

How to Raise a Global Kid - NonEUCitizen
http://www.newsweek.com/2011/07/17/american-kids-immersed-in-chinese-asian-education.html

======
jballanc
If you take this articles as "Very wealthy man with the resources to do so
moves family to where he perceives the focal point of future growth and
opportunity will be," it's a rather uninteresting story.

However, if you take this as "American investor perceives future opportunity
to be greatest in China, enough so to relocate family"...then it's a bit more
interesting. Mostly, because I can be fairly confident in saying that he's
wrong. Dead wrong.

Or maybe he's just narrow-sighted? Perhaps his vision is two crowded by the
blinders of American investment activity to see that China's prominence in the
world economy is directly tied America's prominence in the world economy.
Perhaps he's ignored the impending Chinese demographic disaster because it
doesn't look too different from the one America is now just starting to face.

Either way, this article reinforces for me the notion that to be rich doesn't
require you to be the smartest kid on the block, just the gutsiest (with a
good dose of good luck mixed in). You see, if it were up to me, I'd be moving
my family to Brazil or Turkey. They have youthful populations. Their economies
are well rounded and fairly diversified. Most importantly, though, they are
going to be future hubs of their respective regions. Is there any doubt that
Brazil will be the future superpower of South America? With Turkey's
geographical, political, and demographic position, how can it not be the
future nexus of the "East-meets-West-meets-Middle-East" economy?

China...you can have China. I'd even take India over China...but, China is
fashionable. And somehow I doubt that Newsweek would write the article about
the wealthy family that relocated to Brazil or Turkey.

~~~
zhivota
Jim Rogers and his family moved to Singapore, not China.

~~~
rmc
Looks like he's trying to get his kids fleunt in Mandarin Chinese, so
essentially he's betting on China.

------
maguay
There's one thing about it: growing up global does make you see the world
different. I'm a Caucasian, English-speaking American, but have lived in
Thailand since I was 11. My parents were missionaries, and while we were far
from wealthy, we did get to see many of the countries around Thailand due to
travels for visas and more. And, of course, we grew up bilingual, never
thinking it was odd for others to speak a different language, have different
customs or ideas, or eat different foods. Perhaps best of all, we _weren't_ in
an elite part of the country full of foreigners, but we lived right in a
neighborhood of normal Thais.

And it does make you see the world different. I'm always amazed how much most
other Americans see the world as American-centric, and even seeing logos with
a globe with the US front and center seem odd to me now. Economics and
business classes have been much easier, since the ideas of foreign exchange,
international law, and more were a part of everyday life. And speaking a
second language as close to fluent as you can is a huge asset, and makes you
analyze why you think what you do and why language and society work the way
they do in a huge way.

Perhaps sadly, experiencing prejudice from others while being the minority in
another country also helps you see the evils of disliking someone because of
their language, the way they were educated or raised, their skin color,
nationality, or anything else. That in itself can make you a much better
person. This won't be the same everywhere, but I've experience enough of it to
make my blood boil when I hear racist remarks against others in the US.

Living abroad is not for everyone, but I do think more people growing up with
a global perspective would be a very good thing. You can do it right where you
live, though. There are ethnic communities all around the world, and the
internet brings content of every language to your living room. Raise your
children to see diversity as normal, and make sure they know that they're not
any different than someone from any other part of the world just because of
where they were born, the language they speak, and the color of their hair.
Help them see that they can make a difference in the world, and are not
limited to jobs or lifestyles in their own community.

If more people were raised like that, the world would definitely be a better
place.

~~~
lkozma
I agree with your point (moreso than with the article itself), and I would add
that growing up as a member of a "traditional" ethnic minority in a country
also gives you extra perspectives (even besides the automatic learning of two
languages).

This is far from obvious, many of my peers as I grew up saw it as a handicap
or as a misfortune that they were supposed to learn two languages and
cultures. I say, unless you are facing serious discrimination and as long as
you have decent opportunities of practicing both languages, it is a great
advantage.

Besides language, another thing I see as advantage is a natural skepticism
towards nationalism and all sorts of "rallying" behind a flag (unless you find
yourself locked into the mini-nationalism of your own group.) Growing up in
minority you realize that countries are artificial constructs, not the most
important in the greater scheme of things, that ethnic/linguistic identities
are not nearly as absolute as they are made to seem, etc. etc.

------
macavity23
"I’m trying to prepare them as best I can for the world as I see it ... The
money is in the East, and the debtors are in the West. I’d rather be with the
creditors than the debtors”

I certainly think it says a lot about the way he sees the world that the
location of global capital is apparently the most important factor in raising
his children.

~~~
jballanc
You may call it global capital, others may call it opportunity and if they do,
then they can rephrase your statement as "the location of opportunity is
apparently the most important factor in raising his children." Stated that
way, I don't think he's any different than any other parent in history.

~~~
WorkInKarlsruhe
More precisely it is "economic opportunity". I've yet to see more than a
handful of people search out places of opportunity targeted at raising
flourishing children, as opposed to seeking out economic opportunity. Raising
flourishing children requires a community with good social capital, amongst
other things --- money is only one, small contribution, and it is possible to
make flourishing communities and children without much money. When I saw the
headline about a global kid, I at first thought along these lines, since
American society sucks at the pursuit of happiness and human flourishing
(despite the propaganda to the contrary) --- and so it makes sense to move to
another country/culture for a better social fabric.

------
temeter
>“I am worried that in this interconnected world, our country risks being
disconnected from the contributions of other countries and cultures.”

Now there's a non-sequitur.

>“I’m doing what parents have done for many years,” Jim Rogers says. “I’m
trying to prepare my children for the future, for the 21st century. I’m trying
to prepare them as best I can for the world as I see it.”

Setting aside the fact that the future is unpredictable, and more
unpredictable today than it's ever been, this demonstrates the fundamental
error of human relationships: trying to get somebody to live out _your_ vision
of what their life should be.

In the case of parenting, imo, it's better to try to be a _better person_
generally than to treat your children as products.

------
euroclydon
Is raising an American kid to integrate culturally and economically with Asia
really that great of an idea when taking into account all that we know about
the future?

Yes, China is a creditor, but global trade is probably set to wane with the
increasing scarcity of fossil fuels. It will certainly become increasingly
expensive to pump liquid hydrocarbons into jumbo jets and criss-cross the
Pacific. I think forward looking parents will impress upon their kids the
importance of local and regional relationships because long-haul transport of
goods will likely be seen as a blip on the historical radar.

~~~
sethg
My impression is that the majority of global trade is either in the form of
services, which involve only transporting bits (e.g., a US hospital emailing
X-rays to an Australian radiologist); capital, which involves even fewer bits;
and physical goods that can be transported cheaply by ocean freight and rail.
(Shipping a standard cargo container from Asia to the US costs less than
US$2000; think of how many iPhones can fit into a box that size.)

~~~
jberryman
> Shipping a standard cargo container from Asia to the US costs less than
> US$2.00

That's amazing, can you point me to a source for that?

~~~
sethg
Sorry, US$ _2000_. (Which is still amazing, given the size of the box, but not
so much.)

I got it from the “Recent liner freight rates” table on Wikipedia
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Container_ship#Freight_market>) and misread the
caption.

------
iopuy
This article doesn't get all the facts. What it fails to mention and what I
remember watching on MSNBC(?) a few years ago is that Jim Miller paid $80,000
per year for a Chinese nanny for his daughter since she was born. She is
fluent in Mandarin from this, not from "packing up and heading to Singapore."
Must be nice to have all the cash to do stuff with.

------
zwieback
It seems to me that this is a continuation of the old American gold-rush
mentality: there's always someplace where a new life can be built and a new
fortune can be won. The media whip up a frenzy around these topics while the
vast majority continue what they've been doing.

This is why I'm not worried about the future of the US, we are always on the
lookout for something new and different and despite all the flag waving we're
always fretting about being left behind. Compare that with Europe, which takes
the opposite approach and is currently on a return path to the nation-state.

------
sudonim
Jim Rogers is a pretty interesting guy. He's a well known author of
"Investment Biker" and "Adventure Capitalist" about trips he took biking or
driving around the world. He definitely has cultivated a unique world view for
himself.

I grew up in Singapore (for 16 years), and there are fantastic international
schools there. The local schools focus less on learning through creative
problem solving and more on learning through repetition. I wouldn't put my kid
in a local school, but that's interesting he did.

I think that living in another country as an expat creates it's own problems,
but trying to totally assimilate is impossible, especially when you look
nothing like the locals. The first tends to make you feel superior or separate
like I'd imagine the colonials felt. The second will give you humility and
expose you to what it's like to be a minority.

There are many ways to skin a cat. Exposure to thinking other than your own is
good regardless of how it happens.

