"Innovation and the Global Marketplace"

Posted by DipNote Bloggers
December 14, 2011

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton joined PBS NewsHour's Jim Lehrer for “Innovation and the Global Marketplace: A Discussion on American Innovation, Trade, and the Next 10 Million Jobs,” on December 14 at the Newseum in Washington, D.C. This event was streamed live on www.state.gov; you can find a text transcript of the event here.

The discussion was part of a panel event featuring conversations between PBS NewsHour correspondents and leaders from across the private and public sectors, exploring the critical connections between American jobs, economic growth and U.S. relationships around the world. These conversations explored issues such as trade agreements, public diplomacy, global innovation patterns and policies, the impact of technology on international relationships and geopolitics, and the rapidly changing global marketplace. The event was hosted by PBS NewsHour, The Aspen Institute and Intel.



December 14, 2011

Angela in Romania writes:

I love the world because I have a HD vision of it.

Davor Z.
December 19, 2011

Davor Bilobrk Z. in Croatia writes:

Regarding the issue of "Global Marketplace" certain better organizational mechanisms of global trade should be applied, in the cooperation of public and private sector and under U.S. control, ofc.

Ashim C.
December 20, 2011

Ashim C. in India writes:

This one interview gives so much insight into US policies. Many things Mrs. Clinton has said in the context of Russia, China can be applied to other countries in world and more importantly interpreted in manners, which would be counter productive to US economic and statecraft goals. US, I think, should provide leadership to the world by example in action in everything. Happily there are examples in place in say rise of Japan, South Korea and other countries in south east asia and beyond post second world war. Off course there also are the examples of a whole basket of European countries, which are all more or less good political democracies and also followed economic growth models in alignment with US economy, a fact which is clear from trade baskets of all western european countries in particular. And now these countries have all kinds of problems and no individual country in the world is in a position to position to bail them out. Clearly new adjustments are required in architecture of world economic order and inter country economic and trade relationships. Surely, this matter is being seriously addressed in various multi lateral and biletaral fora. But general impression one gets is that in most of these fora discussion is about which set of countries are more responsible than others in past, present and anticipated future predicaments given their economic developments in past, present and future. Such discussions are followed by a great deal of pass the buck game and little movement forward. It would be better if complimentarity in inter country economic relationship are redefined based on prevailing economic situation of countries and agreed and a chain of financial, trade & commerce and technology transfer patterns are put in place and respected. In a situation where development models based on cooperation and collaboration between for example USA and West European countries is not working as well as they used to, any development model closely similar to that model won't go down well people of for example emerging economies and least developed countries. The new model must promise inclusiveness in growth for the latter set of countries, economic empowerment of people in the lowest to the middle class level of these countries so that first existing industrial/manufacturing , agro and service sector capabilities are utilised optimally, leads to empowerment creating demand for technology driven products and services from developed countries. And there are limits to this proposition also. For example if there is say peace and world remains war free for next fifty years defense oriented industry shall continue to suffer from under utilisation and fail to sustain jobs and much less create ones in future. This reality must be acknowledged and respected. Having said all these, one would add that hiatus between USA and number two far too big and one doubts if the number two and three and four and five economic power have the internal and external market conditions congenial for catching up with USA except in some specific sector where they may some natural advantage. USA is a natural leader. It may slide up and down in phases but quality of life of it's people will remain unchanged generally. Challenge before US economic statecraft is to set examples of sustainable cooperation and collaboration with appropriate and accessible technology, raise itself above suspicion for world leadership without compromising it's principles and values.


Latest Stories