Since last week, the world has been once again under attack by small unseen enemy. The Swine Flu A/H1N1 virus has wrecked havoc in places around the world, starting from Mexico. Numerous organizations, including the WHO is on full drive to ‘really’ identify the virus so proper measures can be put in place. Among one of the first few findings is its low mortality rate as compared to H5N1 counterpart which held the world hostage in early 2003.
Personally, I would like to think of the low mortality rate being contributed by 2 factors. Firstly, the genetic makeup of the A/H1N1 virus is not so deadly to human as compared to H5N1. Secondly, it has nothing to do with the genetic makeup, meaning that the 2 viruses have roughly the same genetic makeup. It is the preparedness of the various organizations that had averted the high mortality rate this time. Anyway, either one is good because we can reduce deaths. But is mortality rate the only thing we should be worried about?
No. Besides mortality rate, we also have to look at the transmission rate. The reason is no matter how low the mortality rate is, if the virus has high transmission rate, it will infect large number of people. A small percentage of very large number of people is still millions of deaths in absolute number. Thus, unless the virus also have low transmission rate, people shouldn’t be too happy with the fact that it has low mortality rate. So, what’s the transmission rate like?
Judging from the quick spread of the virus from humans to humans within a week (currently, about 27 countries across 4 continents have either confirmed or suspected cases), I think it has a high transmission rate. To find out if it is higher than H5N1 virus or not, we need to do more analytical studies.
In conclusion, the virus mortality rate is only part of the story. To understand the entire story, we need more than mortality rate. In this case, transmission rate is definitely a major factor that needs to be taken into consideration.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Economics ≠ Business
I was reading Greg Mankiw’s blog this morning when I came across a link to an interesting article written by David Colander, Chair of Economics Department in Middlebury College. Basically, he was trying to identify the reasons why many students want to be economics majors, evident from the rising enrollments every year. Several were discussed and the root cause appeared to be economics being a “just-right” major. To quote him: economics major provides the appropriate middle ground of skill preparation, analytic rigor and intellectual excitement that students look for in a major, and that employers look for when hiring students.
Well although I won’t be attending economics classes anytime soon and so will not be able to give you a first-hand experience on attending one, I have to agree that is one of the reasons I have applied to do a postgraduate degree in economics. The opportunity to learn about science, apply it in a social context and in the process, improving the lives of the people is another reason why I have made up my mind to switch to economics. For students whose motivations to learn economics are the same as those shared by David and/or me, I think that enrolling in an economics course is an excellent decision.
For students who haven’t really made up their mind about their future plans, enrolling in economics is also a very good decision because the nature of the training doesn’t restrict you to a particular field and therefore allows you to venture to your field of interest once you have found one. Economics is one of the few fields that still keep many doors open even after you complete the course.
However I have to express my disappointment with students who already made up their mind of working in business but take economics simply because their liberal-arts colleges don’t offer business courses and economics is a good substitute. I believe that by doing so, these students are depriving others who are keener than them in learning about economics of the opportunities to do so by competing for the limited number of available places. I have to qualify that I make this statement without any concrete information about the number of applications and number of available places in each college and hence the degree of competition between these 2 groups of students.
Regardless, my point is: if you have made up your mind on a particular field, then you are strongly advised to enroll in a course on that particular field. Don’t enroll in another field that you have no interest in and intend to leave because you will only end up depriving others of the opportunities to enroll in the field of their interest.
Well although I won’t be attending economics classes anytime soon and so will not be able to give you a first-hand experience on attending one, I have to agree that is one of the reasons I have applied to do a postgraduate degree in economics. The opportunity to learn about science, apply it in a social context and in the process, improving the lives of the people is another reason why I have made up my mind to switch to economics. For students whose motivations to learn economics are the same as those shared by David and/or me, I think that enrolling in an economics course is an excellent decision.
For students who haven’t really made up their mind about their future plans, enrolling in economics is also a very good decision because the nature of the training doesn’t restrict you to a particular field and therefore allows you to venture to your field of interest once you have found one. Economics is one of the few fields that still keep many doors open even after you complete the course.
However I have to express my disappointment with students who already made up their mind of working in business but take economics simply because their liberal-arts colleges don’t offer business courses and economics is a good substitute. I believe that by doing so, these students are depriving others who are keener than them in learning about economics of the opportunities to do so by competing for the limited number of available places. I have to qualify that I make this statement without any concrete information about the number of applications and number of available places in each college and hence the degree of competition between these 2 groups of students.
Regardless, my point is: if you have made up your mind on a particular field, then you are strongly advised to enroll in a course on that particular field. Don’t enroll in another field that you have no interest in and intend to leave because you will only end up depriving others of the opportunities to enroll in the field of their interest.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
The Effect of Time on Our View of The Community
While watching a TV programme late last night, I came across an interesting phenomena. This programme was about the daily life of 2 laowais who are currently staying in Beijing, China. Things such as language barrier, food and customs were discussed. During one of the scenes, 1 laowai actually commented that he preferred living in China than wherever he came from because he found that the Chinese are very simple people who choose to spend their free time playing a game of chess or enjoying a hot cup of tea with their neighbors. He added that the Chinese are not arrogant and never try to live beyond their means, unlike their Western counterparts.
Hmmm….strange, I thought to myself. Having spoken to several Westerners and read about their culture, I always have the impression the Westerners enjoy simple life more than the Asians. They seldom splurge on luxuries such as brand new mobile phones every few months. They avoid headaches by giving their children freedom to decide what they want to do once they come of age and thereafter, decline to meddle in their affairs. Last but not least, instead of saving their hard-earned money to buy houses and cars for their children to show off, they use it to pay for their travels around the world. Put is simply, it is the exact opposite of what I heard from the TV programme. Why such contradiction, I ask myself.
Though it remains to be proven, I have a strong feeling the main reason is time spent with the community. Born a Chinese and having lived in Chinese communities for 26 years, I have seen so many extravagant Chinese that I have the mindset of Chinese as a haughty bunch. On the contrary, having only heard the good things about Westerners and never really live in Western communities, I always have the impression that they are simple, humble people who never try to live beyond their means.
The same can be said for the laowai in the TV programme. As he had encountered so many proud Westerners throughout his life, he has the mindset that Westerners are nothing but a bunch of arrogant people. He had good impression of the Chinese because he has stayed in China for only a short period of time and therefore, has not really encountered the nasty people in the community.
Well, that’s human nature for you. When one lives in a place for only a short while, one will have mostly good impression of the place and its people. But when one lives in the same place for a long period of time, one will start to inadvertently uncover the bad attitudes of the people, sometimes to such an extent that it can be labeled as prejudice.
Hmmm….strange, I thought to myself. Having spoken to several Westerners and read about their culture, I always have the impression the Westerners enjoy simple life more than the Asians. They seldom splurge on luxuries such as brand new mobile phones every few months. They avoid headaches by giving their children freedom to decide what they want to do once they come of age and thereafter, decline to meddle in their affairs. Last but not least, instead of saving their hard-earned money to buy houses and cars for their children to show off, they use it to pay for their travels around the world. Put is simply, it is the exact opposite of what I heard from the TV programme. Why such contradiction, I ask myself.
Though it remains to be proven, I have a strong feeling the main reason is time spent with the community. Born a Chinese and having lived in Chinese communities for 26 years, I have seen so many extravagant Chinese that I have the mindset of Chinese as a haughty bunch. On the contrary, having only heard the good things about Westerners and never really live in Western communities, I always have the impression that they are simple, humble people who never try to live beyond their means.
The same can be said for the laowai in the TV programme. As he had encountered so many proud Westerners throughout his life, he has the mindset that Westerners are nothing but a bunch of arrogant people. He had good impression of the Chinese because he has stayed in China for only a short period of time and therefore, has not really encountered the nasty people in the community.
Well, that’s human nature for you. When one lives in a place for only a short while, one will have mostly good impression of the place and its people. But when one lives in the same place for a long period of time, one will start to inadvertently uncover the bad attitudes of the people, sometimes to such an extent that it can be labeled as prejudice.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Indonesia Votes: The Real Reason Behind Those Political Maneuvers
With days before the release of the final result of the legislative election, many Indonesians have little doubt that SBY will win a second term as President without much difficulty. This is despite the ongoing discussions that large number of opposition parties have either organized or participated in. Notable ones include the meeting between Megawati Soekarnoputri (leader of PDI-P) and Jusuf Kalla (leader of Golkar), who until recently has been a loyal Vice-President to SBY as well as the meeting between Megawati, Prabowo (leader of Gerindra) and Wiranto (leader of Hanura)
One major reason for the lack of worry, at least among members of Democrat Party, the President’s party, is the nature of the Presidential election. Unlike the past 50 years where the President is elected by the legislative members, since the last election, the President has been directly elected by the people. Given SBY’s excellent track record during his first term, they are confident the people will once again elect him to be Indonesia’s President. But for how long can this “lack of worry” attitude last? Not very long. As a matter of fact, SBY may start to experience an uphill task as soon as his second-term starts.
Many opposition leaders, with the exception of several newcomers, are seasoned politicians. Even without their campaign advisors, they know very well they have little chance against SBY in the upcoming Presidential election. If that’s the case, why waste the time and resources to forge alliances? Well, it is my strong belief that the ongoing talks on alliances are not for the Presidential election whose outcome is more or less a done deal. Rather, the talks are to forge a cohesive opposition bloc that is capable of acting together as a formidable political force to undermine the President. If they are successful, many of the President’s proposals will be met with strong resistance when being debated in the Parliament and are unlikely to be passed, resulting in nothing more than a lame duck term for SBY. This will prepare the ground for a more competitive election in 2014.
Rather than relaxing and thinking of ways to celebrate his re-election, SBY should start engaging the various stakeholders. He can recruit more parties into his coalition, thus limiting the size of the opposition bloc to a level that will prevent them from exerting considerable influence in the Parliament. He can also try to split and sow discord among the opposition parties by getting some of their personalities to join him in his new administration. If all’s well, we can expect an even stronger Indonesia 5 years down the road.
One major reason for the lack of worry, at least among members of Democrat Party, the President’s party, is the nature of the Presidential election. Unlike the past 50 years where the President is elected by the legislative members, since the last election, the President has been directly elected by the people. Given SBY’s excellent track record during his first term, they are confident the people will once again elect him to be Indonesia’s President. But for how long can this “lack of worry” attitude last? Not very long. As a matter of fact, SBY may start to experience an uphill task as soon as his second-term starts.
Many opposition leaders, with the exception of several newcomers, are seasoned politicians. Even without their campaign advisors, they know very well they have little chance against SBY in the upcoming Presidential election. If that’s the case, why waste the time and resources to forge alliances? Well, it is my strong belief that the ongoing talks on alliances are not for the Presidential election whose outcome is more or less a done deal. Rather, the talks are to forge a cohesive opposition bloc that is capable of acting together as a formidable political force to undermine the President. If they are successful, many of the President’s proposals will be met with strong resistance when being debated in the Parliament and are unlikely to be passed, resulting in nothing more than a lame duck term for SBY. This will prepare the ground for a more competitive election in 2014.
Rather than relaxing and thinking of ways to celebrate his re-election, SBY should start engaging the various stakeholders. He can recruit more parties into his coalition, thus limiting the size of the opposition bloc to a level that will prevent them from exerting considerable influence in the Parliament. He can also try to split and sow discord among the opposition parties by getting some of their personalities to join him in his new administration. If all’s well, we can expect an even stronger Indonesia 5 years down the road.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Be Courteous and Please Chuck Aside That Arrogance
Yesterday, I encountered 2 different people who came to view my house with the intention of renting it. One is a middle-aged woman who works for a courier company. The other one is a young Indian couple who stay nearby.
The middle-aged woman is a pleasant lady. When I opened the main door and say “hi”, she responded with a cheerful “hi” as well. She also introduced herself to me, telling me where she works, how long she has been away from Singapore and that she will be staying alone in the unit. She also asked for my permission before she proceeded to view the rest of the house, particularly my room. All in all, it was a great experience and quite honestly, I have a feeling that my house will be in good hands if she is the tenant.
The young Indian couple, on the other hand, is rude and arrogant. When I welcomed them with a “hi”, they didn’t respond. For a while, I thought my “hi” was too soft but the agent responded to it. They also kept on looking at the ceiling, giving me the impression that I wasn’t worth their notice. Subsequently, they just barged through me to view the rest of the rooms as if they have rented the unit. For goodness sake, do I look so desperate to rent out the unit? Why can’t you show some courtesy? Is being an Indian expatriate so great that you can look down on other people? All these are in addition to his ridiculously low quotation.
But that’s fine because I learn 2 important lessons that I want to share with you guys: 1) being courteous to others goes a long way. Besides making their day, you will also likely get the same courteous treatment from them. 2) There’s really no need to be arrogant because being successful now doesn’t mean you will remain successful throughout your life. Also, the world is so big that even if you are successful, there are many who are equally so, if not more.
The middle-aged woman is a pleasant lady. When I opened the main door and say “hi”, she responded with a cheerful “hi” as well. She also introduced herself to me, telling me where she works, how long she has been away from Singapore and that she will be staying alone in the unit. She also asked for my permission before she proceeded to view the rest of the house, particularly my room. All in all, it was a great experience and quite honestly, I have a feeling that my house will be in good hands if she is the tenant.
The young Indian couple, on the other hand, is rude and arrogant. When I welcomed them with a “hi”, they didn’t respond. For a while, I thought my “hi” was too soft but the agent responded to it. They also kept on looking at the ceiling, giving me the impression that I wasn’t worth their notice. Subsequently, they just barged through me to view the rest of the rooms as if they have rented the unit. For goodness sake, do I look so desperate to rent out the unit? Why can’t you show some courtesy? Is being an Indian expatriate so great that you can look down on other people? All these are in addition to his ridiculously low quotation.
But that’s fine because I learn 2 important lessons that I want to share with you guys: 1) being courteous to others goes a long way. Besides making their day, you will also likely get the same courteous treatment from them. 2) There’s really no need to be arrogant because being successful now doesn’t mean you will remain successful throughout your life. Also, the world is so big that even if you are successful, there are many who are equally so, if not more.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Never decline the offer to learn
During the course of our life, we occasionally encounter requests for help that are totally different from what we are doing currently. Most people tend to reject them on the basis that they are totally unrelated to their jobs or interests. However, is rejection the right thing to do? Well, I don’t think so.
As I like to mention, life is unpredictable and full of surprises. Things that are unrelated to you at the moment may not remain so forever. Sometime in the future, these may end up helping you. And if you reject them now, it means giving up the opportunities to gain the knowledge that may assist you.
Suppose you are currently doing molecular biology research. During a gathering with your ex-classmates, one of them tells you that he is exploring business opportunities in Myanmar and needs help in preparing report on both market and company analysis. Although you have ample time at your disposal, you decide not to offer your help as you don’t think you will do business in Myanmar. A couple of years later, you realize that you are getting tired of molecular biology research and wish to try other options. Coincidentally, Myanmar is becoming one of the “next economies” and you begin to take interest in the possible opportunities that you can explore in Myanmar. If you have offered your help in generating the report for your friend, then perhaps you will be one step ahead of the others.
The moral of the story is: If you have time, please do not decline any opportunities because it may help you in the future. Anything in this world, including those that many resent is worth learning because you never know their usefulness until you need them.
As I like to mention, life is unpredictable and full of surprises. Things that are unrelated to you at the moment may not remain so forever. Sometime in the future, these may end up helping you. And if you reject them now, it means giving up the opportunities to gain the knowledge that may assist you.
Suppose you are currently doing molecular biology research. During a gathering with your ex-classmates, one of them tells you that he is exploring business opportunities in Myanmar and needs help in preparing report on both market and company analysis. Although you have ample time at your disposal, you decide not to offer your help as you don’t think you will do business in Myanmar. A couple of years later, you realize that you are getting tired of molecular biology research and wish to try other options. Coincidentally, Myanmar is becoming one of the “next economies” and you begin to take interest in the possible opportunities that you can explore in Myanmar. If you have offered your help in generating the report for your friend, then perhaps you will be one step ahead of the others.
The moral of the story is: If you have time, please do not decline any opportunities because it may help you in the future. Anything in this world, including those that many resent is worth learning because you never know their usefulness until you need them.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
What’s new, North Korea?
About two weeks ago, our beloved hermit kingdom launched what it claimed was a satellite, declaring that it too had entered the space age. When no one detected the alleged satellite passing through the atmosphere and began to speculate that it was after all a cover for a missile test, North Korea began its all too familiar routine: blame the outside world for plotting against it, announce that it is pulling out of the six-party talk and will restart its nuclear programme. Frankly Mr Kim, as a movie fanatic yourself, aren’t you tired of the same outcome playing again and again?
As a matter of fact, North Korea has been playing its nuclear card every time it hopes to gain more bargaining power in the negotiation table, much like we use wild cards in our favorite board games. Fortunately for Mr Kim and his servile followers, it always works and so, he has become bolder as time passes.
In response to the same tactic employed by a particular player over and over again, we usually develop strategies to counter him. Everyone knows that but for some reasons or another, the top-notch negotiators representing the other 5 countries (or the world if I may) have not been doing that. The outcome: Mr Kim’s continuous success in holding the entire world hostage and the frequent on-off nuclear disarmament talks, which for your information is proceeding at a pace slower than snail when it is on.
To prevent further waste of resources and time, I believe it is worthwhile to consider exerting more pressure on Mr Kim’s regime. As a start, I thought it is good to demand more concrete steps from North Korea in return for keeping our side of the bargain. For example, instead of requesting that it shuts down its nuclear facility, why not ask North Korea to tear down some core buildings in the complex. By doing so, even if it decides to walk out from the negotiation, it will not be easy to restart its nuclear programme. The blowing up of the cooling tower a few months ago is definitely a step in the right direction.
Depending on North Korea’s response, we may decide to stay the course or exert even more pressure. We must send a message to Mr Kim that enough is enough and the world will not fall for his deceit again. However, there must certainly be a limit to the amount of pressure that we can apply on him. Extremely hawkish attitude such as removing Mr Kim by force is a definite no-no because of its grave consequences. North Korea without Mr Kim may descend into a state of anarchy worse than Iraq and Afghanistan. In this regard, it is better to deal with one known maniac than countless unknown clowns. Right, Mr Kim?
As a matter of fact, North Korea has been playing its nuclear card every time it hopes to gain more bargaining power in the negotiation table, much like we use wild cards in our favorite board games. Fortunately for Mr Kim and his servile followers, it always works and so, he has become bolder as time passes.
In response to the same tactic employed by a particular player over and over again, we usually develop strategies to counter him. Everyone knows that but for some reasons or another, the top-notch negotiators representing the other 5 countries (or the world if I may) have not been doing that. The outcome: Mr Kim’s continuous success in holding the entire world hostage and the frequent on-off nuclear disarmament talks, which for your information is proceeding at a pace slower than snail when it is on.
To prevent further waste of resources and time, I believe it is worthwhile to consider exerting more pressure on Mr Kim’s regime. As a start, I thought it is good to demand more concrete steps from North Korea in return for keeping our side of the bargain. For example, instead of requesting that it shuts down its nuclear facility, why not ask North Korea to tear down some core buildings in the complex. By doing so, even if it decides to walk out from the negotiation, it will not be easy to restart its nuclear programme. The blowing up of the cooling tower a few months ago is definitely a step in the right direction.
Depending on North Korea’s response, we may decide to stay the course or exert even more pressure. We must send a message to Mr Kim that enough is enough and the world will not fall for his deceit again. However, there must certainly be a limit to the amount of pressure that we can apply on him. Extremely hawkish attitude such as removing Mr Kim by force is a definite no-no because of its grave consequences. North Korea without Mr Kim may descend into a state of anarchy worse than Iraq and Afghanistan. In this regard, it is better to deal with one known maniac than countless unknown clowns. Right, Mr Kim?
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Selecting the Appropriate Course
When conversing with friends, the topic on future plans never fail to appear, at least for the last few gatherings that I attended. Approximately 8 out of 10 will share their intention to further their studies. And their reasons range from a simple wish of upgrading themselves to a more ambitious one of switching to an entirely new field. Having been taught since young on the importance of education, it is always heartening to hear people who have left their student lives, say that they intend to attend school again. Believe me or not, it is actually not easy to convince yourself to return to school when you have been working for some time because the outflow is high while at the same time, there is little or no inflow.
Suppose you manage to convince yourself to take that courageous step, the next thing on your mind would probably be the course that you should pursue. To answer this question, you have to ask yourself just 2 very simple questions: 1) What is my interest? And 2) What do I intend to do upon completion of the course?
I can’t think of a better way to express the importance of interest besides saying that interest determines whether you complete the course or not. For many of you who laugh this off as nothing more than common sense, I would like to say that it is precisely this “common sense” mindset which causes interest to be taken for granted. When someone tells us he will be pursuing a degree in biological sciences for example, we assume (without asking him) that he is interested in biological sciences. In reality, that may not be the case. He may have enrolled in the course because of purely herd instinct or because the government is strongly promoting the course in line with its economic strategy. Very soon, he may realize that the course is not his cup of tea and begins to find excuses not to attend the lectures as well as tutorials. As time passes, his results will get from bad to worse and he may drop out altogether from the course.
If you think that being academically smart will help in completing the course despite having no interest in it, I would advise you to think again because forcing yourself will only result in a waste of precious time and perhaps, a paper certificate you will not value.
The job that you intend to take up upon completion of the course also helps in deciding the course that you should pursue. For practical reasons, it is not necessary to pursue courses beyond the requirements of the job because it will result in over-qualification and waste of both money as well as time. As an example, if you intend to be a certified freelance translator who works from home, a diploma in translation will probably suffice. If you intend to work as a translator who accompanies the head of state on his visits, then a master or even a PhD in translation may be necessary.
If you have the answers to these 2 questions, deciding the course to pursue will be a breeze.
Suppose you manage to convince yourself to take that courageous step, the next thing on your mind would probably be the course that you should pursue. To answer this question, you have to ask yourself just 2 very simple questions: 1) What is my interest? And 2) What do I intend to do upon completion of the course?
I can’t think of a better way to express the importance of interest besides saying that interest determines whether you complete the course or not. For many of you who laugh this off as nothing more than common sense, I would like to say that it is precisely this “common sense” mindset which causes interest to be taken for granted. When someone tells us he will be pursuing a degree in biological sciences for example, we assume (without asking him) that he is interested in biological sciences. In reality, that may not be the case. He may have enrolled in the course because of purely herd instinct or because the government is strongly promoting the course in line with its economic strategy. Very soon, he may realize that the course is not his cup of tea and begins to find excuses not to attend the lectures as well as tutorials. As time passes, his results will get from bad to worse and he may drop out altogether from the course.
If you think that being academically smart will help in completing the course despite having no interest in it, I would advise you to think again because forcing yourself will only result in a waste of precious time and perhaps, a paper certificate you will not value.
The job that you intend to take up upon completion of the course also helps in deciding the course that you should pursue. For practical reasons, it is not necessary to pursue courses beyond the requirements of the job because it will result in over-qualification and waste of both money as well as time. As an example, if you intend to be a certified freelance translator who works from home, a diploma in translation will probably suffice. If you intend to work as a translator who accompanies the head of state on his visits, then a master or even a PhD in translation may be necessary.
If you have the answers to these 2 questions, deciding the course to pursue will be a breeze.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Indonesia Votes: Money Politics in Action
On the 9th of April, Indonesians took part in the first stage of an election many have predicted will take three stages to complete. Since the 1998 riot which brought down ex-President Suharto, elections in the world’s largest Muslim democracy have been far from boring to me because it is full of surprises. In the 1999 election for example, many had thought Megawati would be sworn in as the 4th President of Indonesia. Due to intense politicking and back-room negotiations, that position eventually went to Gus Dur.
This year’s election, with candidates from 38 parties competed for 692 available seats, is no different. With approximately 2 weeks to go before the final result will be released, the dynamic nature of the election has generated many side stories for the media. For the past few days, both Indonesian print and broadcast media have reported that numerous candidates have been admitted to mental hospital or worse, committed suicide because they are unable to accept the fact that they have lost the election after pouring in billions of rupiah to take part.
What always amazed me, however, are the large number of interesting personalities that despite their lack of knowledge, manage to obtain so much support on the ground. Among them is Prabowo Subianto, Suharto’s son-in-law. 11 years ago, when his father-in-law fell from power, so did he. He was dishonorably discharged by the military and left the country for a self-imposed exile. Sometime last year, if I don’t recall wrongly, his face started to appear in the media, promoting his newly established party, Gerindra. In fact, just last week, he was interviewed by a Singapore newspaper on his political aspiration.
After reading the excerpts from the interview, I wonder why many Indonesians regard him as one of the ideal candidates for the Presidency. He doesn’t seem to know many things that a common people should know, let alone a Presidential candidate. He mentioned something about Singapore having a pro-welfare government when it is not really true. He talked about the current administration’s lack of economic strategy when in reality, SBY and his ministers have stabilized the economy to a level unseen since reformasi. And most importantly, he didn’t share a single thing about his strategy if elected as President.
For a moment, I thought of calling up my Indonesian friends to find out if they supported him and if yes, the justifications for doing so. Then I realized I have just found the answers. Politics in Indonesia is driven more by wealth rather than strategy. If 2 people compete for a seat in the parliament with A having better strategy than B but B having more money than A, it is highly likely that B will get the seat. Well, that’s the sad reality of Indonesia politics and looking at the literacy level of the population, this will probably remain for a foreseeable future.
This year’s election, with candidates from 38 parties competed for 692 available seats, is no different. With approximately 2 weeks to go before the final result will be released, the dynamic nature of the election has generated many side stories for the media. For the past few days, both Indonesian print and broadcast media have reported that numerous candidates have been admitted to mental hospital or worse, committed suicide because they are unable to accept the fact that they have lost the election after pouring in billions of rupiah to take part.
What always amazed me, however, are the large number of interesting personalities that despite their lack of knowledge, manage to obtain so much support on the ground. Among them is Prabowo Subianto, Suharto’s son-in-law. 11 years ago, when his father-in-law fell from power, so did he. He was dishonorably discharged by the military and left the country for a self-imposed exile. Sometime last year, if I don’t recall wrongly, his face started to appear in the media, promoting his newly established party, Gerindra. In fact, just last week, he was interviewed by a Singapore newspaper on his political aspiration.
After reading the excerpts from the interview, I wonder why many Indonesians regard him as one of the ideal candidates for the Presidency. He doesn’t seem to know many things that a common people should know, let alone a Presidential candidate. He mentioned something about Singapore having a pro-welfare government when it is not really true. He talked about the current administration’s lack of economic strategy when in reality, SBY and his ministers have stabilized the economy to a level unseen since reformasi. And most importantly, he didn’t share a single thing about his strategy if elected as President.
For a moment, I thought of calling up my Indonesian friends to find out if they supported him and if yes, the justifications for doing so. Then I realized I have just found the answers. Politics in Indonesia is driven more by wealth rather than strategy. If 2 people compete for a seat in the parliament with A having better strategy than B but B having more money than A, it is highly likely that B will get the seat. Well, that’s the sad reality of Indonesia politics and looking at the literacy level of the population, this will probably remain for a foreseeable future.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Nurturing Children The Soft Way
Changing times bring about changes in attitudes and views. Things which were considered taboos in the past are no longer considered so now. Similarly, things which were once considered acceptable may not be so today. Therefore we have to change the way we handle certain situations. I am not going to write about homosexuality but rather on something which is very close to many of us: nurturing children.
What sparked my interest in writing about this was a conversation I had with a senior a couple of days ago. He has a 16-year old child who just obtained his report card. His wife was horrified to see so many red marks that if put at a distance, might give the impression the card was on fire. She wasted no time in seeing his teachers who promptly suggested that his pocket money was reduced. She also spoke to many friends who told her to do the same thing. Of course, my senior was not spared and he promised to tell her his ideas after thinking about it.
As I was beside him when his wife called, I naturally became the first person he sought advice from. Although he was fine with the suggestion to reduce his son’s pocket money, he wasn’t sure if it may work on his son. I agreed with his concerns. Children nowadays, particularly those above 15-year old are different from those in the past. While those in the past were fully aware of their mistakes and hence, willingly accepted their punishments, children nowadays dislike hard-handed approaches, equating them as non-understanding and means of stifling their freedom. As such, these approaches may not yield significant results and worse still, may turn them from bad to worse.
I thought a more appropriate approach would be to engage him in a constructive conversation. Tell him that although many people have suggested hard-handed approaches, you don’t think it is appropriate since you treat him as an adult. Try to find out the causes of his bad performance. If it is because of certain parental actions which he doesn’t quite understand, explain to him the reasons behind them and apologize if necessary. Next, get him to say what his plans are moving forward. Do your best to expand those simple and vague plans to more concrete ones. For example, if he says he will study hard, ask him how he will intend to do that. The main idea is to get him to realize his own mistakes, feel guilty about them and hence act to rectify them.
The time when children were obedient to the point of carrying out all your wishes, even though they were wrong had long passed. As a teacher-friend of mine once said: “In the past, we introduced ourselves as educators, as teachers. Nowadays, we introduce ourselves as facilitators.”
What sparked my interest in writing about this was a conversation I had with a senior a couple of days ago. He has a 16-year old child who just obtained his report card. His wife was horrified to see so many red marks that if put at a distance, might give the impression the card was on fire. She wasted no time in seeing his teachers who promptly suggested that his pocket money was reduced. She also spoke to many friends who told her to do the same thing. Of course, my senior was not spared and he promised to tell her his ideas after thinking about it.
As I was beside him when his wife called, I naturally became the first person he sought advice from. Although he was fine with the suggestion to reduce his son’s pocket money, he wasn’t sure if it may work on his son. I agreed with his concerns. Children nowadays, particularly those above 15-year old are different from those in the past. While those in the past were fully aware of their mistakes and hence, willingly accepted their punishments, children nowadays dislike hard-handed approaches, equating them as non-understanding and means of stifling their freedom. As such, these approaches may not yield significant results and worse still, may turn them from bad to worse.
I thought a more appropriate approach would be to engage him in a constructive conversation. Tell him that although many people have suggested hard-handed approaches, you don’t think it is appropriate since you treat him as an adult. Try to find out the causes of his bad performance. If it is because of certain parental actions which he doesn’t quite understand, explain to him the reasons behind them and apologize if necessary. Next, get him to say what his plans are moving forward. Do your best to expand those simple and vague plans to more concrete ones. For example, if he says he will study hard, ask him how he will intend to do that. The main idea is to get him to realize his own mistakes, feel guilty about them and hence act to rectify them.
The time when children were obedient to the point of carrying out all your wishes, even though they were wrong had long passed. As a teacher-friend of mine once said: “In the past, we introduced ourselves as educators, as teachers. Nowadays, we introduce ourselves as facilitators.”
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Goldman Sachs’s Ungrateful Announcement
When Goldman Sachs announced its 1Q net income a couple of days ago, my first feeling was that of relief. Our world had finally seen the light at the end of the tunnel after months of nothing but gloomy news of job cuts and more job cuts, I uttered to myself. As I proceeded down the article, I was dismayed to find out that the positive earnings had been contributed mainly by its fixed income, currency and commodity unit. The performance of other divisions clearly still reflected a market that was far from recovery. And worse still, the exceptional performance as the name suggested, were exceptional and had a high chance of not repeating itself. Well, a bit of good news is better than nothing and so I thought Goldman deserved a pat on the back for the commendable effort in trying to create a bright spark in the current downturn.
Just when I was about to do that, I caught 2 points from later part of the article that made me change my intention completely. Firstly, it had set aside almost US$5 billion in salaries and bonuses for employees before paying off the US$10 billion loan from the government. Secondly, it would raise equity to pay the loan, effectively saying that it will use its business earnings for uses other than paying loan. How could a respectable institution allocate a large amount of its earnings to things such as salaries and bonuses before paying off the loan that had saved it from the brink of collapse? Didn’t Goldman which hired many top brains understand the simple logic that without the loan, there might be no Goldman today and hence, not a single cent of the US$1.7 billion net income?
I fully understand the importance of talent retention to many institutions such as Goldman, but I don’t agree with Goldman’s way of showing that importance, considering the situation that it was in. It immediately gave the impression of Goldman as an extravagant and ungrateful child who had forgotten who his savior was. It also appeared to show that Goldman’s decision-making process did not really consider taxpayers’ reactions.
I think it would have been more proper if Goldman limits its compensation to basic salaries and bonuses at least until it has fully paid off the loan. By doing so, it can free up those money and use them to pay the loan instead, thus portraying itself as a responsible player in the industry that had been labeled as greedy and selfish.
If limiting compensation is really not possible, then perhaps Goldman could share with the public the mechanisms of checks and balances that had been put in place to make the new compensation structure different from the infamous “head I win, tail you lose” structure such as gradual disbursement of bonuses and requirement that certain percentage of bonuses remains with the institution.
To Goldman Sachs: Do remember that the public deserves more. After all, you owe the public for your very existence.
Just when I was about to do that, I caught 2 points from later part of the article that made me change my intention completely. Firstly, it had set aside almost US$5 billion in salaries and bonuses for employees before paying off the US$10 billion loan from the government. Secondly, it would raise equity to pay the loan, effectively saying that it will use its business earnings for uses other than paying loan. How could a respectable institution allocate a large amount of its earnings to things such as salaries and bonuses before paying off the loan that had saved it from the brink of collapse? Didn’t Goldman which hired many top brains understand the simple logic that without the loan, there might be no Goldman today and hence, not a single cent of the US$1.7 billion net income?
I fully understand the importance of talent retention to many institutions such as Goldman, but I don’t agree with Goldman’s way of showing that importance, considering the situation that it was in. It immediately gave the impression of Goldman as an extravagant and ungrateful child who had forgotten who his savior was. It also appeared to show that Goldman’s decision-making process did not really consider taxpayers’ reactions.
I think it would have been more proper if Goldman limits its compensation to basic salaries and bonuses at least until it has fully paid off the loan. By doing so, it can free up those money and use them to pay the loan instead, thus portraying itself as a responsible player in the industry that had been labeled as greedy and selfish.
If limiting compensation is really not possible, then perhaps Goldman could share with the public the mechanisms of checks and balances that had been put in place to make the new compensation structure different from the infamous “head I win, tail you lose” structure such as gradual disbursement of bonuses and requirement that certain percentage of bonuses remains with the institution.
To Goldman Sachs: Do remember that the public deserves more. After all, you owe the public for your very existence.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Ending the Piracy in Somalia
For more than a year or so, we have been swarmed with news on pirate attacks off the coast of Somalia almost daily. I have to admit that prior to the very first news on Somalia pirates, the ‘real’ pirates I had heard about were those roaming around the Straits of Malacca. (Sorry to disappoint those who thought I would say Captain Jack Sparrow). Every time I come across articles on this issue, I have always wondered for how long the attacks have been happening? Is it a generation-old situation which sadly has never caught the global media’s attention until now? Or is it a very recent development?
Given the easy access to information in this age, I have no doubt I can find the answer to those questions rather quickly if I want to. However, I would pass that for the time being because I think there is another aspect of this pirate issue which should be given more weights: the ways to solve it.
Last December, after a long debate following weeks of front-page prominence given to this issue by leading newspapers around the world, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1851 which in short, called for further international operations against Somalia pirates. Since then, various countries, inclusive of China which usually prefers not to meddle in other country’s affairs, had sent their navies to the Gulf of Aden to protect ships passing through what is dubbed one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world. Better equipped and trained, these soldiers had successfully rescued many hostages and also foiled numerous hijacking attempts by the pirates.
Although yielding some positive results, we have to admit this method employs nothing more than a conventional use of force. Just like any other similar method involving force, it may backfire under certain situations such as “a hungry man is an angry man.” situation. Another clear weakness is that it doesn’t solve the issue at its core, which many have identified to be the dire and anarchic situation that Somalia is in. When these countries pull back their navies, which are highly likely considering the deployment cost, the lack of pressure will entice the Somalians, particularly those with no other options, to once again enter this profitable but illegal trade, a case of desperate times calls for desperate measures.
Complimenting the current military operations with social programs may have greater impact in reducing piracy than the operations alone because social programs provide alternatives that these pirates can consider. These programs act as barriers between the Somalians and piracy itself. One important program which UN can explore would be those which result in creation of jobs and hence, the reduction of social problems. Without jobs, these people may have higher tendency to go back to piracy because they, just like any of us, need a mean to support their families. Rehabilitation services can also be provided to educate them and hopefully, mend their ways. Strengthening law enforcement institutions within the country should also be on the cards so that Somalia can play its role as a responsible global citizen.
Given the easy access to information in this age, I have no doubt I can find the answer to those questions rather quickly if I want to. However, I would pass that for the time being because I think there is another aspect of this pirate issue which should be given more weights: the ways to solve it.
Last December, after a long debate following weeks of front-page prominence given to this issue by leading newspapers around the world, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1851 which in short, called for further international operations against Somalia pirates. Since then, various countries, inclusive of China which usually prefers not to meddle in other country’s affairs, had sent their navies to the Gulf of Aden to protect ships passing through what is dubbed one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world. Better equipped and trained, these soldiers had successfully rescued many hostages and also foiled numerous hijacking attempts by the pirates.
Although yielding some positive results, we have to admit this method employs nothing more than a conventional use of force. Just like any other similar method involving force, it may backfire under certain situations such as “a hungry man is an angry man.” situation. Another clear weakness is that it doesn’t solve the issue at its core, which many have identified to be the dire and anarchic situation that Somalia is in. When these countries pull back their navies, which are highly likely considering the deployment cost, the lack of pressure will entice the Somalians, particularly those with no other options, to once again enter this profitable but illegal trade, a case of desperate times calls for desperate measures.
Complimenting the current military operations with social programs may have greater impact in reducing piracy than the operations alone because social programs provide alternatives that these pirates can consider. These programs act as barriers between the Somalians and piracy itself. One important program which UN can explore would be those which result in creation of jobs and hence, the reduction of social problems. Without jobs, these people may have higher tendency to go back to piracy because they, just like any of us, need a mean to support their families. Rehabilitation services can also be provided to educate them and hopefully, mend their ways. Strengthening law enforcement institutions within the country should also be on the cards so that Somalia can play its role as a responsible global citizen.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Give and Take: Scientific or Spiritual?
A good friend of mine has been preaching about the concept of “give and take” for as long as I can remember. The concept by itself is simple and depending on one’s explanation, lies either on the scientific or spiritual realm. Starting with the scientific one, I am sure many of you have heard about the term ‘opportunity cost’ sometime during your academic or working life. It is the value of the next best alternative foregone as the result of making a decision. When you decide to use a plot of land to build your fertilizers factory for example, you forego the opportunity of using that same plot for other uses.
As for spiritual one, many seniors would probably have told you about yin and yang, karma and its related stuffs. If you explore and analyze them thoroughly, you will conclude that they are all about balance. In essence, when you take something from another party, you have to give up something to another party and vice versa over a timeline that can range from a fraction of seconds to years.
Being educated and all however do not mean that I support the scientific explanation over the spiritual one. Although I think I should, I can’t because at times, I still hope to rely on the spiritual to explain certain situations. Well, that’s human’s selfish nature for you. The explanation we choose to believe in depends very much on our intention: be responsible for our actions or not. And when it is the latter, the hot favorite appears to be attributing those happenings to something beyond our control a.k.a the spiritual.
Here’s a situation I encountered a couple of weeks ago. I met up with 2 friends for dinner and on the way back to my house for a session of card games, we stopped at the nearby supermarket to purchase drinks. Since it would take no more than 10 minutes, we decided not to waste any parking coupon which was worth 50 cents each. We entered the supermarket and proceeded to the beverages section, quickly selecting our drinks. Upon payment, one of us found out that we had been overcharged by 15 cents. After a long argument, we got the 15 cents and walked back to the carpark only to discover that we have been fined S$35.
If we wanted to take responsibility, we would have selected the scientific explanation, saying that the opportunity cost for not putting the 50 cents parking coupon is the avoidance of fine and since we have foregone it, we should accept the fine magnanimously. If we wanted to avoid responsibility, we would have chosen the spiritual explanation, blaming the fine on our rotten luck and perhaps retribution for the bad deeds one of us committed previously.
I leave you to guess the explanation we settled on. (Hint: There were 1 Indian and 2 Chinese). By the way, no prize for guessing the right one.
As for spiritual one, many seniors would probably have told you about yin and yang, karma and its related stuffs. If you explore and analyze them thoroughly, you will conclude that they are all about balance. In essence, when you take something from another party, you have to give up something to another party and vice versa over a timeline that can range from a fraction of seconds to years.
Being educated and all however do not mean that I support the scientific explanation over the spiritual one. Although I think I should, I can’t because at times, I still hope to rely on the spiritual to explain certain situations. Well, that’s human’s selfish nature for you. The explanation we choose to believe in depends very much on our intention: be responsible for our actions or not. And when it is the latter, the hot favorite appears to be attributing those happenings to something beyond our control a.k.a the spiritual.
Here’s a situation I encountered a couple of weeks ago. I met up with 2 friends for dinner and on the way back to my house for a session of card games, we stopped at the nearby supermarket to purchase drinks. Since it would take no more than 10 minutes, we decided not to waste any parking coupon which was worth 50 cents each. We entered the supermarket and proceeded to the beverages section, quickly selecting our drinks. Upon payment, one of us found out that we had been overcharged by 15 cents. After a long argument, we got the 15 cents and walked back to the carpark only to discover that we have been fined S$35.
If we wanted to take responsibility, we would have selected the scientific explanation, saying that the opportunity cost for not putting the 50 cents parking coupon is the avoidance of fine and since we have foregone it, we should accept the fine magnanimously. If we wanted to avoid responsibility, we would have chosen the spiritual explanation, blaming the fine on our rotten luck and perhaps retribution for the bad deeds one of us committed previously.
I leave you to guess the explanation we settled on. (Hint: There were 1 Indian and 2 Chinese). By the way, no prize for guessing the right one.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
The Riddle Behind Japan’s Sex Survey
Having seen the results of countless surveys which range from political ones such as public perception on the performance of the current administration to wacky ones such as preference for staying with Michael Jackson or at Iranian prison, there is one particular survey result that has baffled me for a long period of time: the frequency of sex in Japan conducted by Durex.
All of us can’t deny Japan’s leading position as Asia’s producer of legal adult media. When you mention asian adult videos for example, the word Japan and the image of sexy, beautiful and fair Japanese women just comes rushing to your mind. The names of other countries such as Thailand or China probably popped up but not as spontaneous as Japan where most bookstores, video stores and even 24-hour convenience stores set aside a section to display those media.
Since practically all of them are in Japanese language, we can safely assume they are targeted towards the Japanese themselves. As the saying goes, if there’s supply, there must be demand. And specifically on adult media, the demand for them must be very high if producers are willing to literally flood the market. By logical thinking, if the Japanese enjoy reading and watching them, then they must enjoy doing them as well. However, the survey results prove otherwise. As a matter of fact, at 48 times a year, Japan has the lowest frequency of sex in the world. Why the contradiction?
I have 2 possibilities in mind: 1) The sample used to generate the results is not representative of the general population. Durex might have surveyed people whose habits and preferences differ from the general population. 2) People who participated in the survey might have provided false information which consequently are reflected in the final results.
The first possibility appears weak considering that Durex had previous experiences in conducting surveys and hence, was unlikely to commit such fundamental error with regards to sampling. Besides, Japan was not a backward country whereby it might be difficult to obtain a representative sample and had showed consistent results for the past few years. The second possibility seems more likely considering that Japanese are very conservative people and regards talking openly to strangers about their real sexual lives a taboo despite the widespread availability of such media.
But then again, the survey results may be correct after all. The large numbers of adult media swarming the Japanese may mean they now spend so much more time watching and reading that they have lesser time doing them.
All of us can’t deny Japan’s leading position as Asia’s producer of legal adult media. When you mention asian adult videos for example, the word Japan and the image of sexy, beautiful and fair Japanese women just comes rushing to your mind. The names of other countries such as Thailand or China probably popped up but not as spontaneous as Japan where most bookstores, video stores and even 24-hour convenience stores set aside a section to display those media.
Since practically all of them are in Japanese language, we can safely assume they are targeted towards the Japanese themselves. As the saying goes, if there’s supply, there must be demand. And specifically on adult media, the demand for them must be very high if producers are willing to literally flood the market. By logical thinking, if the Japanese enjoy reading and watching them, then they must enjoy doing them as well. However, the survey results prove otherwise. As a matter of fact, at 48 times a year, Japan has the lowest frequency of sex in the world. Why the contradiction?
I have 2 possibilities in mind: 1) The sample used to generate the results is not representative of the general population. Durex might have surveyed people whose habits and preferences differ from the general population. 2) People who participated in the survey might have provided false information which consequently are reflected in the final results.
The first possibility appears weak considering that Durex had previous experiences in conducting surveys and hence, was unlikely to commit such fundamental error with regards to sampling. Besides, Japan was not a backward country whereby it might be difficult to obtain a representative sample and had showed consistent results for the past few years. The second possibility seems more likely considering that Japanese are very conservative people and regards talking openly to strangers about their real sexual lives a taboo despite the widespread availability of such media.
But then again, the survey results may be correct after all. The large numbers of adult media swarming the Japanese may mean they now spend so much more time watching and reading that they have lesser time doing them.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Rational Thinking in Action: Proceed or Not?
Have you been in situations whereby you are in a dilemma on what to do with your carefully-thought plans? How do you respond under such conditions? Do you still continue with your plans? Or do you change your plans accordingly? Well, I face many of those situations and being imperfect, have my fair share of making the right as well as wrong decisions.
Right decisions give me the rare opportunities to praise myself while wrong decisions usually result in several days of cursing and swearing plus a few empty cans of beer. Although they make my days gloomy, wrong decisions also teach me a very valuable lesson: rational thinking.
Every information/event you receive/encounter can be classified into 3 distinct groups depending on its impact on your plans: no, positive and negative impact. Those under ‘no impact’ group have no direct effect on your plans, those under ‘positive impact’ group give more justifications to your plans while those under ‘negative impact’ group have the most possibilities: proceeding, delaying or cancellation of plans. Consequently, it is this group which causes the much dreaded dilemma. Which of the 3 you should choose depends on the next step: listing down the pros and cons of each possibility followed by determination of the one with most pros and least cons. No doubt the process is prone to human errors such as wrongly classifying the group which a specific information/event belongs to and selection bias due to personal preference for one possibility over the others, but you can certainly minimize those errors with experiences.
Here’s an example to illustrate the application of the above-mentioned process. Suppose you plan to meet your ex-classmates for dinner on Friday night. As the clock ticks towards the agreed time, your boss walks towards your table and tells you he wants a very important report by midnight. Obviously this will have a negative impact on your plan. Upon listing down the pros and cons, you decide to cancel your plan and rush out the report. Suppose instead of your boss irritating you with his last-minute demand, another friend calls you out. This by itself also has a negative impact on your plan but because the pros and cons are different, you decide to say sorry and stick to your original plan.
This example is straightforward. The penalties for making the wrong decisions are also small, perhaps nothing more than a reprimand from your boss or a light quarrel with your ex-classmates. However, the situations one faces in life are not always simple and have minimal consequences. Some wrong decisions can cost you your careers, relationships or even life. Therefore, think rationally before you act. Protect your plans zealously if you must but also be open to change, cancellation included, if the need arises.
Right decisions give me the rare opportunities to praise myself while wrong decisions usually result in several days of cursing and swearing plus a few empty cans of beer. Although they make my days gloomy, wrong decisions also teach me a very valuable lesson: rational thinking.
Every information/event you receive/encounter can be classified into 3 distinct groups depending on its impact on your plans: no, positive and negative impact. Those under ‘no impact’ group have no direct effect on your plans, those under ‘positive impact’ group give more justifications to your plans while those under ‘negative impact’ group have the most possibilities: proceeding, delaying or cancellation of plans. Consequently, it is this group which causes the much dreaded dilemma. Which of the 3 you should choose depends on the next step: listing down the pros and cons of each possibility followed by determination of the one with most pros and least cons. No doubt the process is prone to human errors such as wrongly classifying the group which a specific information/event belongs to and selection bias due to personal preference for one possibility over the others, but you can certainly minimize those errors with experiences.
Here’s an example to illustrate the application of the above-mentioned process. Suppose you plan to meet your ex-classmates for dinner on Friday night. As the clock ticks towards the agreed time, your boss walks towards your table and tells you he wants a very important report by midnight. Obviously this will have a negative impact on your plan. Upon listing down the pros and cons, you decide to cancel your plan and rush out the report. Suppose instead of your boss irritating you with his last-minute demand, another friend calls you out. This by itself also has a negative impact on your plan but because the pros and cons are different, you decide to say sorry and stick to your original plan.
This example is straightforward. The penalties for making the wrong decisions are also small, perhaps nothing more than a reprimand from your boss or a light quarrel with your ex-classmates. However, the situations one faces in life are not always simple and have minimal consequences. Some wrong decisions can cost you your careers, relationships or even life. Therefore, think rationally before you act. Protect your plans zealously if you must but also be open to change, cancellation included, if the need arises.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Boosting China’s Domestic Consumption: Tax cuts or government spending?
Since the onset of the current downturn, there have been constant mentions of the need to boost domestic consumption to compensate for the drop in world consumption, particularly so for countries that are heavily reliant on exports to drive their economy. It is a good suggestion although I have to qualify that any country considering it must meet one obvious prerequisite: a large domestic market.
With its population size of 1.3 billion people, the Chinese leaders can confidently proclaim that China meets this prerequisite without any difficulty. The next step? Urge its population to spend x yuan more than their initial intended consumption (x being the drop in the world’s demand for Chinese goods) and voila, the economy is still clocking its double-digit growth. Is it that simple? Unfortunately, not really.
China’s dependency on exports consequently means large proportion of its population is employed by both local and foreign companies that cater to international demand. A slump in international demand means fewer revenues or even losses to these companies and hence, cost-cutting measures such as retrenchments which inadvertently lower the spending power of the population.
To cut a long story short, there is a positive correlation between world’s demand for Chinese goods and spending power of the Chinese population. When the world’s economy shrinks, so does the pocket of the Chinese man walking down the street. And that is excluding the fact that Chinese are savers by nature, even when times are good. Great speeches without government intervention, it appears, will unlikely create the desired effect. Do the Chinese leaders have any plans on hand?
As a matter of fact, they have 2 options and they seem to be exploring both, though I am not sure if comparing their level of contributions to domestic consumption is part of the plan. Firstly, announcing tax cuts which essentially put more money in the pockets of the people in addition to reducing the total price of certain goods. Secondly, increasing government spending whose multiplier effect may also spur more spending by the people. To me, it is more of a question of trust. The first option means trusting its people to spend and the second option means otherwise.
At the moment, both seem to have some impact. China sees record car sales in March, exceeding that of US for third month in a row due to taxes on purchases of small cars being halved. As for notable government spending, China announces that it is pumping 850 billion yuan over 3 years to reform its health care system which includes giving each village a clinic.
However, which of the 2 options will make greater contribution to domestic consumption remains to be seen. My money is on government spending because when government spends, it really spends but tax cuts may end up in savings accounts or hidden biscuit tins. But then again, it maybe because I am a Chinese infused with Confucius teachings.
With its population size of 1.3 billion people, the Chinese leaders can confidently proclaim that China meets this prerequisite without any difficulty. The next step? Urge its population to spend x yuan more than their initial intended consumption (x being the drop in the world’s demand for Chinese goods) and voila, the economy is still clocking its double-digit growth. Is it that simple? Unfortunately, not really.
China’s dependency on exports consequently means large proportion of its population is employed by both local and foreign companies that cater to international demand. A slump in international demand means fewer revenues or even losses to these companies and hence, cost-cutting measures such as retrenchments which inadvertently lower the spending power of the population.
To cut a long story short, there is a positive correlation between world’s demand for Chinese goods and spending power of the Chinese population. When the world’s economy shrinks, so does the pocket of the Chinese man walking down the street. And that is excluding the fact that Chinese are savers by nature, even when times are good. Great speeches without government intervention, it appears, will unlikely create the desired effect. Do the Chinese leaders have any plans on hand?
As a matter of fact, they have 2 options and they seem to be exploring both, though I am not sure if comparing their level of contributions to domestic consumption is part of the plan. Firstly, announcing tax cuts which essentially put more money in the pockets of the people in addition to reducing the total price of certain goods. Secondly, increasing government spending whose multiplier effect may also spur more spending by the people. To me, it is more of a question of trust. The first option means trusting its people to spend and the second option means otherwise.
At the moment, both seem to have some impact. China sees record car sales in March, exceeding that of US for third month in a row due to taxes on purchases of small cars being halved. As for notable government spending, China announces that it is pumping 850 billion yuan over 3 years to reform its health care system which includes giving each village a clinic.
However, which of the 2 options will make greater contribution to domestic consumption remains to be seen. My money is on government spending because when government spends, it really spends but tax cuts may end up in savings accounts or hidden biscuit tins. But then again, it maybe because I am a Chinese infused with Confucius teachings.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Should One Rely on Lady Luck?
I have a friend who often encounters “not-so-good” situations but somehow always manages to pull something off at the last minute that I begin to think lady luck follows him everywhere he goes. Let’s call him Mr. S for now.
Mr. S is an intelligent man who has everything going smoothly for him. Although we are both not American, I can say that he is living the American dream: great job, recently promoted, nice house and soon-to-be married. Just like any other human however, he makes a few mistakes. What stunt me is that he overcomes them rather easily.
I can recall 3 incidents: 1) He performed badly during Final Year Project period that he was given a poorly written reference letter which he believed would not be able to land him any job. Shortly after, he found a job but his peers appeared to dislike him and didn’t want to help him. A few weeks later, he was selected to join the graduate recruitment programme of a well-known investment bank.
2) He was told he would be sent to work in London. However before he knew the date and found tenants to rent his entire apartment, he told his existing housemates who promptly moved out of his apartment. As he had a mortgage, he couldn’t use his rental money and had to rely on his own savings to pay for the mortgage for that month. A month later, he found tenants. Had he not found any tenants, he would have needed to pay for the mortgages entirely from his savings for longer period of time and given the amount to be paid per month, I don’t know how long he will last.
3) Knowing that he would not be paid any salary for the month and any unnecessary spending will result in cash-flow problem, he spent S$3000 on stocks. Fortunately, his salary for the month was credited to him due to a miscommunication between HR and Finance in his company.
The question that appeared in my mind is: should one take such risks in everything that one does? I believe the answer is no. Although things may turn in your favor just like in the case of Mr. S, there is also a probability that it may not turn in your favor. Lady Luck is not always on your side. The key is to think and re-think the impact of every single step that you are going to make. Don’t only think of the favorable outcomes. Consider also the possibility of unfavorable outcomes. If the unfavorable outcomes happen, does your step have any contingency plans? Once made, there is no “Undo” button.
Mr. S is an intelligent man who has everything going smoothly for him. Although we are both not American, I can say that he is living the American dream: great job, recently promoted, nice house and soon-to-be married. Just like any other human however, he makes a few mistakes. What stunt me is that he overcomes them rather easily.
I can recall 3 incidents: 1) He performed badly during Final Year Project period that he was given a poorly written reference letter which he believed would not be able to land him any job. Shortly after, he found a job but his peers appeared to dislike him and didn’t want to help him. A few weeks later, he was selected to join the graduate recruitment programme of a well-known investment bank.
2) He was told he would be sent to work in London. However before he knew the date and found tenants to rent his entire apartment, he told his existing housemates who promptly moved out of his apartment. As he had a mortgage, he couldn’t use his rental money and had to rely on his own savings to pay for the mortgage for that month. A month later, he found tenants. Had he not found any tenants, he would have needed to pay for the mortgages entirely from his savings for longer period of time and given the amount to be paid per month, I don’t know how long he will last.
3) Knowing that he would not be paid any salary for the month and any unnecessary spending will result in cash-flow problem, he spent S$3000 on stocks. Fortunately, his salary for the month was credited to him due to a miscommunication between HR and Finance in his company.
The question that appeared in my mind is: should one take such risks in everything that one does? I believe the answer is no. Although things may turn in your favor just like in the case of Mr. S, there is also a probability that it may not turn in your favor. Lady Luck is not always on your side. The key is to think and re-think the impact of every single step that you are going to make. Don’t only think of the favorable outcomes. Consider also the possibility of unfavorable outcomes. If the unfavorable outcomes happen, does your step have any contingency plans? Once made, there is no “Undo” button.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
What are the real motives of Thailand’s protesters?
The Kingdom of Thailand has been in a state of political turmoil since the 2006 military coup that removed Thaksin Shinawatra from power. Over a period of less than 3 years, 4 people have had the honor (or perhaps dishonor) to serve as the country’s Prime Minister: Surayud Chulanont, Samak Sundaravej, Somchai Wongsawat and the current Abhisit Vejjajiva. Except for Surayud, the other 3 had to face either of the 2 different groups of protesters (the red and the yellow-shirts) depending on their political leanings. Samak and Somchai, labeled as proxies to Thaksin, had their share of unsuccessfully trying to convince the yellow-shirts to disperse. Abhisit is in no better state, having to constantly find new routes that would allow him to reach his office without encountering any red-shirts.
On the record, the leaders of each group have claimed their actions as nothing more than a noble and just cause to rid the country of corrupt and unconstitutionally elected leaders. They have also been portraying themselves as defenders of the common people who have been underrepresented and unfairly treated by the government. Some even go as far as rationalizing their actions as an act of saving the country from the brink of destruction. But do they walk the talk? Analysis of their actions seems to prove otherwise.
Besides boosting the sales of locally-manufactured colored shirts and hand clappers, I cannot seem to identify other benefits of the long-drawn protests on Thailand and its people. On the contrary, I can easily list the drawbacks. The occupation of Government House effectively crippled the administration. The closure of Bangkok’s Suvarnabhumi airport last December resulted in an approximate loss of 200 billion baht in tourism revenue which could have been used to finance many government projects whose main beneficiaries are the people. In addition, following the announcement to postpone the ASEAN Summit for the 3rd time in a row yesterday, world’s perception on Thailand has definitely taken a hit. This is expected to negatively affect both investments and job creation efforts. Ultimately, it is the people, that protesters claimed to be fighting for, which will be badly affected. So what are the real motives of these protesters (or I should say, those leading the protests)?
Well, definitely not improvement of people’s well being. For the yellow-shirts, I am guessing it is purely the allure of executive power after being in the opposition for quite some time. For the red-shirts, I am speculating Thaksin’s personal goal of getting back his currently frozen assets as the main motivation.
My advice to the Thais, in particular those donning yellow or red shirts: think and ask yourself whether your actions really benefit the country and people. If you are in doubt or your answer is no, then perhaps it is time for you to take those shirts off.
On the record, the leaders of each group have claimed their actions as nothing more than a noble and just cause to rid the country of corrupt and unconstitutionally elected leaders. They have also been portraying themselves as defenders of the common people who have been underrepresented and unfairly treated by the government. Some even go as far as rationalizing their actions as an act of saving the country from the brink of destruction. But do they walk the talk? Analysis of their actions seems to prove otherwise.
Besides boosting the sales of locally-manufactured colored shirts and hand clappers, I cannot seem to identify other benefits of the long-drawn protests on Thailand and its people. On the contrary, I can easily list the drawbacks. The occupation of Government House effectively crippled the administration. The closure of Bangkok’s Suvarnabhumi airport last December resulted in an approximate loss of 200 billion baht in tourism revenue which could have been used to finance many government projects whose main beneficiaries are the people. In addition, following the announcement to postpone the ASEAN Summit for the 3rd time in a row yesterday, world’s perception on Thailand has definitely taken a hit. This is expected to negatively affect both investments and job creation efforts. Ultimately, it is the people, that protesters claimed to be fighting for, which will be badly affected. So what are the real motives of these protesters (or I should say, those leading the protests)?
Well, definitely not improvement of people’s well being. For the yellow-shirts, I am guessing it is purely the allure of executive power after being in the opposition for quite some time. For the red-shirts, I am speculating Thaksin’s personal goal of getting back his currently frozen assets as the main motivation.
My advice to the Thais, in particular those donning yellow or red shirts: think and ask yourself whether your actions really benefit the country and people. If you are in doubt or your answer is no, then perhaps it is time for you to take those shirts off.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Maintaining Good Relationships is Never Wrong
Ask anyone walking down the street if they try to maintain good relationships with people they know and their replies are probably yes. Ask them again for the reasons and their answers probably range from lack of choice (such as “he/she determines the outcome of my performance appraisal”) to personal preference (such as “cultivating good relationships is part of my inherent nature). I have no doubt many will give reasons somewhere between the two. So which of the two is the correct one? Apparently none. Each reason is valid despite being at different end of the spectrum.
For lack of choice, let’s be pragmatic. All of us are living in the world whereby interacting with people around us, irregardless of our status or positions is a necessity, not an option to get things done. Even the US President, dubbed the most powerful man on earth, has to live by this rule. He has to maintain good relationships with the Congressmen and Senators because they determine whether his proposed bill is passed or not. He has to maintain good relationships with the other world leaders because without their support, he will not be able to push his agenda. President Bush’s hawkish attitude towards Iran effectively cut bilateral relations between the two countries, with Iran continuing its nuclear research. If he had maintained good relationships with the Iranian leaders despite his personal displeasure with their occasional anti-US rhetoric, perhaps the nuclear issues would have been resolved.
As for personal preference, life is full of surprises. Even with proper planning and calculated decisions, we can never eliminate systematic risk. Consequently, accurately predicting future outcomes is impossible. Now, we may think we will never rely on some people for help and hence do not bother to maintain good relationships with them. But as we proceed with life, plans may change and we suddenly realize we need these people after all. Put yourself in their shoes. If you are one of them, would you provide your help? Well, perhaps you would if you are a nice guy. However, it is also highly likely you may decline to help because the past events still linger in your mind.
A good friend of mine experienced both extremes first hand. While we were still studying in the university, he did his final year project under a well-known faculty member. He was unhappy with his supervisor over certain insignificant issues. Instead of setting them aside, he expressed it through his work ethic. Unimpressed, his supervisor gave him a non-commendable grade.
Subsequently, he moved to the financial industry. All the while, he never tried to mend his soured relationship with his supervisor because he was confident the different nature of the two areas means he would never need his supervisor’s help under any circumstances. After working for three years, he decided to enroll for a postgraduate course and one of the entry requirements is references from academic supervisors. Obviously, he had no courage to approach his supervisor for the precious reference letters.
Irrespective of your reasons, always keep in mind that maintaining good relationships is something worth nurturing and instilling.
For lack of choice, let’s be pragmatic. All of us are living in the world whereby interacting with people around us, irregardless of our status or positions is a necessity, not an option to get things done. Even the US President, dubbed the most powerful man on earth, has to live by this rule. He has to maintain good relationships with the Congressmen and Senators because they determine whether his proposed bill is passed or not. He has to maintain good relationships with the other world leaders because without their support, he will not be able to push his agenda. President Bush’s hawkish attitude towards Iran effectively cut bilateral relations between the two countries, with Iran continuing its nuclear research. If he had maintained good relationships with the Iranian leaders despite his personal displeasure with their occasional anti-US rhetoric, perhaps the nuclear issues would have been resolved.
As for personal preference, life is full of surprises. Even with proper planning and calculated decisions, we can never eliminate systematic risk. Consequently, accurately predicting future outcomes is impossible. Now, we may think we will never rely on some people for help and hence do not bother to maintain good relationships with them. But as we proceed with life, plans may change and we suddenly realize we need these people after all. Put yourself in their shoes. If you are one of them, would you provide your help? Well, perhaps you would if you are a nice guy. However, it is also highly likely you may decline to help because the past events still linger in your mind.
A good friend of mine experienced both extremes first hand. While we were still studying in the university, he did his final year project under a well-known faculty member. He was unhappy with his supervisor over certain insignificant issues. Instead of setting them aside, he expressed it through his work ethic. Unimpressed, his supervisor gave him a non-commendable grade.
Subsequently, he moved to the financial industry. All the while, he never tried to mend his soured relationship with his supervisor because he was confident the different nature of the two areas means he would never need his supervisor’s help under any circumstances. After working for three years, he decided to enroll for a postgraduate course and one of the entry requirements is references from academic supervisors. Obviously, he had no courage to approach his supervisor for the precious reference letters.
Irrespective of your reasons, always keep in mind that maintaining good relationships is something worth nurturing and instilling.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Pragmatism vs. Ideology: China’s SDR Proposal
Since Deng Xiaoping embarked on the policy of economic reform and openness in 1978, China has steadily been gaining prominence as a rising world power. Newspapers start allocating more spaces to articles on China. Television channels begin airing more shows on China, with topics as diverse as history and politics to foods and travels. The media blitz covering Beijing Olympics, billed as coming-of-age party last year further gave China the opportunity to showcase its remarkable transformation to the world. Gone are the days when it is an embarrassment to associate one with China.
The latest financial crisis also appears to be a blessing in disguise for the Chinese leaders. One by one, they denounced the deregulations of the financial industry by the Western capitalists which have been blamed as the root cause of the current downturn. They extolled their highly regulated system of government. Zhou Xiaochuan, Governor of China’s Central Bank, even went as far as proposing that US dollars be replaced by SDR as the new reserve currency. (SDR is accounting unit defined in terms of a basket of major currencies and is used primarily by IMF.)
As many countries, US included, begin to propose more measures to better control the financial industry, it seems that China is finally winning the war of ideology. But is the proposal to replace US dollars with SDR purely ideological? Is China sending a message that the role of US as sole superpower has ended? Well, not really according to Paul Krugman and I couldn’t agree more. Here’s his take in my own words plus additional comments.
To ensure that exchange rate remains fixed and hence its competitiveness as the world’s factory, China has been buying US dollars to counteract the increasing demand for Chinese yuan. The end result: lots and lots of US dollars in its reserves. If the US dollars weaken, there will be huge unrealized capital loss on the Chinese side.
Anticipating that such a scenario may happen in the future, in particular when the currently sidelined talks on yuan revaluation regain its momentum, China is looking at ways to minimize its impact. Replacing those US dollars with other currencies by itself is not an option because it is not possible to sell immense amount of dollars in the free market without triggering the value of dollars to drop and hence the much dreaded capital loss as well as the loss of its leading position as a premier manufacturing location.
Replacing those dollars by worldwide consensus, on the other hand, is a different story altogether. Because the transition from US dollars to SDR will be heavily regulated and closely monitored, it is unlikely to cause a sharp drop in the value of dollars, allowing the Chinese to more or less preserve their capital.
At first sight, the proposal gave the impression that China is flexing its muscle in the long-drawn ideological warfare. In reality, it is nothing more than the thinking of pragmatic leaders.
The latest financial crisis also appears to be a blessing in disguise for the Chinese leaders. One by one, they denounced the deregulations of the financial industry by the Western capitalists which have been blamed as the root cause of the current downturn. They extolled their highly regulated system of government. Zhou Xiaochuan, Governor of China’s Central Bank, even went as far as proposing that US dollars be replaced by SDR as the new reserve currency. (SDR is accounting unit defined in terms of a basket of major currencies and is used primarily by IMF.)
As many countries, US included, begin to propose more measures to better control the financial industry, it seems that China is finally winning the war of ideology. But is the proposal to replace US dollars with SDR purely ideological? Is China sending a message that the role of US as sole superpower has ended? Well, not really according to Paul Krugman and I couldn’t agree more. Here’s his take in my own words plus additional comments.
To ensure that exchange rate remains fixed and hence its competitiveness as the world’s factory, China has been buying US dollars to counteract the increasing demand for Chinese yuan. The end result: lots and lots of US dollars in its reserves. If the US dollars weaken, there will be huge unrealized capital loss on the Chinese side.
Anticipating that such a scenario may happen in the future, in particular when the currently sidelined talks on yuan revaluation regain its momentum, China is looking at ways to minimize its impact. Replacing those US dollars with other currencies by itself is not an option because it is not possible to sell immense amount of dollars in the free market without triggering the value of dollars to drop and hence the much dreaded capital loss as well as the loss of its leading position as a premier manufacturing location.
Replacing those dollars by worldwide consensus, on the other hand, is a different story altogether. Because the transition from US dollars to SDR will be heavily regulated and closely monitored, it is unlikely to cause a sharp drop in the value of dollars, allowing the Chinese to more or less preserve their capital.
At first sight, the proposal gave the impression that China is flexing its muscle in the long-drawn ideological warfare. In reality, it is nothing more than the thinking of pragmatic leaders.
Staff Benefits: Should we review it again?
The current global downturn has forced companies to start looking for cost-cutting measures. Among them, job cuts appear to be one of the hot favorites. Job cuts, however, is not a silver bullet. While it helps companies save costs, it also causes unemployment-related social issues: loan-defaults and suicides are just some of them.
To be socially responsible, I believe that companies should look at other measures and use job cuts only as a last resort. One measure that comes to my mind is review of staff benefits. For a long period of time, companies have literally been showering luxurious benefits on their staffs: business class travel, 5-star hotel stay, S$40 meal, etc. Many of you may think my proposed measure comes a bit too late and companies with logical management would probably have implemented it long before I propose it. I have to admit I thought the same initially.
However, many of you will be surprised to find that most of those luxurious benefits are still in place, even for some that have completed the supposedly rigorous review process. Worse, they exist in organizations that have been largely blamed for the current situation: banks. I have a friend who works with an international investment bank and will be traveling to London on a fully-sponsored S$7500 business class. The same friend is also staying in a 5-star hotel, courtesy of the bank, for one week prior to his departure. The only thing that hurt him is the reduction of his meal allowance from S$40 to S$20 per meal, which is still a lot considering the packets of chicken rice he can get from hawker centers or super-value meals he can get from McDonald’s. My point is: how many people on the street spend $20 for a meal everyday?
Banks have said there is a limit to the reduction of staff benefits that they can implement because of the need for talent retention. But clearly this reason is not strong enough to justify retrenchments. Is it morally okay to retrench people so that you can then use the cost savings to sustain your extravagant life? Surely, more adjustments to the staff benefits could be done. In my friend’s case, the bank could have let him fly economy and put him up in a 3-star hotel instead. The amount of savings, estimated at S$6000, could have been used to prevent another employee from losing his job for 2 months (assuming his salary is S$3000 a month). The meal allowance could have been further reduced. After all, a full meal in an average place such as food courts and hawker centers only costs between S$3-10.
To companies: Please be socially responsible. Sacrificing those luxuries to save jobs is much better than job cuts and its related social issues.
To be socially responsible, I believe that companies should look at other measures and use job cuts only as a last resort. One measure that comes to my mind is review of staff benefits. For a long period of time, companies have literally been showering luxurious benefits on their staffs: business class travel, 5-star hotel stay, S$40 meal, etc. Many of you may think my proposed measure comes a bit too late and companies with logical management would probably have implemented it long before I propose it. I have to admit I thought the same initially.
However, many of you will be surprised to find that most of those luxurious benefits are still in place, even for some that have completed the supposedly rigorous review process. Worse, they exist in organizations that have been largely blamed for the current situation: banks. I have a friend who works with an international investment bank and will be traveling to London on a fully-sponsored S$7500 business class. The same friend is also staying in a 5-star hotel, courtesy of the bank, for one week prior to his departure. The only thing that hurt him is the reduction of his meal allowance from S$40 to S$20 per meal, which is still a lot considering the packets of chicken rice he can get from hawker centers or super-value meals he can get from McDonald’s. My point is: how many people on the street spend $20 for a meal everyday?
Banks have said there is a limit to the reduction of staff benefits that they can implement because of the need for talent retention. But clearly this reason is not strong enough to justify retrenchments. Is it morally okay to retrench people so that you can then use the cost savings to sustain your extravagant life? Surely, more adjustments to the staff benefits could be done. In my friend’s case, the bank could have let him fly economy and put him up in a 3-star hotel instead. The amount of savings, estimated at S$6000, could have been used to prevent another employee from losing his job for 2 months (assuming his salary is S$3000 a month). The meal allowance could have been further reduced. After all, a full meal in an average place such as food courts and hawker centers only costs between S$3-10.
To companies: Please be socially responsible. Sacrificing those luxuries to save jobs is much better than job cuts and its related social issues.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Welcome!
We encounter many things daily and can extract lots of learning points from most if we spend just a few minutes reflecting on them. Sadly, due to our hectic schedule, we tend to brush aside those encounters, preferring to just focus on our career and study. In essence, we have missed the opportunity to learn something new, valuable and beneficial as we experience the various phases of life.
Occasionally, we do find the time to reflect, but are plain lazy to put them in writing. Very soon, we have forgotten them and are at a loss when the time comes to draw on them.
My motivation for writing this blog is to put these learning points in writing and share them with as many people as possible. I also hope to expand my collection of learning points through your experiences. So please be generous with your comments. The topics I cover will be diverse, ranging from my personal encounters through coffee talks and travel to news articles on anything under the sun. I guess I don’t have to explain why I have called this blog “The Perpetual Apprentice”
Cya around!
Occasionally, we do find the time to reflect, but are plain lazy to put them in writing. Very soon, we have forgotten them and are at a loss when the time comes to draw on them.
My motivation for writing this blog is to put these learning points in writing and share them with as many people as possible. I also hope to expand my collection of learning points through your experiences. So please be generous with your comments. The topics I cover will be diverse, ranging from my personal encounters through coffee talks and travel to news articles on anything under the sun. I guess I don’t have to explain why I have called this blog “The Perpetual Apprentice”
Cya around!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.JPG)
