Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

8 of China's Top 9 Govt. Officials Are Engineers

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the making-trains-run-on-time dept.

China 403

kkleiner writes "Did you know that the president of China is a scientist? President Hu Jintao was trained as a hydraulic engineer. Likewise his Premier, Wen Jiabao, is a geomechanical engineer. In fact, 8 out of China's top 9 government officials are scientists or engineers."

cancel ×

403 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

political SCIENCE (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174332)

and all of ours are scientists.

Re:political SCIENCE (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174426)

So what? Even most of the ministers of Iran including their president have a PhD (some of them from universities like MIT). But their government has been the most terrible one since last 30 years.

Re:political SCIENCE (2)

metlin (258108) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174500)

Eh. India's current Prime Minister [wikipedia.org] is an economist, and used to teach at Oxford. And ironically enough, his son is an attorney for the ACLU (oops). However, the former President used to be a rocket scientist [wikipedia.org] .

Re:political SCIENCE (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174760)

Eh. India's current Prime Minister [wikipedia.org] is an economist, and used to teach at Oxford. And ironically enough, his son is an attorney for the ACLU (oops). However, the former President used to be a rocket scientist [wikipedia.org] .

He doesn't have a son. None than less Indian gov is still trash.

Re:political SCIENCE (3, Insightful)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174646)

Political scientists study politics, they don't BECOME politicians. It's the same as in biology: biologists don't become rats, they study them. Lawyers are far more likely than political science majors to become politicians.

Yeah, but (0)

Legal.Troll (2002574) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174350)

I bet you can buy those degrees in China, whereas in the U.S. you can only buy a liberal arts degree or a variety of lesser graduate degrees.

Like, oh, I don't know... I'll have to think of an example...

Slavery (2)

hinesbrad (1923872) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174368)

9 our of 9 Chinese top officials promote blatant economic slavery in an attempt to increase their power. These people aren't stupid, but they are very dangerous and exploitative of the population.

Re:Slavery (0)

tmosley (996283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174404)

Yeah, those guys are slaves, with their no regulations and income tax rate half of ours.

Those evil exploitative bastards!

Re:Slavery (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174542)

Yes, the "no regulation" that leads to sweatshops and companies like Foxconn having their employees commit suicide due to shitty working conditions.

Re:Slavery (4, Funny)

dbIII (701233) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174726)

That's right - living the Libertarian dream!

Re:Slavery (2)

Man On Pink Corner (1089867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174810)

Of course, Foxconn's employee suicide rate is less than [businesspundit.com] that of the rest of the Chinese population taken as a whole, but don't let that derail your derp.

Re:Slavery (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174870)

Of course, the article you quote is written by a liberal arts major like yourself, and, like you, lacks basic understanding of statistics.

You can't really compare the average Chinese (who still lives in extreme poverty, is lacking education and prospects for the future) to the person, who is allowed to live in Shenzhen (where Foxconn's main facility is located). Shenzhen's population is very far from a representative sample of the Chinese population. People there are much, much better educated (1/5 of China's PhDs work there), paid substantially more than elsewhere and, generally, have much better lives than the norm in China.

But don't let your ignorance stop you from spewing the cliches that you hear on the conservative radio broadcasts while you drive to your cleaning job.

Re:Slavery (2)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174808)

Yes, the "no regulation" that leads to sweatshops and companies like Foxconn having their employees commit suicide due to shitty working conditions.

They've promised in writing not to do that anymore, and we've put up nets. Now get back to work before I beat you.

Re:Slavery (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174672)

tmosley: Your comment is perhaps the most ignorant one I've read this entire month.

Re:Slavery (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174700)

Yeah, those guys are slaves, with their no regulations and income tax rate half of ours.

Indeed. The regulations they often lack are for the workers' protection. And you have to have your head buried pretty deep in conservative propaganda to equate income taxes with slavery on any level. Actual slaves don't earn -any- income.

Re:Slavery (2)

agm (467017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174772)

No regulation? Ever heard of the "great firewall of China"? Falun Gong? Tienanmen Square? No regulation indeed.

Re:Slavery (3, Interesting)

Balthisar (649688) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174840)

Actually I'm getting ready to accept a three year assignment in China. My tax rate rate (due to my income) will be 50%. Fortunately for me my company equalizes all of my taxes (a burdensome process in itself, described below), so I won't see the effects, but that's versus a net rate of only 26% (federal only) after my itemized deductions.

Tax equalization (I've been through this before when on assignment in Mexico): I owe 50% to the host country, and (say) 26% to my home country (only over about 90,000 when not in the USA). But because my company pays my foreign taxes, the USA regards that as income to me. So the company pays that back, which both China and the USA recognize as income to me. So that tax that, too. So the company pays that back, too, which is taxed by both countries.

In effect, I come out okay, the Chinese take well, well over 50% of my true, earned income, and the fact that the United States gets anything is just stealing from my company (every other modern country in the world doesn't tax overseas personal income).

Of course we all know the Chinese are communist in name, and in order to continue professing such they're socially obligated to tax us rich (compared to their workers) bastards at exploitative rates.

Re:Slavery (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174522)

Slavery Gets Shit Done!

Re:Slavery (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174588)

That reminds me of the Dead Kennedys song Holiday in Cambodia.

Re:Slavery (1)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174558)

So how would YOU take a billion people out of poverty? The fact is, when there are a billion people waiting in line for a job, wages will be low. Institute minimum wages you say? Say goodbye to companies who will setup their factories elsewhere. Give everyone a social safety net? How, when you have nothing to give? Because of China's economic policies, people are taken out of poverty every day.

Compare this to the current US government: tax cuts for the richest, bailouts for the big banks (TARP and the Feds ~0% interest rates), subsidies for the oil companies. This comes all out of the pocket of its taxpayers, to further enrich the richest.

Re:Slavery (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174732)

So how would YOU take a billion people out of poverty?

Not having a 12 step plan to create a billion jobs doesn't disqualify one from criticizing human rights abuses.

Institute minimum wages you say? Say goodbye to companies who will setup their factories elsewhere.

I don't hear anyone saying "If China would just raise minimum wages, everything would work out PERFECTLY!!!" Hell, I think even morons on cable news would propose a more nuanced plan than that.

The fact is, when there are a billion people waiting in line for a job, wages will be low.

Citation needed. What's the critical mass of population at which you are doomed to have low wages?

Compare this to the current US government: tax cuts for the richest, bailouts for the big banks (TARP and the Feds ~0% interest rates), subsidies for the oil companies. This comes all out of the pocket of its taxpayers, to further enrich the richest.

I think there's a false dichotomy going on here. The US being screwed up does not make the Chinese good.

Re:Slavery (1)

Rik Rohl (1399705) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174662)

Those bastards!
In the west, we leave it to the private sector to do that!

Re:Slavery (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174712)

Right—but at least their lobbyist have to fight each other to the death in order to get the right to do it. Isn't that what democracy is all about? *half-hearted rimshot*

Flamewar anyone? Scientist must be smart, right? (0, Troll)

p43751 (170402) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174370)

And still the Chinese go after the Norwegian Government for having a country where The Nobel Committee give out the Peace Price to a person fighting for human rights. We, Im Norwegian, try to tell them that a committee is free to do what ever they want, but they still send formal complaints, boycott trade agreements and generally behave like the biggest bully in kindergarten.

*troll, me?*

Re:Flamewar anyone? Scientist must be smart, right (0, Troll)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174458)

Yes, the noble prize people must be indeed very noble.

They gave the peace prize to Hussein Obama, didn't they?

Re:Flamewar anyone? Scientist must be smart, right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174548)

well aren't you cute.

let's try this again (0)

cinderellamanson (1850702) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174674)

Well aren't you cute.

Re:Flamewar anyone? Scientist must be smart, right (0)

epyT-R (613989) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174800)

Not that I give a damn for the implication of his name, but the fact they gave him a prize just for being obama tells me everything i need to know about that 'esteemed' committee..

Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (0)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174372)

Given the amount of imitation and bad research there, those are near-worthless credentials outside of China.

Then again, unlike China, education is not reserved for the few who manage to luck out on the tests. It's more or less open to all in comparison.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (1)

tmosley (996283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174420)

Yeah, God forbid the best and brightest get in, rather than EVERYONE.

Wait, that's what it was like in the US during our golden age? WTF!? Didn't they know that we can fix any problem by just throwing tuition money at it to the point that colleges feel the need to build waterparks with lazy rivers an every campus?

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (4, Informative)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174570)

That's a good one. Yes, let's forget all the people in that "golden age" that only made it into colleges due to their parent's wealth.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (0)

cinderellamanson (1850702) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174768)

education has money, because, dun-Dun-DUN - education makes money. I wonder if that's why the term "new money" was derogatory.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (3, Informative)

marcushnk (90744) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174450)

I do hope you all don't think this way.
Don't be fooled by the Faux News view of China.
One day you'll wake up and it'll be too late to do anything about their world markets domination.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174576)

It's spelled Fox. If you are going to (justifiably) rant on them, don't bother stooping to their level. I really get tired of all the people who "punify" a name to make a point.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (1)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174678)

Because America exported all their manufacturing to China.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (5, Insightful)

belthize (990217) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174452)

From the article:

Thirty-four countries were assessed in all by the PISA test, considered to be the most comprehensive of its type. Out of those 34 the U.S. ranked 14th in reading, 17th in science and 25th in math.

China’s 15-year olds also took the test. They ranked 1st, 1st, and 1st.

Is your point that the PISA test is either a useless measure or intentionally slanted to favor China ?

Your signature seems to imply a view that anything that casts the US in an unfavorable light in comparison with the rest of the world, including self introspection as to how we could be better, is suspect.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174536)

Your signature seems to imply a view that anything that casts the US in an unfavorable light in comparison with the rest of the world, including self introspection as to how we could be better, is suspect.

Given how faddish and unthinking this sort of thing tends to be, yes, it should be questioned. Given that China's 15 year olds supposedly beat not just the US (which frankly is an easy target) but everyone else including Japan and the whole of Europe, then I wonder how, not if, they gamed the test.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174648)

Had you read just a little further into the article:

Actually, the test in China was performed by city and the top placings were earned by Shanghai, not China as a whole

So it's specifically using the city in China that got the best results, not the national average.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174668)

This test was administered to only students living in Shanghai, and as such was not representative.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/education/07education.html [nytimes.com]

The fact is that away from the coastal cities China is still very backward.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (4, Insightful)

belthize (990217) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174752)

Part of the problem though is this is viewed as a China vs US issue and creates arguments (see other posts here) about China's political flaws or the test's flaws. The US scored below the average of all countries, whether China was 1st, 4th or dead last is somewhat immaterial.

We can't improve as long as our gut reaction is to take any criticism, either internally or externally generated, as a personal affront.

Re:Worthless degrees by equally worthless schools. (4, Insightful)

bluemonq (812827) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174496)

Then you'd have to include Japan in that. And England. And most other nations that realize that there's nothing wrong with vocational schools, and that some people are better off going to one of them instead of college.

Sounds about right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174376)

China historically put a lot of weight on scholarly pursuits, including having candidates for government positions sit exams to qualify. They culturally revere learning while we typically mock it.

In the US 8 out of 9 top government are lawyers. (5, Insightful)

wulfmans (794904) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174388)

Ever think that the US might have gown down the WRONG road ?

Re:In the US 8 out of 9 top government are lawyers (0)

CupBeEmpty (720791) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174528)

I will take liberal democracy by lawyer any day of the week when the alternative is communist oligarchy by scientist.

Re:In the US 8 out of 9 top government are lawyers (5, Insightful)

bmo (77928) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174664)

>liberal democracy

But that's not what we have.

We have capitalist oligarchy neo-fascism instead.

Liberalism is a dirty word, don'tchaknow. It's been that way since 1980. Doing /anything/ that advances society overall and gets everyone a better standard of living instead of increasing the power of the ruling class is "bad." The oil companies /need/ that 20 billion dollar subsidy on top of their windfall profits. Because without it, the oil companies will stop delivering oil. Or something. Because the ruling class of the corporations knows better, for all of us.

We've even got an entire tv network spewing this garbage 24/7.

Fuck this country, for it is fucked.

The assholes at PNAC that got us into two wars should be swinging from nooses like the traitors they are.

--
BMO

Re:In the US 8 out of 9 top government are lawyers (2, Insightful)

CupBeEmpty (720791) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174746)

Uhhh ok fair enough. There is always emigration to China when it gets intolerably oppressive in the US.

Re:In the US 8 out of 9 top government are lawyers (4, Insightful)

epyT-R (613989) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174784)

Doing /anything/ that advances society overall

bias.. the argument being that not everything progressives push for is any good for anyone but their social and economic (yes economic) lobbies. Same as the right. There are some differences on those lobby lists, but as you go up in donations, you start to see the same corporate interests funding both sides...funny eh? I wonder why that is?

The oil companies /need/ that 20 billion dollar subsidy on top of their windfall profits. Because without it, the oil companies will stop delivering oil. Or something. Because the ruling class of the corporations knows better, for all of us.

as opposed to an all-'knowing' government knows better? a government that routinely flouts the rules it expects everyone else to follow (unless they have lots of cash to buy them off).. sound familiar? it doesn't matter which party you support, you're supporting the same thing. the differences are becoming less and less relevant as time goes on..at least as far as solving today's issues goes..

Anyway, since neither party is doing me any favors, I'd like my freedoms back please. I don't need a bogeyman to keep me in line, nor do i want billions spent to fight it.

Re:In the US 8 out of 9 top government are lawyers (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174856)

Wow, do you panic much? After that rant, the first thing you blame is......oil companies? I mean, I don't like subsidies for oil anymore than anyone else, but come on, $20billion isn't enough to cause the US real problems. In fact, $400 billion a year (for the wars) isn't enough to make a huge dent in a $14 trillion economy. If the country is truly fucked, it's because of something more fundamental.

But you're not going to find it if you are panicked or outraged. Panic and outrage is how people manipulate you, and right now, you sound like perfect manipulation material. Calm down and think rationally.

I'd still rather be here than in China. I've been to both.

Re:In the US 8 out of 9 top government are lawyers (1)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174702)

Democracy is an illusion, when the two only parties have the same policies.

Re:In the US 8 out of 9 top government are lawyers (5, Interesting)

timeOday (582209) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174884)

I will take liberal democracy by lawyer any day of the week when the alternative is communist oligarchy by scientist.

It's not immediately clear why those things should have to go together. Maybe because analytical, honest people tell us things we don't want to hear? Carter was drummed out of office for telling us energy was finite, and that we needed to buckle down and tighten our belts a bit for a while. He got railroaded by an actor who told everybody whatever they wanted to hear and put us firmly on the path of financial irresponsibility.

Re:In the US 8 out of 9 top government are lawyers (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174554)

And 10 out of 9 grad-ge-ated the sixth grade

Re:In the US 8 out of 9 top government are lawyers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174630)

I like it when gowns are down.

So? (1)

atari2600a (1892574) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174396)

This is more or less how most of the world is; the US is one of the few places where being a scientist isn't synonymous with being respected.

and from this i conclude (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174406)

That all engineers must be corrupt....

Interesting. (4, Insightful)

mirix (1649853) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174422)

Surely China is lacking in a lot of areas, but I do find this interesting.

I grow really weary of western leaders being almost completely lawyers, polsci majors, bankers, economists, and the like.

It would be nice to have some ministers that actually come from the field they are in charge of more often than now, at least. Lawyers and bankers make laws for bankers and lawyers, go figure.

Re:Interesting. (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174578)

Well my congressman is a physicist [house.gov] , neener neener.

I'll take that over somebody who believes that some big invisible guy in the sky is controlling everything.

Re:Interesting. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174722)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Chu

Re:Interesting. (2, Insightful)

CupBeEmpty (720791) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174724)

I said it a few comments down... but I will take lawyers, polisci majors, bankers, and economists who support liberal democracy in a heartbeat over scientific leaders who endorse prison camps, massive censorship, brutal suppression of political dissent, for some reason want to crush the most non-threatening [wikipedia.org] people on the face of the planet [wikipedia.org] , and who (at the very minimum tolerate) endorse forced sterilization [time.com] !

the lawyers are coming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174444)

a new generation will be taking over next year, they are mostly lawyers,

And most western politicians (1, Interesting)

mywhitewolf (1923488) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174462)

are active religious members.

Chinas economy is growing without having to steal oil
Americas economy is falling even after stealing oil.

i see a pattern.

Re:And most western politicians (2)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174748)

Chinas economy is growing without having to steal oil Americas economy is falling even after stealing oil.

To be fair, we didn't steal it nearly as cost-effectively as we could have, and the economic failings weren't directly related to religion, a lack of scientists in government, OR the stealing of oil.

Re:And most western politicians (1)

epyT-R (613989) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174822)

america is not alone in that pasttime..

That explains everything (4, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174466)

Hey fellow geeks, tell me what you think about population control.. are you fundamentally opposed to involuntary sterilization or do you think it might sometimes be the right solution?

Some of the scariest social policies that I've ever heard have come out of the mouths of engineers. We're inherently heartless bastards who consider ourselves intellectually superior and so should have the right to sweep aside individual rights for what we consider to be the greater good.

For many of us, it has taken years of deprogramming to free ourselves from the "our kind know better" mindset.
 

Re:That explains everything (2)

mehrotra.akash (1539473) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174564)

so, engineers are like Borg?

Yes, population control makes sense (1, Insightful)

ShooterNeo (555040) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174710)

Has it ever once occurred to you that there is a hard, cold reality outside of whatever "politically correct" bullshit you like to think about. Sure, millions of Americans think that population control is wrong. Mostly for religious reasons.

But even if every human being on the planet were opposed to it, there is a REALITY we live in. And in that reality, there is finite living space, farmland, and resources available for a given level of technology. (granted, technology gradually lifts the limits but populations grow EXPONENTIALLY if unconstrained)

What other solution is available to China? By stopping their population from growing too fast, they don't exceed their living space which WOULD eventually result in deaths from starvation and wars as the starving populations fight it out for the remaining food.

Go look at Africa to see what happens when there's no control.

Re:That explains everything (1)

epyT-R (613989) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174834)

I'm ok with population control. if we don't do something, we WILL have to implement involuntary sterilization in order to survive. I'd start with tax incentives... first two kids get an education on the state..after that, you pay.. how about reforming the welfare system so that it doesn't reward people with no money from getting married and pumping out the kids. just for starters..

Minor quibble... (4, Informative)

SnapShot (171582) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174470)

> Did you know that the president of China is a scientist? President Hu Jintao was trained as a hydraulic engineer.

So, he's not a scientist, he's an engineer. That's not a slam against engineers (or scientists) but I believe that the two outlooks are very different.

Re:Minor quibble... (2)

CupBeEmpty (720791) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174628)

>Did you know that China doesn't have a "President" in any meaningful sense [wikipedia.org] of the word? President Hu Jintao is an "organ of the state" who is a figurehead for the National People's Congress, a largely powerless body selected by the Chinese Communist Party [wikipedia.org] .

So, he's a figurehead not a president. That's not a slam against presidents (or figureheads of repressive oligarchies) but I believe that the two outlooks are very different.

Re:Minor quibble... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174852)

You mean like how John Boehner is a figurehead for the United States Congress, a largely powerless body selected by the Chamber of Commerce?

Re:Minor quibble... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174750)

On top of that, a quick check of his history: he's been purely in politics since at least 1982. His degree is from 1965. He did actually work as an engineer for a while, but it was a long time ago, and may not be all that relevant to how he leads today and what the current state of education and engineering is in China.

Re:Minor quibble... (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174846)

Completely agree. Also annoyed with how the headline disagrees with the summary about "engineers" vs. "scientists or engineers". It's like watching the facts getting scraped out of the content and thrown aside. Goddamn, journalism is just the worst thing ever. It makes me want to go watch old Edward R. Murrow broadcasts to remind myself that there was a point in time where communication was valued, and journalistic integrity wasn't just something for quaint academics.

Re:Minor quibble... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174854)

I like your point but nothing you said implied a slight on engineers. Please stop guessing what your readers will extrapolate. This is political correctness gone mad.

8 out of 9 ... or not...? (2)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174472)

The slashdot headline says "8 of China's Top 9 Govt. Officials Are Engineers." The slashdot summary says, "8 out of China's top 9 government officials are scientists or engineers," in a link to singularityhub.com. Singularityhub says "In fact, 8 out of China's top 9 government officials are scientists," in a link to forbes.com. Forbes.com doesn't say anything about 8 out of 9 anything.

So we have some possibilities: (a) 8/9 are engineers (slashdot headline); (b) 8/9 are scientists (singularityhub); (c) 8/9 are scientists or engineers (slashdot summary); (d) none of the above (original source, forbes.com).

This stuff about comparing the US's science and engineering to China's is just plain dumb, and not only is it dumb, it's getting really, really old. Didn't we have enough of this in the Sputnik era?

Some reality checks: (1) Science is not a zero-sum game. If someone in China publishes a really good scientific paper, it makes the US better off, not worse off. (2) The US is a capitalist country, where labor is a market, and the value of a particular skill is set by supply and demand. If employers are having trouble hiring enough scientists, they'll offer higher pay for scientists. Ditto for engineers. (3) Chinese higher education sucks to high heaven. US higher education is the envy of the world. (How many US college graduates do you know who go to China for grad school?) (4) Science and engineering are two different things.

That's also why they are not great leaders (1)

hackingbear (988354) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174480)

While we here in this forum respect engineers and scientists (because we are one of them,) they don't necessary make great leaders by any mean. So far, these 8 Chinese top officials, like the 8 preceding them, are just following the game plan set up by the early true leaders Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping, neither of whom are engineers but career generals and politicians. You can even claim the current leaders are "better" because they have not committed massive wrongdoings such as Great Leap Forward or Cultural Revolution or June 4 as their predecessor. But the current leadship's impact on Chinese history is much much less comparing to the still current political/economic impacts by Mao or Deng.

Re:That's also why they are not great leaders (3, Informative)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174624)

This was definitely not Mao's game plan. China transitioned from communism to capitalism after Mao's death because Mao's plans weren't working.

Re:That's also why they are not great leaders (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174802)

Ask somebody from China about Mao and little they had to eat back then to get a clue. An indication that they are not following Mao's plan is that China can feed it's people and export food instead of starving. Mao hurt China far more than the Japanese invasion.

Please! We got you beat easily (4, Informative)

ddd0004 (1984672) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174482)

100 out of 100 are laywers in the US and not the attractive altruistic 22 year old laywers that you see on TV.

That's nothing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174512)

...our president is a community activist.

We're so screwed.

Engineers as leaders is great... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174516)

...Until they decide to engineer society.

Re:Engineers as leaders is great... (2)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174660)

Lawyers and bankers as leaders is great! ... until they deregulate the banking industry to allow them to cripple the financial system, then bail them out so that the richest of the rich can still get multi-million dollar bonuses.

Margaret Thatcher majored in chemistry at Oxford (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174524)

And worked as a research chemist for a short while. Then she became a lawyer!

Out of thouse 8... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174532)

..how many should be engineers? If it is anything like soviet union the one that should be engineer is not going to be around for much longer.

Also, nine out of nine (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174538)

Scoff at the concept of democracy or freedom of information.

Re:Also, nine out of nine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174812)

if china runs well, who cares about these western craps. The fact is China runs very well, much better than US.

Not a surprise (1)

atomicbutterfly (1979388) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174560)

The Chinese consider science and technology extremely important for the development of their state. There are many, many universities in China which focus SOLELY on producing Engineers. Not a surprise they'd prefer those sorts in people positions of power than the Western world, who for some reason prefers lawyers.

And this is why China is kicking our a** (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174602)

Who are OUR legislators? A bunch of lawyers who can only find new ways of $crewing the rest of us.

Engineers are MUCH better problem solvers than lawyers.

We are doomed.

When did these leaders study? (1)

readin (838620) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174620)

In the US most of our leaders are trained as lawyers. How many people in China were graduating with law degrees 40 to 50 years ago (anyone remember the cultural revolution?) Rule of law hasn't been practiced in China for a very long time, so being trained as a lawyer hasn't been as useful there and I suspect it has been quite risky. Suppose you had been trained as a lawyer before the communists took over. As a lawyer you would have been involved in government - making you a target when the cultural revolution came along. So if you were a talented young person 40 to 50 years ago I suspect a law degree just wasn't that attractive.

People daily propaganda (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174622)

Firstly these are not scientists, they are politicians with engineering degrees.

Secondly, they are also all second and third generation Communist Party Members, their parents were all big CCP players, what makes you think they had to do any work to get their qualifications? Every one of them was virtually guaranteed to get a degree no matter what their ability.

Third, even if they did their work, have you even been to any Chinese universities? All but the very top two are shockingly terrible, and I teach at a Chinese university, the standard here is.....shocking, cheating is so rife that it makes nearly all tests worthless it doesnt even compare to the crappest community college back home.

Fourth, have any of these people actually worked as engineers or have they been politicians all their life?

Fifth, what makes you think an engineer would be better at running a country than anyone else?

This smells like something put out by the people daily.

Useless statistic (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174626)

I want to know how many Chinese prefer Folgers Coffee Crystals to their regular coffee. I mean, if I'm going to open a factory there, I need some numbers I can use.

8 of China's Top 9 Govt. Officials Are Engineers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174642)

So? Now days, anyone doing computer-related work in the US is an "engineer". Hell, at the company that I work at, the sales people are "engineers".

I had one of our newly-hired "Sales Engineers" call me yesterday to ask me how to change his Windows password. And, he's supposedly a "Windows expert".

Your point? (1)

poity (465672) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174666)

How many constitutional law professors, human rights lawyers, or social scientists do they have in top government places?
Engineers serve valuable roles and are certainly well qualified in many respects, but running a country that's both successful and treats its people well requires wisdom that no college degree can ever confer. I take it that kkleiner meant to imply that China has set the standard in some way, and that other nations do themselves a disservice by not having as many engineers in top decision-making positions. If so, then it still begs the question what makes one believe an engineer would do a better job than someone of another profession when shaping public policy?

China is emulating Singapore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174676)

Singapore started of this trend of having highly educated politicians. A lot of Singaporean politicians are from Ivy Leagues and they are mostly science, engineering and math types and get paid in millions of $

I wish we (USA) were more like China. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174706)

With that said, I still love my United States, and hope we can wake up. I just wish my elected leaders loved my country equally, but they are out buying property in Dubai. 8-(.

-Obligatory Link


Clicking here could get you arrested if you are in China [falundafa.org]

So is AQs. So what is the point? (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174708)

That gov. efficiency starts with intelligent scientists and engineers? Perhaps it is time that we simply hire decent ppl, rather than ppl like reagan and W.

So was Herbert Hoover... (1)

ClaudeVMS (637469) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174718)

BAWAAAAAHHHH!!!

We are doomed (1)

pesho (843750) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174730)

Are you telling me that China is run by people who have been trained to make informed decisions based on hard facts? We stand no chance, unless we luck out and rapture comes on may 21st. [ebiblefellowship.com]

Communist China (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174774)

Because in communist china, the teachers always report accurate results. The officials who role those results up, they always report accurately. No communist official would EVER decide the outcome before ever doing a survey and arrange for the results to be as desired.

For those who have might be a little behind on their politics or history, please look up the USSR.

China will topple from within, again, due to the strain of urban vs rural, educated vs uneducated, wealthy vs abject poverty (starvation level), powerful vs disenfranchised. It is only fitting that the nail in the coffin of China will be the interwoven nature of the US-China economy as the US gets beaten down under a mountain of liberal government social program spending. You could shut down the ENTIRE US federal government, and it still couldn't keep up with entitlement growth under medicare, medicaid, and SSA. The pyramid scheme, like all such schemes, eventually collapses.

Taxation is irrelevant, parties are irrelevant, capitalism is irrelevant. The government of the US made promises to its citizens and the world that simply cannot be kept. The Great Lie of SSA and Federal spending is being laid bare. The tower crumbles.

Future help for the U.S. Congress (1)

Greg_J7 (1590811) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174792)

Soon the U.S. Congress will finally have something to look to help them understand (the much needed) modern IP legislation.

I'm an engineer, not a scientist. (1)

Balthisar (649688) | more than 3 years ago | (#36174850)

I'm an engineer. There's no way in hell that I ever pretend that I'm a scientist. We're practical. We execute science, not discover it (generally speaking).

does china even have lawyers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36174874)

why would a society without fair trials or the ability to challenge laws have lawyers in the first place?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>