South Korea has 50 million people in the space of Indiana. It easier to build up cell phone services in that situation. The US still has very good coverage. I never claim that we were number one if every little area but I would say we are number one overall. USA is like a top rated Decathlon athlete. Yes there may be a better athlete in any one event but very few if any that are the top contenders at many events.

To claim the US has lousy infrastructure because another country may be a little better in one area is not more than being a US hater. Much of what is considered better is subjective anyway. Is a dirt road that I am usually on by myself and can go 100 MPH better then a crowded interstate that transports 1000’s going 70?

Point to a few black bridges and graffiti walls then scream the sky is falling. Please. There isn’t a town in the continental US that aren’t easily accessible. Railroad tracks crisscross this country. Ports and airports a many. Telecommunications all over the place. Massive Banking systems and the list goes on and on.

Typical liberal mentality. They find a couple of negatives to point at and then claim what a disaster. They don’t look at the positives of the US or the negatives of others but I suppose that wouldn’t fit their agenda.

Of course, that's all changing now without the cosmetic improvements unless you think a new cheap strip mall or casino is better than old individual residences.

Sometimes the problem isn't lack of funding but in lack of priorities to maintain buildings and roads and the like in the local government.

I think it's actually even more complicated than that. Gridlock and political infighting aren't solely features of the federal government. They're problems at the state, county, and city level, too (as we here in Chicago, Cook County, Illinois can attest).

Sometimes the problem isn't lack of funding but in lack of priorities to maintain buildings and roads and the like in the local government.

I don't think it's debatable that we need to invest more in our infrastructure.

I agree completely. The only question I have is what do we mean by “we”?

Is maintaining a bridge in Minneapolis primarily used by commuter traffic the reasonable responsibility of the federal government? I would think it would be an expense that should mostly be borne by Minneapolis, Hennepin County, and the state of Minnesota. Should people in Louisiana be taxed to build roads and bridges in Alaska?

To clarify: I think the issue is not one of absolute involvement but of relative involvement, an issue of subsidiarity.

But it’s also the case that Singapore’s not spending 1 percent of GDP a year on a misguided effort to control Iraq.

I don't know how much Singapore is spending in Iraq (I suspect that MY doesn't, either) but Singapore has been part of the MNF in Iraq since the beginning and have been enthusiastic supporters of the enterprise.

If MY is concerned about the free ridership issue, I think it's a reasonable concern and extends beyond Singapore to China, India, Japan and many other countries. Are we paying more than our share for the security umbrella that we're extending? It would make an interesting question for debate.

The latter is no doubt true. Then again, I don’t recall Manhattan having been exactly spic and span in 2003. Or, indeed, 1985. So I’m going to discount the war as the proximate cause of the Skyway’s sootiness nothwithstanding that we could undoubtedly get Manhattan quite clean if we were to devote 1 percent of GDP a year to that end.

Maybe so. But I don't recall large numbers of people moving to Singapore from the US. I do, however, recall the reverse. I'm not by any means suggesting 'love it or leave it' or anything of the sort... but it does seem there's a large number of things the author hasn't fully considered in her assesment of the situation.

And unlike Singapore, we don't cane them for dropping chewing gum on the sidewalk.