A Clearer Choice: Hooray!!

Romney's selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate will, we can hope, move this Presidential campaign beyond trivia, name calling, and defamation.  The American people are hungry for genuine consideration of serious policy choices and are capable of discerning attractive resolutions within the unavoidable complexity.  The time for division, demogogic over-simplification, and class warfare should never have arisen; but it is now high time for it to depart.  

So, for the first time in a long while, we can hope for a clear set of choices.  If the current administration has superior approaches to foreign policy matters, let them bring them to the public floor.  If the Republican challengers have more articulate plans for economic growth and rational tax policy, let's hear them, clearly (if not loudly, thank you!).  If candidates have a set of possible solutions to the problems around the long term viability of Social Security and Medicare (see blog post of March 3, 2010), let's bring them forward for careful consideration.  And, in any event, let's agree that there are problems with these entitlements systems.  The most disingenuous position of the Democrats is that everything here is just fine.  The demographics/economics of these systems (in the US and almost everwhere else in the world...and especially in some parts of the developing world) are definitely not fine.  Either a great inter-generational injustice or a sudden retraction of long-standing promises...or both... is about to be inflicted.  Financial professionals have a duty to our fellow citizens, everywhere, to blow the whistle on this!

My sentiments among these choices favor the challengers.  I understand, of course, that there are many nuances here and I strongly believe that we should not harness the power of government to any set of social policies...Left or Right.  While, on a personal level, I am deeply sympathetic to the "social justice" components of their overall motivations, I see the general thrust of the Left's economic policies being very seriously flawed: some version of redistribution of income and wealth from the more successful to the less so and a large role for government in economic decision-making.  Despite genuine good intentions, this choice repeats the error now on display in most of Europe and seems to ignore the great, failed economic experiment of the 20th century: Soviet Communism, which made everyone under its sway poor.  And, while I wince (or worse) at some of the social policy perspectives of the Right, I concur with their general desire for limited government intrusion and for  incentives to  foster individual economic success and to impose disincentives on failure to exert effort.

The debate, then, should be joined over which is the greater good: reducing disparities in relative wealth or enhancing virtually everyone's absolute wealth, across generations, despite even greater relative disparity.  It's not a case of "either/or", but of emphasis.   It's also a matter of understanding  and accepting tolerable costs for that desired emphasis.  How do we get to what we decide is the greater good?  Let's understand the costs...we're smart enough to do this; let's decide, as a society, what costs, and how much of them, we're willing to bear...we're fair enough to do this; and let's agree on the benefits we desire...we're insightful enough and optimistic enough to accomplish this.  

I vote for everyone's greater absolute wealth... even at the cost of greater disparity in relative wealth.   History is on my side.  Even the "poorest" people today, almost anywhere on the planet, have much better health, longer  life span, greater access to movement and communication, and greater freedom of choice of economic outcomes than the "richest" people of just 100 years ago.  Not many well-informed persons of 2012 would trade places with even the wealthiest person of 1912.  Maybe it would be fun for a day or a week...but not many would make that permanent switch.

So, America has a now clearer choice this November:  do we want to be, in the words of our national anthem,  more of "the land of the free and the home of the brave" or instead move further toward being the land of the indebted and entitled and the home of the timid and dependent?  We get to choose; we have to choose!

ENOUGH!!...about Romney's Tax Returns

If I were Romney, I would publish the tax returns that his political opponents are clamoring for...but not because he has a duty to do so; but only to get this issue behind him.  And I wouldn't do it in the way they request.

I respect his right to privacy about his returns.  We all should. We should  understand that he is already complying with the existing laws relating to disclosure.  If the degree of disclosure is not enough to satisfy legitimate needs for understanding better his financial circumstances, then change the law and make more extensive disclosure mandatory.  But, meanwhile, it would probably be good, as a political expedient, to volunteer to do more than is now actually required.

And, I believe that there are ways to do that that will not compromise his and his family's legimate privacy interests.

But, first, a comment on the apparently malicious, or at least ignorant, charge or innuendo that his acknowledged holding of overseas accounts must mean that he is somehow avoiding the payment of appropriate US taxes.  It is fundamental that all US citizens must pay income taxes on all income, from anywhere in the world.  If Romney were using foreign accounts to avoid paying proper US taxes, he would be, already, in very serious violation of the tax law and would no doubt be disqualified from any political candidacy.  The continued implication of this wrongdoing, and the glee with which the media reports and repeats it, is shameful.  The only excuse would be that the accusers are truly ignorant of this fundamental principle of taxation of worldwide income and ignorant of the many legitimate reasons for persons of even modest wealth to pursue the protections offered by certain overseas jurisdictions.  Many medical professionals, for example, maintain "asset protection" accounts in places like Switzerland or the Caymans as a way of shielding those assets from the scrutiny of opportunists (but not from the scrutiny of the IRS) and from the claims of unjustified creditors. But no US citizen can, legally, use them to avoid income taxation of the income they may generate.  If  knowingly false accusations would be shameful,  the alternative of ignorance is nearly as bad.

So, here's what I would do if I were Romney:  enlist a small group of impeccably highly qualified persons (say, the heads of the personal income tax practice at each of the Big 4 accounting firms) to review the returns and then report, publicly, their findings on two points:

• had there been any illegitmate manipulation of the tax law?
• had the Romneys taken advantage of tax planning any more agressively than they would have condoned for any of their similarly situated clients?

If the answers to both questions is "no", that should put an end to this inquiry, without further violating the Romney's rights to privacy.  If the answer to either question is "yes", then, the very negative political outcomes may be only one of Romney's problems. 

It's Not Too Late

Only a little over two weeks since Aurora, (see post of July 22, 2012) America again faces the pain and frustration of a mass shooting.  What incredibly sad irony, the killing and wounding of Sikhs, and first responder police, within their temple, and during a worship service.  The Sikhs are gentle, tolerant, peace-loving people. It's hard to imagine a religious group less likely to inspire violence against them.  And, here again, the murderer gave little indication of the huge threat he posed to those around him and, I suspect we'll learn, acquired his weapon or weapons fully legally. 

It is well past time...and it's not too late...to seriously address the significant problems of public safety that our current culture and law of gun tolerance presents.  Joe Klein, in the current issue of TIME Magazine, presents very sobering statistics about the prevalence of these mass shootings throughout at least the past 35 years and how prior assault weapons controls showed no apparent relief from the carnage.  However, that implies a logical fallacy.  Because that particular legislation failed to lessen the violence it does not follow that no legislation, no cultural shift can do so.  Klein also, with chagrin and apparent resignation, also cites polling data that shows much reduced support for stricter gun controls over the past 20 years.  I am more optimistic about the future.

The data are what they are, but they are not destiny.  With strong and persistent leadership, from public opinion-makers, from legislators, from whoever resides in the White House, we can effect a change in this mentality toward access to weapons and toward aggressive treatment of mental illness that threatens us all.  The current balance between individual liberties and public welfare and safety is just plain wrong.  We can do better.  We must.  Shame on us all if we don't even try.

Let's Get Serious about Gun Control!

This weekend's events in Aurora, Colorado are tragic, senseless, and, I think, should make us all very angry on two fronts. 

Where are our cultural leaders daring to speak out about the glorification of violence that, in deeply sad irony, was on the screen as backdrop to the killing and wounding.  Dark Knight is only one, the latest, of a long line of films, videos, and  "games" that trivialize the pain and destruction that guns inflict, in some subtle way making us all feel that gun-play is normal and even fun. While we may not be able or want to "ban" such violence, we don't have to culturally aggrandize it...the commentary in the entertainment news about how much Dark Knight's  first weekend box-office take was going to be now leaves me feeling sick.  I understand and support the notion of freedom of expression involved here, but we don't have to permit the manufacturers to promote violence as entertainment. Just like it's now illegal for tobacco to advertise in most media, we could make the advertisement of gratuitously violent fiction subject to considerably more stringent limitation.  But even more important, our cultural leaders (high among them being our 24/7 media) can help to make that violence very "uncool"...just like most young children these days find smoking a nasty, anti-social act.  It takes time, and leadership, but it's not impossible to gradually change mentality on this.


And where are our political leaders, at all levels of government, calling for us to do something more...maybe much more...about the accessability of these deadly weapons. That the Aurora murderer apparently acquired his arsenal of guns and ammunition and explosive devices legally is eloquent in its condemnation of our existing legal restrictions.  These situations are of course the work of insane people...but people who did not display their deadly insanity in advance to put the world on notice.  the University of Texas Tower sniper, Columbine, Viginia Tech, and now Aurora quickly come to mind and in each of these, and far too many others, the insane person was able to wreak so much death and destruction because of guns.  If we can't prevent the work of madmen,  at least we can make it much more difficult for them to do so much harm.

Today, President Obama visited the wounded and consoled many of the families of those who lost their lives.  As always, he spoke with passion and moved us with his calls for recovery from this sadness and his confidence in the goodness of the American people.  But I was greatly disappointed that he didn't take this ocassion to move beyond the role of Consoler in Chief.  I hoped for, and even half-expected, him to move from that tone to close on a tone of righteous anger, saying something to this effect:

"It is now time...it is now way past time...to get serious about truly effective gun control in this country.  That the shooter in this tragedy acquired his weapons "legally" tells us there is something terribly wrong with what is "legal" in our land.  I know of course that there is Constitutional protection for the use and possession of firearms, but I also know that the Second Amendment has important limiting language about  "a well-regulated militia..."as the basis for that protection, and our Constitution embraces many compromises and balancing acts.  The current situation regarding guns is clearly out of balance. 

I am aware of all the arguments against more effective gun control; some of them have some merit.  But overall, I believe the American people are no longer convinced.  I believe the American people are ready to strike a new balance.  I believe the American people should hold all their leaders accountable to make significant improvements in public safety from gun violence.   The right to expect that public safety is at least as important as the many other rights our governments go to great lengths to protect.  We've fallen far too short here.  We must make this better!

I pledge the balance of my term as President...and my next term if the people give it to me...to do everything I can to lead Congress to enact legislation and to insist that every department of my Administration does everything in its power to reduce this blight on our country.  For example, I will redeploy some of Homeland Security's TSA army to help prevent this horrible domestic terrorism which has done so much more harm to our country than any foreign terrorists have been able to accomplish.  If it takes a Constitutional amendment... and it might...I pledge to you that I will do everything I can to bring that about."


Alas, he didn't say that or anything like it.  That leaves it to Governor Romney to depart from the agenda of one slice...maybe a small one... of what people identify as his "base".  The American people are, I'm convinced, ready for some brave leadership on this issue.  Like Johnson on the Civil Rights legislation, like Nixon in his opening to China, like Clinton on welfare reform, it may take the perceived tribune of the status quo to achieve a real breakthrough. Please Mr. Romney, be your own man; do the right thing...even if it does cost you the prospect of being elected.  You may just be surprised.  There are many people out there, at every point of the political spectrum,  hungry for a man of principle to step forward on this.  Be that man!

Solving the Health Care Mess: an Update

I've recently reviewed what I wrote on this topic more than two years ago (Solving the Health Care Mess,  March 3, 2010), and am even more convinced that I was onto the right combination of solutions.  This past week's Supreme Court ruling on the consitutionality of The Affordable Care Act validates several of my concerns then and now, but still leaves unfulfilled a comprehensive result that only legislatures and executive leadership can give us.

First, as a lawyer and student of and great admirer of our Constitutional system, a few comments on the Supreme Court ruling itself and its immediate political aftermath.

• I was very pleased to see the Court's strong majority (7 - 2) upholding a key element of federalism (the respective sovereignties of the States and the federal government) by voiding penalties imposed on States which do not participate in certain Medicaid aspects of the law.   The core genius of our governmental system is in limiting the risk of too much power lodged in any one branch or level and in reserving to the States those aspects of governmental power that are likely to have the most immediate impact on most people.  Most of the evolution of this power balance has been from the States to the federal government over many, many years, but it's gratifying to see the Court come down strongly on the notion that there are still some limits on the exercise of power on the federal level.
• I was also pleased to see the majority (though only 5 to 4, here) rejecting the notion that the "individual mandate" was a valid exrcise of the Commerce Clause power. While we learned in law school years ago that the federal government's power to pre-empt State regulation of inter-state commerce is almost without limit [Europe should have taken an important lesson here that commerce among sovereign entities needs some central arbiter to avoid protectionism within a single national entity...but that's something for another post at another time], it was encouraging to see the Court draw the line on that power to void an attempt to impose affirmative duties on individuals to engage in a commercial act that they otherwise choose not to do.  If it were legitimate to base the individual mandate on a Commerce Clause notion, that notion could justify the federal government's requiring individuals to do just about anything.  On the federalism theme, nobody doubts that the States have such power to compel action; the issue was whether the federal government had any basis for exercising it.
• So, the mandate was declared constitutional (a different 5 to 4 majority) on a theory that the Administration and slim Congressional majorities denied was at work when the law was passed in 2010.  Words matter; theories and rationales matter.  If the only basis for the mandate's constitutionality lies in the undisputed power of the federal government to tax individuals for reasonable(whether wise or unwise) purposes, then the political establishment must live with that reality.  Calling it a "penalty" or "fine" simply won't work...and is frankly disrespectful of the Court's decision and of the people's strong desire for less spin, more transparency in government.  The American people...with most of them in the center... are smart enough to grasp these distinctions and I don't think they'll let the Democrats get away with wanting to have it both ways. 
• And, the Republicans, so far, are missing the most important part of the message they can respond with.  The American people...at the center...are also not going to be comfortable with a strident "Repeal, Repeal, Repeal!  solution. Their message should  quickly emphasize it's next thought..."and replace with something much better!" 

What would that "much better" be?

First, the tax should used to directly solve the problems of "adverse selection" (being a free-rider until you actually need the medical coverage).  Insurance works, in every realm, where people buy it because they want to protect themselves from an unaffordable financial consequence, or are forced to do so, well in advance of ever needing the coverage.  The most sucessful homeowners insurance situation is never actually having your house burn down, or losing your roof to a storm, or suffering other major calamities.  So, if we're going to tax free-riders, we need to make the tax big enough to actually motivate the desired action.  Not many healthy young people are going to volunteer to buy a $5000 or more insurance policy merely to avoid a $1000 tax.  Assuming that a small tax, all by itself, will prompt appropriate, but more expensive, societal behavior is naive.  Most people will make the rational economic decision to pay the small tax until they actually need the more expensive insurance. So, the "free-rider" situation doesn't go away until the tax is as stiff or stiffer than the cost of the insurance.  And, then, with that tax revenue, the government should actually buy the insurance coverage (thru 3rd party commercial insurers) that the taxed individual never got around to doing him or herself.  That would put everyone in the same third-party intermediated, individual choice of care situation. 

Pre-existing conditions coverage, covered medical exams, etc. can all be part of the mandated coverage.  "Buy it yourself or we'll buy it for you with money we'll take out of your pocket!  And if you're too poor, so we can't tax you, we'll give you a voucher you can only use to buy it.  But, however you get it,  once you've got it, you're on your own to use it wisely".  With everybody in that insurance pool, healthy and sick, young and old, actual premiums would likely come down.  And, they could come down much more if the realm of covered costs made more sense.

So, even more important that getting to universal coverage is to change what is covered.  This will take lots of leadership and a patient effort at re-educating the public, but the most significant change would be shifting the insurance mentality from "first dollar" to "last dollar" coverage.  Some grandfathering of existing beneficiaries (eg, for those already in the Medicare system) and some gradualism, maybe over decades, will no doubt be necessary, but the ultimate solution is to put individuals in charge of their first dollar costs so that competition among providers and careful prioritization by consumers applies to medical care as it does to everything else.  To my thinking, the " much better" would be a tax rationalized individual mandate used to purchase catastrophic, not basic, insurance coverage, with the tax cost on a par with the premium cost of such coverage.   Putting people squarely in control of... and insisting that they take financial responsibility for...their everyday and elective medical care needs, but as a society making sure that catastrophic, non-elective costs don't bankrupt individuals through universal insurance against that risk, will be the real revolutionary solution to the mess we have now.

Three Days in May in Mongolia

Direct from the Asia Foundation meeting, about 30 of us continued on to Ulaan Baator ("UB"), Mongolia's modern capital and home to nearly half of its people.

As we approached the grey/brown landscape of central Mongolia by air, the plane took a very wide circle around the city below and eventually landed.  Only a little later did we learn that at this time of year, the winds crossing the single runway are so strong that many landings are aborted for windshear.  One more pass and we would have headed back to Beijing.  "Chinggis Kahn International Airport" in bold letters above the terminal were among the last words in Roman letters we were to see.  A big surprise is that almost everthing is rendered in the Cyrilic alphabet, even signage on major, new buildings. 

Russia made Mongolia its first satellite...in 1921...not long after the revolution and imposed its alphabet on the pronunciation of the native Mongolian tongue.  There were other displacements, of course, including the near destruction of Buddhist teachings and all but one or two monasteries.  Among the first, imposing but ugly, things you notice on the very bad road from the airport are several gigantic power plants.  These provide light, and heat, and hot water to the city through a form of physical grid unknown in America, but common in the old Soviet sphere.  Giant pipes bring warm air and hot water to individual buildings throughout the city like a system of capillaries.  One wonders how much of this is an attempt at efficiency in the very cold winter climes of the old Soviet world and how much it served as a method of control and coercion.  We're of course accustomed to every edifice supplying its own heat and hot water thru small, very local devices...how quaint...how inefficient...but how independent....and how very Mongolian. 

The life of the traditional, nomadic herder today is little changed from the days of the great Kahn, except that the ger (we call them "yurts") now has satellite TV and a small solar panel to power the electronics.  When the herders pick up their complete belongings and move to (literally) greener grass several times a year, their 21st century equipment moves with them. In any event, spring was just beginning to arrive in Mongolia (most, but not all, of the trees were first showing green buds) and the gargantuan urban heating system was undergoing some seasonal readjustment, resulting in unapologetically unreliable access to hot water the first day we were there.

The Ulaan Baator Hotel claims to be UB's first 5 star hotel.  "First" is an important part of that claim since the place was built in 1961 (Krushchev was still master of the Kremlin then) and the definitions of stardom have no doubt evolved in the intervening half century.  The hotel hasn't changed much so you can easily imagine a group of commissars making themselves at home, toasting with vodka, singing The Internationale, while they plot their next opportunity to get back west of the Urals.  Our suite (living room, dining room, bedroom, two weird closets, and a bath and a half) was, I imagined, the site of some intrigues over those early years.  Penelope was convinced that there were blood stains on the very old and patched carpet.  There are much nicer and newer hotels in the city, but none with its cachet...or location right at the center of power in Mongolia. 

The "5 Star" Ulaan Baator Hotel

Aside from the very new Government House anchoring the main square, the other buildings at this city center (Opera, banks, offices) all seem to date from the '20's and look much like the architecture and bear the colors of early Soviet style.  You could imagine yourself in St. Petersburg for a short moment...especially, again, since the script everywhere is Cyrilic.  The Government House is home to both Parliament and the President's office and, out front, a huge statue of Chinggis Kahn makes it clear where the self-recognized history of the Mongolian people begins.  His visage appears on all the money (tugrics) as well.  The Asia Foundation party spent a lot of time in this part of town, enjoying a reception by the US Ambassador, meetings with members of Parliament, Supreme Court Justices, and a breakfast meeting with President Elbegdorj Takhia.  Elbegdorj was a key revolutionary at the fall of the old Soviet satellite leadership in 1990 and subsequently studied at Harvard before going into domestic Mongolian politics and rising to be head of state of the parliamentary democracy that supplanted the old Communist regime.

Government House, Sukhbaator Square

For its vast size, Mongolia has surprisingly few people...only about 2.7million in the whole country.  That wouldn't comprise even a middling city in China now.  That stupendous land area...and few people... are landlocked between two even vaster neighbors.  Cultivating good relations with the US, as its "3rd Neighbor", gives Mongolia an even stronger hand in playing Russia and China off against eachother as the only foreign policy available.  Most countries can take for granted their access to open seas for trade and defense.  Imagine the complications of having to rely on everything coming in or going out over some other country's land or airspace.  Happily for Mongolia, China's huge supply of labor and immense appetite for natural resources could rapidly enrich the relatively few native Mongolians...or more likely, in the near term, the Australian and Canadian mining companies now at work extracting coal and copper and rare earths.  For now, however, the people are still "poor", but not impoverished in spirit.  Each person receives a small, monthly stipend from the government and is entitled to a small plot of free land, enough for a sizable family to assemble a workable homesite and garden.  But, somehow, it seems very inapt to try to endow a many centuries old nomadic people by rooting them to a particular piece of land.

On our way to the Tuul River Lodge, we were able to visit a small herder family, a strong, handsome young man and a beautiful young woman with their rambunctious 6 yr old son.  The boy was just "home" from a long stint at boarding school and a daughter, a little older, was to return to the ger soon.  All Mongolian children must attend school to age 16, most in a boarding situation in town, and spend their summers with their parents and, if herders, their flocks.  That nomadic life must be coming to an end, soon, though.  Our host was one of 11 children, but the only one still living the life of a nomad.  It's hard to imagine that the boy, now loving his freedom and the very sweet affections of his parents and riding and herding with his father, will ever actually take up that life.  The jobs in the mines or the offices in town will offer too much more comfort and ease.  But not necessarily more wealth.  With hundreds of livestock (horses, goats, sheep, and cows), the father could be considered rich by Mongolian standards...but it is such a hard life...and the long, cold winter is the worst enemy.  We learned how to tell direction from the positions of gers.  The one door always faces south, because the brutal winds tend to come from the north.  Not infrequently, the cold is so deep for so long, the dzud, that virtually all the animals die.

Double E-Ticket in Mongolia-land!

Getting to the Lodge was the greatest adventure of the trip.  I had envisioned a permanent set of buildings..."lodge"...rather it was a temporary, a la nomade, set of gers on the side of a gentle slope looking down on a river meandering among woods and greening fields.  Very pretty.  It was "civilization" after the trip over the mountain to get there.  Normally, getting to the lodge is a matter of taking off-road vehicles around and thru the river after leaving the paved road from UB.  For us, recent rains and the melt of recent snow ruled out that passage.  Instead, in old Russian military vehicles, looking a lot like something out of Mad Max, we went over the mountain, literally, no switch-backs, just straight up one side and straight down the other. We should have had headgear, inside the vehicle!  We dubbed it the "super, double-E ticket in Mongolia-land!"  Getting back, later that night as the sun was setting in a beautiful purple aura, was even more harrowing.  We were in the last vehicle to leave, a long while after others so there was no one ahead...or behind.  As we began the steepest part of the climb, now in total darkness, the engine started to smoke and gave off the smell of burning cables.  The two Mongolian drivers seemed reasonably unperturbed as the six Western passengers shared half-hearted words of encouragement and not very funny jokes about having to spend the night in old Russian hardware before a search party would venture out for us.  Happily, we had thought to bring a spare bottle of wine as a roadie.  After some consultation and Mongolian cursing and, Penelope is convinced, the application of some chewing gum, the old crate lurched back into life.



Outside a ger at Tuul River Lodge



A final note on the contrast between the modern urban environment of UB and the ancient nomadic past:  on one of our evenings in town, there was a reception at the Museum of Contemporary Art, for the who's who of the capital to honor the Asia Foundation visit.  Many of the women and quite a few of the men were wearing traditionally inspired formal attire and drank good wine and grazed on a broad array of foods and listened to a string quartet playing Mozart, followed by a contemporary Mongolian rock/traditional band.  And the art and photography forming the backdrop was worth the visit in its own right.  Hard to imagine a place further away from the sophisticated cities of the "first world" than Ulaan Baator, but that night, one would have found it hard to tell any real difference. 

Beijing: May, 2012

Travelled to Beijing with the Asia Foundation and to meet again with my Chinese friends in FPSB-China.

First, I must acknowledge the great hospitality of my FPSB colleagues in China.  As before, a party of officials greeted Penelope and me at the still awe-inspiring new Beijing Capital Airport, handled our baggage and drove us to the hotel.  For the next several days, we were treated to car, driver (Mr. Wang), and guides/interpreters to make sure we had a great time and didn't lose precious time in navigating Beijing's sometimes horrifying traffic.  Many thanks, again!



May 19, 2012, Beijing.  My translator, at left

 I had the opportunity once more to address a group of about 100 financial planning practitioners and officers of banks which furnish most of the wealth management services in China.  I also again had the pleasure of interviews with financial planning trade press.  As my hosts confided to me over dinner, the Chinese may sometimes pretend that they care little about what others think of them, but in fact they care greatly, and especially, about what the Americans think of them.  This was meant to be a comment about geo-political relations, generally, but it applies especially in China's ongoing development of the financial planning profession..

Speaking of dinner, Beijing now boasts some of the world's most beautiful restaurants, serving truly outstanding cuisine.  While guests of FPSB and, later with our friends in the Asia Foundation, we ate at four of the most spectacular restaurants we've ever seen:  DaDong, Duck de Chine, Temple (in an ancient-looking building next to an authentic Ming Dynasty temple near the Forbidden City that had been converted into a television factory during the Cultural Revolution), and finally, on our last night there, the best of them all: brand new Cuisine Cuisine.  No expense seems to be spared in the finishes, the art, the spacious private rooms (seating from about 6 to maybe 20, at single round tables; these are customary features of the high-end restaurant scene in China), the number of servers, and the quality of the food.  We observed the same thing in Hong Kong and Shanghai in recent visits.  And the diners are no longer mostly rich, older Westerners, but Chinese...young, and rich.

Jillian Schultz, Paul Slawson, Mary Slawson

The art scene in Beijing is vibrant.  With our friends, Paul and Mary Slawson, with FPSB-China provided guide and driver, we ventured to the Three Shadows Photography Art Centre, run by a young American woman, Jillian Schultz, friend of our Jewish "god-son" and renowned music director, Doug Peck.   In the CaoChangdi community of art galleries, some designed by the famous (now, especially, for being repressed) artist, architect (the "bird's nest" stadium of the 2008 Olympics), and dissident Ai Wei  Wei, we found graphic art, sculpture, photography, and video to rival anything in volume and interest one can find anywhere  It was a weekday and, besides some school children playing in one of the grassy yards, we had it almost entirely to ourselves.  Despite confusing, unmarked streets, Mr. Wang eventually managed to find our target restaurant for lunch, filled with 50's American kitsch, and then insisted on picking up the bill.  A few days later, I decided to fill an unscheduled morning with the short walk from the hotel  (home to the Beijing Bentley and Rolls dealers...next door to the newly opened Maserati dealership) to Tien an Men Square and the Forbidden City.  Almost immediately, a young Chinese man approached me asking where I was from.  They often do this to Westerners as a way of practicing their English.  Quickly I learned that he was an art student and his school was on the way that I was headed.  Eventually, I purchased a four scroll depiction of the four seasons that he had done and a piece by one of his teachers. 

Nearing the entrance to the Forbidden City. 
This lavish landscaping is found everywhere in Beijing.
One of the poorer air quality days

With these inexpensive treasures slung over my shoulder, I continued on to what must be the greatest man-made tourist attraction in the world.  If only the Chinese come to marvel at the works of their imperial past, the numbers would be huge...but they come, from everywhere, in unimaginable hordes, to view what was always intended to be seen as the center of the universe.  Long before the British placed the "prime meridian" at the observatory in Greenwich, the Chinese measured everything under the heavens in relationship to the center line of the majestic imperial compound...directly bi-secting the perfect symmetry of the palace grounds and sequence of buildings.  Even though it was my third visit, I was quickly overwhelmed again by the subtle grandeur...it's intended impact, I'm sure.

Beyond the dining and sightseeing, of course, the meetings of the Asia Foundation assembled an extremely accomplished group of senior foreign service professionals, academics, and a handful of Western and Asian business people to consider social, economic, and political developments in China.  Among the most interesting for me was the rise in private philanthropy in China.  Niall Ferguson, historian/economist/philosopher, whose recent book, Why the West rules...for Now,  I had just read, would align this trend with the more general growth of "Christian" adherence and the rapid development of a "Protestant Ethic' in China.  He sees this as one of the unrecognized keys to China's otherwise notorious economic success.  Caring about the welfare of society beyond the family, being able to trust in one's fellow business relationships, and a having a high propensity to save...to defer gratification...has, he argues, helped to create the most rapid advance in economic growth in all world history.

And with that growth, continuing still today at quite rapid rates, the wealth of currently developed nations...especially the US...will likely decline, on a relative basis.  Before too long, China's economy may even surpass America's in absolute terms...the numbers, multiplied by 1.2billion and counting, have a relentless impact. Still,  it will be quite a long time, perhaps never, before the Chinese, on a per capita basis, will forge ahead of their American counterparts.  If you see yourself as a world-citizen, it may not matter much if they do.  And, for the Chinese, by the time they may get there, it also may not matter much.  I hope it does turn out that we all approach it with that non-chalance.