"The demand for luxury goods has increased for a number of reasons, including rapidly increasing disposable income, the increasing sophistication of Chinese consumers, and rapid urbanization and growing wealth in second- and third-tier cities." This seems like a big piece of marketing spin.

What about what these rising percentages of luxury consumerism are actually going to do to the luxury market? It is more likely to create a bubble and wash it out. That's why they want Chinese to shop domestically. They want to create two different brands. They want one Chinese brand, and one other "international" brand that has a different offering, because we are talking a lot of consumers. And luxury is not meant for "a lot" of consumers. It's meant to be luxury.

I'd love to see a more accurate depiction of what is really going on with the luxury market -- like it's erosion.

This sounds like a great job!

I think you're probably only reading one link. To be fair, I do social media consulting, but that doesn't mean I am not interested in listening to other voices, and actually engaging them on my blog and on their blogs. A more careful read of the site shows you that there are more than just passing references to charter schools. there are posts about digital publishing, online education, the shadow education system, as well as interviews with people in different careers who reflect upon their traditional education and make predictions about the future of education. A more careful reading of the site, and an actual engagement of the site would reward you with a deeper understanding of what I actually do.

Wow, I sound like a teacher. I happened to have been one at one point, too.

You all should check out my blog, especially if you are teachers. I am looking for people to talk about innovations in teaching, and what the future of teaching will be in the next few years. http://douglascrets.wordpress.com/

So, I have not heard anyone say, except maybe the teacher, but I think the reason teachers are scapegoated is because in the way the public system is set up, parents, students and teachers are not given a voice. They are told what to do.

If a culture is formed by people interacting together in a social way, and collaborating to make something, I can't see why we have to depend so much on union lobbyists and reps and politicians. Why can't we put schools in the hands of teachers, students and education experts / professionals?

I think it's because an education is a national resource, and just like oil, gold or natural gas, it is a precious commodity in its current form, and it is linked to money. If we can adjust the system so that it is more about learning and more about social collaboration, using technology and media, I think we can boost the performance of everyone, regardless of money. We need to link up teachers with entrepreneurs and outside of the box thinkers. What are people's thoughts on this? I am interested to hear your responses.

A question for Diane Ravitch. If union policies kick out young teachers who do perform well, how can we encourage the training and professional of young teachers so that they can be those excellent teachers who stay there a long time? Seems tenure policies do get in the way here.

I wanted to correct my question. I had understood that caprice was going to be on the program. Could i ask my question to Lisa Graham Keegan instead.

Also, I found it interesting that the teacher just on said that the kids do well because, I think, that there is no competition from other schools.

I was wondering if I could ask Caprice a question. It seems to me that everyone works with the understanding that teachers do probably the greatest thing for our nation -- they create the future. But they also seem to be a group that is beset by political wrangling, and in that sense they seem the victims of other people's agendas. What would you do to help teachers have a greater say in their own future, their own agendas, and in their own innovation? Thanks!

But how many businesses in 2010 can qualify for bank loans? I know people running all sorts of different businesses, some of them for years. They can't get traditional bank loans either. It doesn't mean they are any more of a risk than other businesses, in an economy like this, with stressed out banks like those. You could easily ask, "Why would anyone want to do financial business with these banks?"

Brad, great post, and it's helped me revise a little of my thinking from my commenting at Fred Wilson's blog with Tereza. I'd be happy to read more research and if you want, you can send me some data or links to reports you have done, or just point me the way. Thanks.