logo
The US is squandering its two most important privileges

The US is squandering its two most important privileges

Vox6 days ago

is an editorial director at Vox overseeing the climate, tech, and world teams, and is the editor of Vox's Future Perfect section. He worked at Time magazine for 15 years as a foreign correspondent in Asia, a climate writer, and an international editor, and he wrote a book on existential risk.
In 1965, then-French finance minister Valéry Giscard d'Estaing came up with the mot juste for describing the way that the supremacy of the dollar provided the foundation for the financial supremacy of the US. The fact the dollar was so dominant in international transactions gave the US, d'Estaing said, an 'exorbitant privilege.' Because every country needed dollars to settle trade and backstop their own currencies, foreign countries had to buy up US debt, which in turn meant that the US paid less to borrow money and was able to run up trade and budget deficits without suffering the usual pain. The exorbitant privilege of the dollar was that the US would be able to live beyond its means.
Future Perfect
Explore the big, complicated problems the world faces and the most efficient ways to solve them. Sent twice a week. Email (required)
Sign Up
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
It's always been an open question as to how long that privilege would last, but President Donald Trump's harsh tariff policies, paired with a budget bill that right now would add trillions to the budget deficit, might just be enough to finally dislodge the dollar. Annual federal deficits are already running at 6 percent of GDP, while interest rates on 10-year US Treasuries have more than doubled to around 4.5 percent over the past few years, increasing the cost of interest payments on the debt. As of the last quarter of 2024, 58 percent of global reserves were in dollars, down from 71 percent in the first quarter of 1999. The dollar may remain king, if only because there seems to be no real alternative, but thanks to the US's own actions, the exorbitance of its privilege is already eroding — and with it, America's ability to compensate for its fiscal fecklessness.
Related Trump figured out how to hit Harvard where it really hurts
But the dollar isn't the only privilege the US enjoys. Since the postwar era, America's best universities have led the world. Harvard, Princeton, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, CalTech — these elite universities are the foundation of the American scientific supremacy that has in turn fueled decades of economic growth. But also, by virtue of their unparalleled ability to attract the best minds from around the world, these schools have given the US the educational privilege of being the magnet of global academic excellence. In the same way that the dollar's dominance has allowed the US to live beyond its means, the dominance of elite universities has compensated for the fact that the US has, at best, a mediocre K–12 educational system.
And now that privilege is under attack by the Trump administration. Cutting off federal funding for universities like Columbia and Princeton and eviscerating agencies like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation were bad enough — but the administration's recent move to bar international students from Harvard would be a death blow, especially if it spread to other top schools.
The ability to attract the best of the best, especially in the sciences, is what makes Harvard Harvard, which in turn has helped make the United States the United States. Just as losing the privilege of the dollar would force the US to finally pay for years of fiscal mismanagement, losing the privilege of these top universities would force the country to pay for decades of educational failure.
American science runs on foreign talent
As Vox contributor Kevin Carey wrote this week, foreign students are a major source of financial support for US colleges and universities, many of which would struggle to survive should those students disappear. But the financial picture actually understates just how much US science depends on foreign talent and, in turn, depends on top universities like Harvard to bring in top students and professors.
An astounding 70 percent of grad students in the US in electrical engineering and 63 percent in computer science — probably the two disciplines most important to winning the future — are foreign-born. Nineteen percent of the overall STEM workforce in the US is foreign-born; focus just on the PhD-level workforce, and that number rises to 43 percent. Since 1901, just about half of all physics, chemistry, and medicine Nobel Prizes have gone to Americans, and about a third of those winners were foreign-born, a figure that has risen in recent decades. It's really not too much to suggest that if all foreign scientists and science students were deported tomorrow, US science would grind to a halt.
Could American-born students step into that gap? Absolutely not. That's because as elite as America's top universities are, the country's K–12 education system has been anything but.
Every three years, the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is given to a representative sample of 15-year-old students in over 80 countries. It's the best existing test for determining how a country's students compare in mathematics, reading, and science to their international peers.
In the most recent PISA tests, taken in 2022, US students scored below the average for OECD or developed countries in math; on reading and science, they were just slightly above average. And while a lot of attention has been rightly paid to learning loss since the pandemic — one report from fall 2024 estimated that the average US student is less than halfway to a full academic recovery — American students have lagged behind their international peers since long before then. Other wealthy nations, from East Asian countries to some small European ones, regularly outpace American peers in math by the equivalent of one full academic year.
To be clear, this picture isn't totally catastrophic. It's fine — American students perform around the middle compared to their international peers. But just fine won't make you the world's undisputed scientific leader. And fine is a long way from what the US once was.
America was a pioneer in universal education, and it did the same in college education through the postwar GI Bill, which opened up college education to the masses. By 1950, 34 percent of US adults aged 25 or older had completed high school or more, compared to 14 percent in the UK and 11 percent in France. When NASA engineers were putting people on the moon in the 1960s, the US had perhaps the world's most educated workforce to draw from.
Since then, much of the rest of the world has long since caught up with the US on educational attainment, and a number of countries have surpassed it. But thanks in large part to the privilege that is elite universities like Harvard or the University of California, and their ability to recruit the best, no country has caught up to the US in sheer scientific brainpower. Take away our foreign talent, however, and US science would look more like its K–12 performance — merely fine.
Life after Harvard
It seems increasingly apparent that the Trump administration wants to make an example of Harvard, proving its own dominance by breaking a 388-year-old institution with strong ties to American power and influence. On Tuesday, the New York Times reported that the administration planned to cancel all remaining federal contracts with Harvard, while Trump himself mused on redirecting Harvard's $3 billion in grants to trade schools.
Grants and contracts are vital, but they can be restored, just as faith in the US dollar might be restored by a saner trade policy and a tighter budget. But if the Trump administration chooses to make the US fundamentally hostile to foreign students and scientific talent, there may be no coming back. Politico reported this week that the administration is weighing requiring all foreign students applying to study in the US to undergo social media vetting. With universities around the world now competing to make themselves alternatives to the US, what star student from Japan or South Korea or Finland would choose to put their future in the hands of the Trump administration, when they could go anywhere else they wanted?
The US once achieved scientific leadership because it educated its own citizens better and longer than any other country. Those days are long past, but the US managed to keep its pole position, and all that came with it, because it supported and funded what were far and away the best universities in the world. That was our privilege, as much as the dollar was. And now we seem prepared to destroy both.
Should that come to pass, we'll see just how little is left.
A version of this story originally appeared in the Future Perfect newsletter. Sign up here!

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why Blueprint Medicines Corporation (BPMC) Skyrocketed On Monday
Why Blueprint Medicines Corporation (BPMC) Skyrocketed On Monday

Yahoo

time33 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Why Blueprint Medicines Corporation (BPMC) Skyrocketed On Monday

We recently published a list of . In this article, we are going to take a look at where Blueprint Medicines Corporation (NASDAQ:BPMC) stands against other top-performing stocks on Monday. Blueprint Medicines soared by 26.09 percent on Monday to close at $127.79 each following news that it is set to be acquired by French pharmaceutical giant Sanofi for $9.1 billion. Under the agreement, Sanofi will commence a tender offer to acquire shares of Blueprint Medicines Corporation (NASDAQ:BPMC) at a price of $129 apiece for a total equity value of $9.1 billion. A doctor examining a patient's samples in a modern hospital setting. In addition, shareholders will be able to receive one non-tradable contingent value right (CVR), which will entitle them to two potential milestone payments of $2 and $4 per CVR for the achievement, respectively, of future development and regulatory milestones for BLU-808. The upfront offer price represents a 27-percent premium over Blueprint's closing price on May 30, 2025, and a premium of approximately 34 percent over the 30 trading days of its volume-weighted average price (VWAP) as of May 30, 2025. The purchase will also include the latter's rare immunology disease medicine, Ayvakit/Ayvakyt (avapritinib), the only approved medicine for advanced and indolent systemic mastocytosis (ASM & ISM). READ NEXT: 20 Best AI Stocks To Buy Now and 30 Best Stocks to Buy Now According to Billionaires. Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey. Sign in to access your portfolio

UK Eyes Greater Nuclear Role in Europe Amid Doubts About US
UK Eyes Greater Nuclear Role in Europe Amid Doubts About US

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

UK Eyes Greater Nuclear Role in Europe Amid Doubts About US

(Bloomberg) -- The UK envisages taking an enhanced role in NATO's nuclear deterrence amid doubts surrounding the US commitment to the alliance, as Prime Minister Keir Starmer pledges to make Britain 'war-ready' to counter Russian aggression in Europe. Where the Wild Children's Museums Are Billionaire Steve Cohen Wants NY to Expand Taxpayer-Backed Ferry The Economic Benefits of Paying Workers to Move Now With Colorful Blocks, Tirana's Pyramid Represents a Changing Albania At London's New Design Museum, Visitors Get Hands-On Access The government is exploring new capabilities such as fighter jets able to fire nuclear weapons as part of plans to boost Britain's nuclear contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, according to a person familiar with the matter who requested anonymity discussing sensitive matters of national security. That move would come in addition to the renewal of the UK's existing Trident deterrent, a £15 billion ($20 billion) investment in nuclear warheads and the construction of as many as 12 new submarines as part of the AUKUS partnership with Australia and the US. It's reflective of a wider sense of urgency among European leaders about the need to step up defense spending due to doubts about the US commitment to European defense under President Donald Trump's leadership. Britain's investment in its nuclear deterrent and the wider European focus on the issue comes 'in the context of fears of diminished US commitment to provide nuclear deterrence to its allies,' William Alberque, senior fellow at the Pacific Forum in Berlin, said in a phone interview. 'It's to offset the risks of US detachment.' Commencing discussions with the US on shouldering more of the burden of NATO's nuclear deterrent is one of the key recommendations in the government's Strategic Defence Review published Monday. The document set out plans for an overhaul of Britain's military to put it on a war-footing. European nations are having to adjust to US President Donald Trump urging them to contribute more to their own security, a stance that has also prompted the continent to re-think how it approaches nuclear weapons. Trump has demanded NATO members spend 5% of economic output on defense — more even than the US spends now, and up from the alliance's current 2% guideline. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, meanwhile, is proposing members spend at least 3.5% on core defense activities. In March, French President Emmanuel Macron said he would open talks with European allies on extending France's nuclear umbrella over the continent, given concerns that the US would withdraw its protection. Polish prime minister Donald Tusk has said he has had serious talks about Macron's proposal to use Paris's nuclear capabilities to defend Europe. While the UK and France are the only nuclear powers among European members of NATO, Britain is the only country in Europe that currently assigns its capability to the defense of NATO. Speaking ahead of the defense review's publication on Monday, Starmer said he was '100% committed' to Britain's nuclear deterrent and its future capability. 'There has been a sense that the balance between Europe and the US has to be reconsidered and there has to be a greater burden on Europe,' Starmer told BBC Radio on Monday, referring to NATO members. 'They have a point. We collectively need to step up.' The defense review published Monday said Britain is 'well-placed' to take on a greater role providing deterrence in the Euro-Atlantic, and comes as the US confronts the 'unprecedented challenge of facing two near-peer nuclear powers, Russia and China.' The UK's Trident deterrent consists of four ballistic missile submarines, with at least one patrolling the seas undetected at all times. YouTube Is Swallowing TV Whole, and It's Coming for the Sitcom Millions of Americans Are Obsessed With This Japanese Barbecue Sauce Mark Zuckerberg Loves MAGA Now. Will MAGA Ever Love Him Back? Trump Considers Deporting Migrants to Rwanda After the UK Decides Not To Will Small Business Owners Knock Down Trump's Mighty Tariffs? ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Sign in to access your portfolio

Hun Sen urges ICJ intervention in Cambodia-Thailand border row, warns of Gaza-like conflict
Hun Sen urges ICJ intervention in Cambodia-Thailand border row, warns of Gaza-like conflict

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Hun Sen urges ICJ intervention in Cambodia-Thailand border row, warns of Gaza-like conflict

PHNOM PENH, June 3 — Former Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen has called for a resolution of the long-standing border dispute with Thailand through the International Court of Justice (ICJ), warning that continued inaction could lead to a conflict resembling the Gaza Strip. Speaking at a joint session of Cambodia's Senate and National Assembly commissions on Sunday, Hun Sen also declared the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding between the two nations 'no longer applicable' due to the lack of progress over 25 years, according to a report in The Nation. He stressed that Cambodia had made a courteous invitation for Thailand to jointly submit the case to the ICJ, hoping for a diplomatic and peaceful resolution. 'Cambodia will not violate the territory of other nations,' he said, adding that the country is merely seeking to protect borders inherited from the French colonial era and preserved under King Norodom Sihanouk. He revealed that recent clashes along the border had resulted in the death of a Cambodian soldier, further heightening the urgency of resolving the issue. Hun Sen warned that if violence were to escalate, Cambodia would immediately appeal to the United Nations Security Council for intervention. During the same session, the joint commission unanimously backed the government's plan to bring the dispute before the World Court. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Hun Manet reaffirmed the government's determination to proceed with the ICJ case, regardless of whether Thailand agrees to participate. He also called on all Cambodian politicians and the public to support the armed forces, as talks under the Joint Boundary Commission continue.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store