the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is a university degree, which all 80m+ of Party members have. The required Chinese qualification for higher political office is membership of the CCP plus a performance record of success in running one of the local city or provincial economies. One result of that process is that senior Chinese politicians have a track record of success and possess a realistic competence in running a sub-unit of the Chinese economy. That capability maps over to the running of the whole economy, with the result that the Chinese meritocracy is the most intelligent, the most highly qualified, and the most effective government in the world.A major problem with most governments is succession planning. Even when a western government is brilliantly led for a few years, there is a lack of succession planning due to the political or democratic process. The excellent and highly competent and subtle FDR was “succeeded” (but actually failed) by President Harry Truman who did not continue Roosevelt’s policies because he did not understand them, and to the extent he did, he disagreed with them. There is an automatic capability of excellent succession planning built into the Chinese higher political system. No such capability exists in in the upper reaches of western governments.The technocratic government of China plans the country’s future. The US has no such plans. Note the key points of “China’s New Five Year Plan” covering the 2015–2020 period:The American economic system is more democratic than meritocratic. It was once claimed with pride that anyone could become an American President. That does seem to be true if that person possesses or can attract sufficient funding. But it is no guarantee of even minimal economic competence, and even when America succeeds in some measures (eg Obamacare) the next President (eg Trump) can partially reverse any popular gains made.3.3 The Chinese Government understanding of, and application of the “Mandate of Heaven” vs the British and American adoption of the “rule by the rich”3.3.1 The “Mandate of Heaven” The concept of the “Mandate of Heaven” was introduced into Chinese history over three millennia ago in 1045 BCE by the Shang dynasty. See Mandate of Heaven - WikipediaThe Mandate of Heaven is summarised by Mencius as“The people are of supreme importance; the altars of the gods of earth and grain come next; last comes the ruler. That is why he who gains the confidence of the multitudinous people will be Emperor... When a feudal lord endangers the altars of the gods of earth and grain, he should be replaced.”Chinese economic policy acts to ensure the highest possible increase in the incomes of the people, so is in accordance with the Mandate of Heaven.11th century China under the brilliant Prime Ministership of Wang Anshi (1021–1086), the first investment credit economist, became the first industrial economy and was then the largest economy in the world. See Wang Anshi - Wikipedia and my own view of the historical greatness that individual at Part 2 (The Invention of Credit Creation For Productive Investments in the Northern Song Empire (960-1126) by Wang Anshi (1021–1086) ofGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to What are major Chinese innovations?3.3.2 The Forecasts Of Oswald Spengler (1880–1936)What has happened to nearly all western and westernised economies was forecast by Oswald Spengler, in his first bookIn this ground-breaking book, (the Decline of the West is two volumes) Oswald Spengler accurately predicted thatThe natural evolution of all Western “democratic” economies was to become plutocratic economies, captured by monied interests, and mainly and usually almost entirely serving the interests of the richThe western media would also be captured by monied interests and the people and their education would become uninformed and their understanding would be defective against the “we decide what is and isn’t news” agenda focus of western mediaDemocratic societies would see the emergence of “Caesars” - inadequate usually rich individuals who would lead major economies into decline - without possessing the competence to do otherwiseSee The Decline of the West - Wikipedia andGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to What are the biggest reasons for why wage growth in the US has been so terrible for decades?George Tait Edwards's answer to How long has China's government been an oligarchy? which refers to the Spenglerian propheciesAll of these predictions have come to pass for all the major western economies. These changes in the focus of western governance (from advantaging the people to advantaging the rich) are the major reason for the current and the continuing decline of the British and American hegemonies.Because real consumption is the largest expenditure factor in the western Keynesian equation of the economy (NY=C+I+G), the most important aspect of economic policy is focusing on how best to increase the rate of real average and median living standards. Chinese economic policy does that, western Austerity does the opposite.The last thousand years of history demonstrates that if an economy operates for the benefit of all its people, it becomes a world-leading economy, and if it just operates to place its monied class above the people, then that's the rapid route to economic decline.Spengler’s observations appear to be consistent as the mirror image of the “Mandate of Heaven”. The Spenglerian rule of the rich produces economic decline, the Mandate of Heaven rule for the people produces great growth and widespread prosperity and potential success as a major world economy.3.4 The Chinese understanding, development and application of the leading economic technology in the form of MadeInChina2025 which is the Chinese version of Germany’s Industrie04 which the German Federal Minister has described as “the Fourth Industrial Revolution” versus the American lack of any such programmeChina has proposed and implementing the “next industrial revolution” based on the wholesale introduction in all of its manufacturing and services economy the fast-reacting, integrated G5/Internet of things/Credit-creation-economy. SeeGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to What is the comparison between the German industrial policy "Germany04" and "Made In China 2025"? andGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to China had 6.6% GDP growth in 2018, is that good or bad? andGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to At what point will we know if Trump is winning his tariff battle with China? and seeGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to What are the major differences between the American economic system and the Chinese economic system?By opposing MadeInChina2025 Donald Trump has lost much of America’s future. SeeGeorge Tait Edwards's answer to Why is “made in China 2025” so concerning to Trump that he demanded China must abandon that plan in order to stop the trade war?3.5 The willingness of the Chinese Government to learn from best economic practice elsewhere in the world, compared with the American lack of such learning, and the American assumption that US economic decline is the “fault of other countries” when it is largely home-grownChina has learned high-growth macroeconomics from the Japanese master growth economist Dr Osamu Shimomura (1910–1989).See George Tait Edwards's answer to What did China get right in its economic and social development which the US got wrong?China is following (by about 70%, higher than any other nation) the recommendations set out at The Most Successful Economic Policy Of All Time - The German Historical Economics Development of Shimomuran-Wernerian MacroeconomicsThe leading nations of the west are now firmly on the Spenglerian trajectory of economic decline via the WCM invention-suppressing and the Austerity-following people-impoverishing “rule by the rich” and no change to the economic prospects of these economies seems likely soon.The United Kingdom and the USA have suffered economically through the leadership activities of the five modern “Caesars” in the persons of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, President Ronald Reagan, Prime Minister Tony Blair, Prime Minister David Cameron and President Donald Trump. All five of these leaders claimed they possessed a superior economic programme when they did not. Each of them accelerated the economic decline of their nation by ruling and running their economy in the interests of the rich, and were supported in that objective by a subservient media.Margaret Thatcher’s major programme (commonly known as TINA because she said “there is no alternative) was the destruction of large part of the “Post-war Consensus” which had placed Britain in the forefront of nations as a progressive welfare-state economy serving its people. The positive inheritance of the Clement Attlee post-war administration (comprising the five pillars of the welfare state) and the John Maynard Keynes insights about the reduction of unemployment were two situations she reversed. Some British newspapers hailed Mrs Thatcher as a mere housewife who proposed housewife cost-cutting economics as a solution to Britain’s economic decline but it rapidly became clear that her knowledge of real economics was minimal while her policies were industrially disastrous. I enjoyed meeting Mrs Thatcher and her team in 10 Downing Street when I was a member of the Grylls Group, but the report of that group (which I had written) to assist SME financing, was turned down by Geoffrey Howe in his March 1982 Budget Speech.The use of the vast additional government revenues of North Sea (largely Scotland’s) Oil was to reduce the top rates of income tax to the great benefit of very rich incomes. That policy was introduced by Nigel Lawson who, from my brief discussions with him, understood even less economics than Thatcher did. Lawson described the future of Britain as not just a low-tech but a no-tech economy, a nation with a high dependence on tourism, a nation of hamburger-friers but minimal technology. The pound was allowed to zoom upwards which destroyed about 20% of the British manufacturing industry, a result which several economists at the time described as a greater industrial damage than that done during WWII by the Germans. Thatcher reduced the living standards of working people (and their ability to finance the Labour Party) through the sale of nationalised industries into private hands, and through her preference for finance and the City of London rather than manufacturing industry. The keys to the industrial future of Britain - the machine tool manufacturers like Stone-Platt (see Platts Textile Machinery Makers by R H Eastham) and Alfred Herbert (see Alfred Herbert (company) - Wikipedia which says “it was one of the world's largest machine tool manufacturing businesses. It was at one time the largest British machine tool builder”) both went into bankruptcy without any supportive action from the government. The British banks shut both companies down after they had increased their new equipment investment but reduced their liquidity by doing so. The shutdown of much of British manufacturing industry reduced the incomes of the working class who Thatcher saw as “the internal enemy” because they largely did not vote Conservative.The climax of Thatcherism was the Poll Tax which system has historically been used (especially the USA) to deny poorer people the right to vote. It succeeded in its major objective by chasing so many voters off the electoral rolls that the John Major Government was elected despite all the opinion polls indicating a Labour victory. That was Thatcher’s last achievement although it was preceded by her downfall.Ronald Reagan destroyed the manufacturing pre-eminence of the United States through a deliberate policy of relocating what he saw as major “smokestack” industries abroad. See REAGAN'S HIDDEN 'INDUSTRIAL POLICY' which notes“The Reagan plan to shrink America's basic industries has been enormously successful. Since 1981, when the value of the dollar began climbing to unprecedented levels as the budget deficit ballooned, some 2 million jobs have been lost in old-line manufacturing businesses. Steel, autos and others have been forced to reduce domestic capacity, set up operations abroad (or enter into joint ventures with foreign producers) and diversify into specialized niches.”As I have noted elsewhere, the multiplier effect between the loss of manufacturing jobs and total job losses in the USA is somewhere between three and five, probably three for the effect within five years and five within a decade. The loss of future smokestack industries is quasi-permanent and the future loss of their likely developments is crippling to job prospects in these affected states. In 1982 I observed that decline in US industries first-hand by driving on holiday from New York to Buffalo through some roads often lined by shut-down factories and discussing that situation with my wife’s American relatives.Here’s a map illustrating the “American rustbelt” consequences of Reagan’s policies:Source: Copyright B Jennings, 2010 and reproduced by permission.Tony Blair pretended to be a socialist with a “new Labour” policy but once in office continued and adopted the policies of Thatcher, who had accurately described him as “her greatest achievement.” His political achievements were minimal and his self-admiration almost boundless, the two major tracer marks of a Caesar. While Blair did reduce some child poverty he (along with the late Mo Mowlem) in the “cocktail offensive” had promised the money speculators in the City of London that if elected he would continue to treat them favourably, continuing Thatcher’s major policy of financial preference with industrial decline. (The major ex-industrial areas in the UK become the British rustbelt, around Glasgow, Newcastle, Sheffield, Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester and South Wales, but I can find no relevant map illustrating that reality.) The great contrast between the very high hopes the people of Britain had after the election of a Labour Government led by Blair in 1998 compared with the subsequent minuscule achievements of the Blair Governments caused a major collapse in Labour voters. Blair admitted he was a Thatcherist after he left office, an admittance that would have placed him into the position of the historical obscurity he deserved, if he had stated that reality before he gained office rather than afterwards. He is probably the most disappointing Labour leader of all time.David Cameron destroyed the democratic foundation of the UK for partisan advantage resulting in his downfall and the disastrous Brexit vote which was not a valid democratic result. See George Tait Edwards's answer to Does it matter if British are in favour of the Brexit today?Donald Trump is just another very disappointing Republican President favouring tax cuts for the rich without any more productive American industrial policy. SeePresident Trump wrongly blames the decline of US industry on foreign countries when the main real culprit is his political predecessor President Ronald Reagan.4 ConclusionsThe rise of China and the economic decline of the USA is not simply a matter of population and economic growth (which viewpoint can be seen as broadly “right” but it’s too limited an explanation) but it is also more solidly based uponA much better and more realistic Chinese economic understanding and practice than that available in the USAA more competent and realistic Chinese Government serving the people rather than the US Government focus on serving the richThe practice by the Chinese Government of the “Mandate of Heaven” while the USA is trapped in a system of rule “of, by and for the rich”The Chinese adoption of the MadeInChina2025 best available transformative economic technology while the USA lacks any such industrial policyThe Chinese Government as a institution practising “lifelong learning” and high investment in the best available technology, while the USA neither learns from others nor invests for itself, but instead POTUS Trump blames the rest of the world for its home-grown economic decline.6 Over-arching Conclusion This did not need to happen. If the USA had continued with FDR’s economic miracle 1938–44 based upon FDR’s foundation ideals of “rule for the people and invest in US manufacturing industry” then the USA might have grown by about 7% a year from 1945 and the USA might have had a 2015 economy about 2 to the seven times larger (because 7% produces a doubling of real economic size every decade) of about $256tr. in $2005 PPP prices. This compares with a world GDP today of about $134tr. If FDR policies had prevailed, something like that might have happened. Of course that growth rate might have lessened after the first forty to fifty years of high growth due to the limitation of input resources and an America04 upgraded US system might have then been required. The USA could have kept its position as a world-leading economy if it had taken the trouble to study and practice how best to do that.But it did not. And that opportunity is now lost forever.Perhaps the world has had a lucky escape. The American culture after 1980 turned pathological and into the win-lose-legal-system money-dominated education-for-the-rich health-services-for-the-rich tax-cuts-for-the-rich Austerity-for-the-workers gun-toting rustbelt system we see in America today. The Chinese culture is focused on the domestic delivery of higher living standards within a comprehensive welfare state and is an internationally constructive and more bilateral approach as reflected in all the project funding of B&RI/OBOR/&Other investments.In my considered opinion, the Chinese way is much better.