Other challenges of their low birth rate include the likelihood that Europe’s market share will shrink; its military power will decrease as it dedicates an even bigger portion of its resources to supporting its elderly; and its proportional influence in the U.S. will decline, especially as America forges greater ties with the homelands of its new immigrants—Latin America, and South and East Asia.

  It has even been noted that we’re about to have an intercontinental generation gap. Currently, the median age in America is 35.5; in Europe, it’s 37.7. But by 2050, the median age in America will be 36.2—and in Europe, it will be 52.7. This means that not only will Europe and America be divided by the Atlantic, but they may have fundamentally different outlooks on the world. Europe will be shaped by events happening now, whereas America will be shaped by a decade that today, has not yet happened.

  But for all that legitimate hand-wringing, here’s the piece in the whole Baby Bust story that I see being underreported. Yes, birth rates are on the decline, and childless grown-ups are on the rise. But the decline in the overall number of children that European families are having also means an increase in the number of single-child families across the continent. Siblings may be fading, but Onlies are on the rise.

  In the U.K., 23 percent of women have just one child, up from 10 percent two decades ago. In Luxembourg, between 1970 and 1991, there was a 16 percent increase in the number of families who had just one child. In Finland, the number of Only Children grew 50 percent between 1950 and 1990. In Portugal, it grew 134 percent between 1950 and 1991. And in all of those countries, as birth rates have kept declining, the number of Only Children has kept on rising. Single-child families are the fastest-growing family arrangement in the Western World.

  This has serious implications. Since Only Children tend to be pampered, expect a new marketplace for child luxury goods. And who could deny them a pet or two? Look for the mass children’s goods retailers to struggle, but for specialized stores to prosper. (Perhaps the mass-merchandisers can make a go of it by catering to the newer, faster-reproducing immigrants.)

  As a purely demographic matter, fewer teenagers might also mean less crime, fewer riots, and fewer demonstrations at the universities. There will also be an intense search to fill the schools—which may trigger bringing in more foreign students to fill the higher-level educational system. Teachers, too, will be looking for new jobs as the demand for them shrinks.

  But what also lies within this microtrend is the glimmer of hope for a European revival. A generation of Onlies means a rising class of confident, high-achieving, imaginative citizens ready to tackle Europe’s problems, big as they may be.

  According to birth order researchers, oldest children are highly motivated, responsible, perfectionist, and inclined toward leadership. In the U.S., they are overrepresented at Harvard and Yale, and every astronaut ever to launch has been an oldest child or an oldest boy. Famous eldests are said to include Clint Eastwood, J. K. Rowling, Winston Churchill, and all the actors who have ever played James Bond.

  Middle children are compromisers, adaptable, and rebellious—John F. Kennedy was a famous middle, as was Princess Diana. Youngest children are outgoing, manipulative, impatient, irresponsible, and creative; they include Cameron Diaz, Jim Carrey, and Eddie Murphy.

  But Only Children, like oldest children, are said to be confident, articulate, ambitious, responsible, and perfectionist. Having had their parents’ relatively undivided attention, they are close to their parents, and disfavor radical change. They expect a lot from themselves and from others. They do not take criticism easily; and having been forced less often to share as kids, they can be inflexible. But they are stars: Famous Onlies (in some cases with some faraway half-siblings) have included Tiger Woods, Leonardo da Vinci, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. And Frank Sinatra, who, like a true Only Child, did it “his way.”

  So it is true that Europe faces serious challenges, and has fewer people coming up to address them. But of the ones that are coming, a greater percentage will—thanks to their Only status—be ready to step up in responsible, creative, and successful ways. Devoted to their parents’ generation, they will tackle the social security challenge with vigor. Having spent many hours making up their own games while the adults talked among themselves, they may well come up with imaginative solutions no one has yet dreamed of. Their continent’s problems loom large, but theirs will be a generation of high-achieving innovators ready to step up. So long as they can master playing well with others, both at home and abroad, Europe may yet experience its Greatest, and Smallest, and Onliest Generation: the Eurostars.

  Vietnamese Entrepreneurs

  In America, most people still think of Vietnam as the place we became involved in a no-win war, based on a lack of cultural understanding. Fifteen years; 58,000 U.S. soldiers’ precious lives; a humiliating escape in April 1975 from the roof of the American embassy in Saigon/Ho Chi Minh City. The failure against which all U.S. military campaigns have been judged ever since. The war itself was based on the domino theory—the idea that if Vietnam became communist, so would country after country in Asia, and the balance of power would fall to communism. Boy, was that theory wrong.

  But the belief that Vietnam-style communism would be a repeat of North Korea’s was so ingrained that what has actually happened in Vietnam is almost unimaginable to most Americans. While our former enemy the communist government is still in power there, Vietnam has become one of the most entrepreneurial spots on earth. Where America once sent soldiers, and then POW recovery teams, we now send cash. Personal, eagerly shelled out, cold hard cash, for everything from black pepper to coffee to rice to seafood. In 2006, Americans spent nearly ten times more on goods from Vietnam than the Vietnamese spent on goods from us.

  In the past fifteen years, Vietnam has done more than just about any other country on earth to reduce poverty and build up its middle class. Across the country, the number of abject poor—those who make less than $1 a day—dropped from 51 to 8 percent. Neither China nor India has that good a rate.

  In Vietnam’s two largest cities, the poor (defined as those making under $250 per month) dropped from 60 percent in 1999 to just 25 percent in 2006. And at the same time, the middle class (making $251–$500 per month) nearly doubled—to more than half of Vietnam’s urban population. And “middle class” in Vietnam means what it means elsewhere these days: Almost half of these people have cell phones, almost half have computers, and nearly 20 percent have personal e-mail at home. Vietnamese purchases of beauty and baby products have shot way up. Personal entertainment spending has doubled since 2003 alone. Since 2001, the percentage of Vietnam’s city-dwellers who own bank accounts has nearly tripled, to more than a third of the population.

  Many of Vietnam’s entrepreneurs are in food-related businesses, perhaps because of the large food production industry in that country. From the very successful Dr. Ly Quy Trung—CEO of the Pho 24 restaurant, with fifty locations in Vietnam, Indonesia, and the Philippines—to the low-income mom-and-pops pasting handwritten signs in their front yards advertising homemade pho (noodles) or refurbished scooter engines—Vietnamese at every level are leaping into the entrepreneurial fray. Other businessmen and -women are pioneering the high-tech sector, with Vietnam having been called a “second India” of software exports, and rising as a force in telecom.

  And all this growth is likely to keep going. Almost three-quarters of Vietnamese children of secondary school age are in school—up from about one-third in 1990—which is a higher rate of growth than either China or India can boast. Infant mortality is down. Life expectancy is up. Foreign money is pouring in. In 2005, the economy grew at a remarkable 8.4 percent, making it one of the fastest-growing economies in the world.

  All these happy numbers are reflected in—or driven by—the Vietnamese people’s extraordinary optimism. According to world surveys conducted by Gallup International Voice of the People, Vietnam is regularly the most optimistic country on earth—with more than 9 out of every 10 citizens saying this year will be better than last. In fact, on that measure, Vietnam beats the second-most optimistic country—Hong Kong—by a good 20 points. (Wondering which country is the most pessimistic? Greece, edging out even Iraq.)

  Whence the capitalist fervor, in a land that battled the capitalist superpowers for the right to institute communism, and won? After the Americans left Vietnam, the party tried pure communism, but bad harvests and economic mismanagement nearly caused a famine. Thus was born doi moi, or a series of market-based reforms designed to stimulate the Vietnamese economy without sacrificing the party’s political power. The U.S. encouraged this direction, with President Clinton in the mid-1990s ending the U.S. trade embargo and normalizing diplomatic relations. By 2002, Vietnam had amended its constitution to guarantee equal treatment for state and private companies, and eliminated several bureaucratic hurdles to the registration of private companies. The rest of the world began warming up to Vietnam, both diplomatically and economically. In 2001, the U.S. and Vietnam signed a bilateral trade agreement, and in December 2006, Vietnam joined the World Trade Organization and the U.S. Congress approved permanent normal trade relations. In perhaps the final chapter of the story of the U.S.-Vietnam military conflict, in 2006, President George W. Bush lifted the U.S. embargo on arms sales to Vietnam.

  Of course, it’s not all sunshine. Officially, America still regards Vietnam as an “authoritarian” state that abuses human rights. The banks still heavily favor state-owned enterprises, and entrepreneurs have little collateral to offer since the state still owns all the land. Corruption is rampant; intellectual property rights are few; and the court system is still beholden to the Communist Party. Income taxes are high, and power shortages are routine. In rural areas, where the bulk of Vietnam’s population still lives, income has not risen nearly as fast as in the cities.

  But the rate of economic progress in a place as ravaged as Vietnam underscores a serious entrepreneurial force, which the world would do well to attend to. Look, in the coming years, for substantially increased investment in that nation. The domino theory was wrong because communism in its pure form has been unable to generate a sustaining economic model better than capitalism. Democracy has actually had more trouble getting established than capitalism because enlightened communist states (which do not include North Korea) have been realizing they can hold on to political power if they loosen up on the economic reins. By introducing modest economic freedom, they have been able to enjoy continued political domination—we see that on a huge scale in China and Russia, and now we see it here in Vietnam. These regimes have learned that acknowledging and accommodating economic spirit is the only way to hold on to political power, and that as long as people have economic rights, they may not be so concerned about human rights. America was founded on the opposite principle—that human and political rights must come first—but these states are turning that theory on its head with some surprising success.

  Look also for lessons regarding Vietnam’s age structure. In most industrialized and developing countries in the world, we are having aging crises—certainly in America, Europe, and Japan, the populations are living longer than ever, and not being replaced at nearly the rates they used to be. In Vietnam, by contrast, over 60 percent of the nation’s 84 million people are under age 27. While a youthful age structure is not always a recipe for success—the world nations with the lowest median age are struggling countries in Africa—it could be here, given the country’s serious focus on education and the optimism that pervades the country, particularly among young people.

  And if you want to start a business, especially selling goods to Americans, hop a plane to Vietnam and see what you can get made there for speedy exportation. The workforce is booming.

  Thirty years after the U.S. failed to defeat communism in Vietnam, that country is a model entrepreneurial nation, trading goods, arms, and ideas with some of the biggest capitalist powers on earth. In a sense, this would be the equivalent of Iraq, thirty years from now, having rejected formal democracy but working with the U.S. to teach other nations town hall plebiscites and online presidential chats. It sure doesn’t seem likely now. But neither, when you watched Marlon Brando descend into hell in Apocalypse Now, did you imagine that one day you’d buy Vietnam’s coffee and rice at ten times the rate they’re buying ours.

  French Teetotalers

  There is nothing the French enjoy more than having wine. Except, perhaps, not having wine. French culture has been built around mixing wine with daily life—at brunch, at lunch—whenever a bunch of French people get together, it is usually around wine. And poor cheese—what would it taste like without the addition of a savory wine?

  So here’s a fact that has French wine merchants gagging. Over the course of the past forty years, no country on earth has cut its alcohol consumption more than France (except the United Arab Emirates, where in at least one emirate, people are lashed for possessing alcohol). And it’s all about the wine. While consumption of beer and spirits has stayed basically steady in France, the per capita consumption of alcohol from wine fell from 20 liters in 1962 to about 8 in 2001. In glasses of wine, that translates into about 235 per person per year, down from about 425. And it’s projected to drop even further and faster by 2010.

  Now, to be fair, the French still drink more wine than anyone else on earth. Even that dramatic drop still has the average French adult drinking 235 glasses of wine a year—the equivalent of one glass almost every weekday, or one glass every day from New Year’s until almost early septembre. But it’s a dramatic decline nonetheless.

  One reason for the dwindling wine consumption is the acceleration of the French meal. In 1978, the average French meal lasted 82 minutes. Plenty of time for a half-carafe, if not a bottle. Today, the average French meal has been slashed down to 38 minutes—and it’s more likely than a meal anywhere else in Europe to include McDonald’s burgers and fries. Wine is a victim of the disappearance of the leisurely meal. It is not the target of the change, but the decline in wine consumption is a by-product of the emergence of the faster, more modern, on-the-go lifestyle. Having resisted change for centuries, France is becoming modern, and Old World habits are giving way now at a rapid rate. Today’s French children are no longer sheltered from the Internet, video games, TV, and fast food. Whereas the countryside had been immune to the changes in the city, now we are even seeing France’s boundaries and borders shrink, as high-speed trains break down cultural barriers and connect every corner of France.

  A second reason for the wine decline is a recent public safety campaign, mainly focused on road security. As of 2004, there were about 10,000 deaths per year from alcohol-related traffic accidents in the European Union, with France having one of the worst rates per capita. In the U.S., the federal government responded to rising drunk-driving deaths by essentially forcing every state to raise its drinking age to 21, which experts agree has saved tens of thousands of lives. While France hasn’t seriously considered raising its drinking age—16—the Ministry of Transportation did crack down on drunk drivers in recent years, and also launched a public education campaign designed to warn people of the effects of driving while intoxicated. Drivers paid attention. So much so that wine manufacturers, whose profits are slumping, sued the government—and launched a counteroffensive to have wine classified as a food. That would not only eliminate printed health warnings on wine bottles but radio and TV advertising for wine would be unlimited. Don’t laugh. Spain classified wine as a food in 2003.

  The third reason the French are drinking less wine is the greater degree of health-consciousness that the French, like many Westerners, feel. Apparently some French Women Do Get Fat, and they are attempting to diet and exercise like everybody else. And in 2007, laying to rest yet another quintessentially French habit, the French banned smoking in public places—and some 70 percent of the French population support the ban.

  Perhaps also important is that the immigrants coming to France in the last decades have largely been Muslim, and religious Muslims drink no alcohol. The French cannot, therefore, count on the next generation of Muslims to save the wine industry—if anything, the growing Muslim population could exacerbate the problem, and land now used for vineyards could gain more value if used for housing.

  Typically, such consumer goods problems have been dealt with by exporting them—if our own French citizens won’t drink our wine, we’ll ship it out. But, to whom? Upstart winemakers from the U.S. to Australia to China to Brazil have been making their own less expensive, and quite good, wine. And Americans, for one, are not as interested in French products as they used to be. Fights over “French fries,” as well as serious disagreements over foreign policy, have left many Americans with a sense that France is not the role model it once was. Once the standard of all luxury, and a key player in Western history, France is no longer a top-of-mind country for most Americans, especially as compared to China, India, Russia, and the U.K. And U.S. merchants have taken advantage of that fact to grow the share of the California wine market. Two decades ago, wine-tasters held their noses to sample California wines. Today, they celebrate them. And while American wine-drinkers got educated on Merlots and Cabernets, they have lost any sense of what a Bordeaux or a Meursault is. The U.S. industry has been educating its consumers while the French have turned their backs on them, and the results have been dramatic. Meanwhile, Spain, Australia, and other vintners moved in with popular, lower-cost wines, and French wines got isolated as the expensive brand with declining benefits.