But the data comparing young adults aged sixteen to twenty-four in different countries—the folks who will be manning the global economy for the next thirty or forty years—deserves a closer look. The figures come from three charts in the report’s statistical annex, which we have adapted here. Taken together, they vividly illustrate some of the challenges facing an economic hegemon that has for decades been plagued by wage stagnation and rising inequality, and which, as President Obama has pointed out, desperately needs to raise its game.

The numbers come from the O.E.C.D.’s inaugural Survey of Adult Skills, a massive exercise in which researchers interviewed five thousand people in each participating country. In order to capture their ability to function in “technology rich environments,” the subjects were also asked to answer questions on a computer.

The first chart shows proficiency in literacy among sixteen-to-twenty-four-year-olds. Finland’s youth came out on top, with a score of 296.7; the average score was 277.9. The United States scored 260.9, which put it second to last, above Italy.

The second chart shows proficiency in numeracy among sixteen-to-twenty-four-year-olds. Once again, Finland was in first place, with a score of 284.9. The United States was dead last, with 240.0. (Russia, too—though not a full member of the O.E.C.D.—beat us by quite a lot.)

The third chart, the one at the top of this post, shows proficiency in problem-solving. In this case, the researchers, rather than summarizing their findings in one number, categorized each subject according to his or her level of proficiency: level one, level two, or level three. For the purposes of constructing a single set of standings, I combined some figures, calculating the percentage of subjects who achieved the top two levels. In this case, the United States didn’t do any better. With a score of 37.6 per cent, it came in last place out of nineteen (or out of twenty if you include Russia).

I’ll just make three additional points.

There are some questions that should be asked about any multi-country survey like this one: Is the methodology consistent across the sample? Does it control for cultural and language differences? Can the results from various countries really be compared? As far as I know, nobody has suggested that this study particularly disadvantaged the U.S. subjects, or that the results were unreliable. (Of course, the survey is still new. Criticisms may yet emerge.)

The education and skill levels of a country’s population aren’t the only determinants of its economic fate. Other factors matter: resource endowments; investment in physical capital and R. & D.; political stability; competition; openness to new innovations, ideas, and people; a reliable legal system; and ready access to finance. In some of these areas, the United States still ranks very high. But as countries such as Japan and Korea have amply demonstrated, having a well-educated and well-trained labor force is an essential foundation of economic prosperity. And for the United States, where one of the greatest economic challenges is raising the living standards of the middle class, enhancing workers’ skill sets and productivity is simply essential.

This is, again, far from the first international comparison to make the United States look bad. It is well known, for example, that when it comes to test scores in math and science, American middle-school and high-school students lag behind their counterparts in Asia and Europe. At this stage, we don’t really need more evidence that there is a problem. We need a concerted national effort to address it.