Do you wish that there could be substantial discussion which could lead to a more humane and environmentally responsible form of globalization?
That is actually the purpose of the first-ever Zermatt Summit, which will address the major economic and ethical issues raised by globalization (the disconnect between the world of high finance and the real economy; the economy itself is not serving the common good as it fails to properly serve the dignity of individual citizens; and, at an individual level, difficult ethical dilemmas emerge which are almost impossible to resolve).
Expected are representatives of academia, business, government, non-governmental agencies (NGOs), trade unionists, performing artists....
Discussion will focus on how the processes of globalization can be changed to serve the common good - exploring and formulating a roadmap of how to navigate the challenges currently facing mankind and help create a better world.
The idea is that people need to be placed at the centre of the globalization process, so that the world of high finance can serve the economy, while the economy serves the common good, and the common good cares for the people, enhancing the prospects of poorer and socially marginalised groups.
For the individual to be able to reach his or her full potential, he or she must be able to blossom within a society which supports the family, community and enterprise in an inclusive political structure. The broader challenge is for a wider realisation of the responsibility of the individual within society and vice-versa.
The manifest failure of economists and politicians to anticipate the recent financial crisis can not be understood without considering the underlying failure to take into account the impact on the individual of the driving process of global capital. Obstacles to creating a better world will remain until you and I play a more significant role in the process of globalization.
The notion of Common good
The rapid process of globalization makes it an even greater challenge to balance the needs of human beings whether they are material, spiritual or emotional with those of society at large. Under these circumstances, using terms such as the ‘common good’ could be very helpful in defining new rules. Implicit in the common good is a full respect for both the individual and collective interests of society while at the same time asking the individual to demand less for herself or himself, and to concentrate more on serving the community.
So the Zermatt Summit will focus on the respective roles and responsibilities of institutions and individuals from the perspective of furthering the common good.
More than that, the three days will be devoted to forming concrete and practical recommendations.
After the Summit has been completed, the Advisory Board, made up of senior business leaders and experts, will formulate recommendations from the Summit, which will be widely published. A progress update on how these recommendations are being adopted worldwide will be presented at the following Summit.
The programme is:
Thursday June 3, 2010
14.00 - 17.00 Welcome and registration
16.30 - 17.00
Welcome address by Christopher Wasserman - President of the Zermatt Summit Foundation
17.00 - 17.30 Piano concert
18.30 - 19.30 Welcome Reception
________________________________________
Day 2
Friday June 4, 2010
09.00 - 09.45 Welcome Address
The world crisis and the change of paradigm by Prof. Philippe de Woot Restoring the Ethical and Political Dimension of the Corporation:
Rebalancing Entrepreneurship, Leadership and Corporate Statesmanship
09.45 - 11.00 Keynote Address 1.1 (Plenary session)
• Revisiting the corporate raison d’être
Keynote Address 1.2 (Plenary session)
• Entrepreneurship and the economic progress
11.00 - 11.30 Coffee break
11.30 - 13.00 Roundtable 1 (Plenary session)
• Finance to serve entrepreneurship and economic progress
13.00 - 14.30 Lunch
14.30 - 15.15 Keynote Address 2 (Plenary session)
• Back to ethics, towards a responsible leadership
15.15 - 15.30 Coffee break
15.30 - 16.30 Workshop 2*
• The responsible supply chain
• The responsible consumption
• Developing responsible leaders
16.30 - 16.45 Coffee break
16.45 - 17.15 Reporting back from workshop (Plenary session)
17.15 - 18.45 Roundtable 2 (Plenary session)
• Ethics and corporate responsibility: Economy to serve
the Common Good
18.45 - 19.00 Break
19.00 - 20.00 World premiere viewing of the film
«Doing Virtuous Business»
20.00 Departure for the «Swiss Night»
(return by 24.00)
________________________________________
Day 3
Saturday June 5, 2010
09.00 - 09.45 Keynote Address 3 (Plenary session)
• Corporate Statesmanship and Common Good
09.45 - 10.00 Coffee-break
10.00 - 11.00 Workshop 3*
• Business and the political debate
• Multi stakeholders initiatives
• Partnering with NGOs and civil society
11.00 - 11.15 Coffee-break
11.15 - 11.30 Reporting back from workshop (Plenary session)
11.30 - 13.00 Roundtable 3 (Plenary session)
• Corporate Statesmanship and Common good: Common Good to serve the person
13.00 - 14.30 Lunch
14.30 - 15.15 Keynote Address 4 (Plenary session)
• Changing hearts and minds: the role of spirituality
15.15 - 15.45 Coffee break
15.45 - 17.15 Roundtable 4 (Plenary session)
Changing hearts and minds
17.15 - 17.45 Concluding Summary:
Towards a new corporate culture
by Prof. Henri-Claude de Bettignies - CEIBS
18.00 End of the Summit
Farewell cocktails
The Zermatt Summit Foundation has been declared a foundation of public interest at both a federal level in Switzerland and at the cantonal level in Valais.
The Board Members are:
• Christopher Wasserman, President
President, Terolab Surface Group
President, Ecophilos Foundation
• Nicolas Michel, Vice President
Professor of International Law at the
Geneva Graduate Institute of International
and Development Studies. Former Deputy
General Secretary for legal affairs of the UN
• H.I. and R.H. Archduke Rudolf of Austria,
of Hapsburg-Lorraine
Founder and Managing Director of Triple A
Gestion S.A.
• Father Nicolas Buttet
Founder and Moderator of the Eucharistein
Fraternity, Founder of Philanthropos
European Institute
• Jean-René Fournier
Member of the Federal States Council (Swiss
Parliament). Former President of the Valais
government
• Theodore Roosevelt Malloch
Chairman and CEO of The Roosevelt Group
• Antonin Pujos
Non-executive director, Adviser
Chairman of the Research Club of the French
Institute of Directors (IFA)
The Foundation's Advisory Board consists of:
• Henri-Claude de Bettignies (Chairman)
Distinguished Professor of Globally Responsible Leadership at the China Europe International Business School Shanghai (CEIBS) AVIVA Chair Emeritus Professor of Leadership and Responsibilty Emeritus Professor of Asian Business and Comparative Management at INSEAD Director of CEDRE (Centre for the Study of Development and Responsibility)
• Elizabeth Sombard
Founder and President Résonnance Foundation
• Philippe de Woot
Professor Emeritus of the Catholic University Louvain
Holder of a PhD in Law and Economic Sciences
Harvard Faculty Associate
• Guido Palazzo
Professor of Business Ethics at HEC University of Lausanne
• Jean Staune
Founder and General Secretary of the Interdisciplinary University of Paris. Professor in Philosophy of Sciences at the MBA of the Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales (HEC) Director of the collection “The Time of Science” at Fayard Editions
Partner institutions of the Summit include, in no particular order:
Ecophilos (www.ecophilos.org)
Entreprise et Progres (www.entreprise-progres.net)
The China Europe International Business School (www.ceibs.edu)
The Yale Center for Faith and Culture (www.yale.edu/faith)
Oxford's Institute for Religion and Society in Asia (http://irsa.co.uk/index.php)
The Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative (www.grli.org)
Transforming Business, the University of Cambridge, UK (www.transformingbusiness.net)
BTW Transforming Business (TB) is co-ordinated by Dr Peter Heslam, Dr Flint McGlaughlin, Dr Rick Goossen, and John Kay and has the benefit of a number of distinguished patrons and advisers, some of whom are listed below.
TB addresses, not surprisingly, research questions that are close to the heart of the Zermatt Summit, such as:
How can the creative forces of free enterprise be effectively applied to the most pressing social, economic, and moral challenge of our time: the elimination of poverty?
How can we best instill and nurture vision, motivation, and values-led entrepreneurial aspirations, especially in young people?
What impact do relational, moral, and spiritual intelligence have on business solutions to poverty?
What is the connection between business success and institutional, spiritual, relational and moral values?
How can competition best foster creativity and innovation?
TB's Patrons and Advisers include:
Prof Helen Alford (Pontifical University, Rome)
Ben Andradi (Servista)
Prof Alan Barrell (Cambridge entrepreneur and academic)
Matthew Bishop (The Economist)
Prof Philip Booth (Institute of Economic Affairs)
Paul Chandler (Traidcraft)
Dr Stephen Copp (Bournemouth University)
Dr Catherine Cowley (Heythrop College, London University)
Prof John Dunning (Reading University)
Anthony Farr (Allan Gray Orbis Foundation)
Larry Farrell (Farrell International)
Prof Ram Gidoomal CBE (Syntel)
Dr Alan Gillespie (Ulster Bank)
Lord Brian Griffiths (Goldman Sachs)
Stephen Green (HSBC)
Dr David Hillson (Risk Doctor)
Dr Kurt Hoffman (Shell Foundation)
Prof Sir John Houghton (Victoria Institute)
Lord Geoffrey Howe (former Chancellor of the Exchequer)
Prof David Jackman (London Financial Academy)
Prof Peter Johnson (Durham University)
Prof Graeme Leach (Institute of Directors)
Prof Jack Mahoney (London University)
Clive Mather (Tearfund)
Dr David Miller (Yale)
Charles Miller Smith (Scottish Power)
Mark McAllister (Fairfield Energy)
Sir Mark Moody-Stuart (Anglo American)
Prof Geoff Moore (Durham Business School)
Sir Jeremy Morse (Lloyds)
Prof Michael Naughton (St Thomas University)
Prof Simon Peyton-Jones (Microsoft)
Dr Jennifer Roback Morse (Acton Institute)
Prof Theodore Roosevelt Malloch (Yale)
Dr Vinay Samuel (Institute for Development Research)
Lynne Sedgemore, CBE (Centre for Excellence in Leadership)
Prof Max Stackhouse (Princeton)
Sir Christopher Wates (Wates Group)
Sir John Whitmore (Performance Consulting)
Prof Paul Williams (DTZ and Regent College)
Prof John Wood, CBE (Imperial College, London University)
Prof Michael Woolcock (Harvard/World Bank)
ends
Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, March 20, 2010
A new credit card scam
On the Karmayog Yahoogroup, details have just been posted of aa new credit card scam
"This one is pretty slick since they provide YOU with all the information, except the one piece they want.
"Note, the callers do not ask for your card number; they already have it....
"One of our employees was called on Wednesday from 'VISA', and I was called on Thursday from 'Master Card'.
"The scam works like this:
Caller: 'This is (name), and I'm calling from the Security and Fraud Department at VISA. My Badge number is 12460. You r card has been flagged for an unusual purchase pattern, and I'm calling to verify. This would be on your VISA card which was issued by (name of bank). Did you purchase an Anti-Telemarketing Device for $497.99 from a Marketing company based in ... ?'
"When you say 'No', the caller continues with, 'Then we will be issuing a credit to your account. This is a company we have been watching and the charges range from $297 to $497, just under the $500 purchase pattern that flags most cards. Before your next statement, the credit will be sent to (gives you your address), is that correct?'
"You say 'yes'. The caller continues - 'I will be starting a Fraud investigation. If you have any questions, you should call the 1- 800 number listed on the back of your card (1-800 -VISA) and ask for Security.'
"You will need to refer to this Control Number. The caller then gives you a 6 digit number. 'Do you need me to read it again?'
"Here's the IMPORTANT part on how the scam works.
"The caller then says, 'I need to verify you are in possession of your card'. He'll ask you to 'turn your card over and look for some numbers'. There are 7 numbers; the first 4 are part of your card number, the next 3 are the security Numbers that verify you are the possessor of the card. These are the numbers you sometimes use to make Internet purchases to prove you have the card. The caller will ask you to read the 3 numbers to him. After you tell the caller the 3 numbers, he'll say, 'That is correct, I just needed to verify that the card has not been lost or stolen, and that you still have your card. Do you have any other questions?' After you say No, the caller then thanks you and states, 'Don't hesitate to call back if you do, and hangs up.
"You actually say very little, and they never ask for or tell you the Card number. But after we were called on Wednesday, we called back within 20 minutes to ask a question.. Are we glad we did! The *real* VISA Security Department told us it was a scam and in the last 15 minutes a new purchase of $497..99 was charged to our card.
Long story - short - we made a real fraud report and closed the VISA account. VISA is reissuing us a new number. What the scammers want is the 3-digit PIN number on the back of the card, don't give it to them. Instead, tell them you'll call VISA or Master card directly for verification of their conversation. The real VISA told us that they will never ask for anything on the card as they already know the information since they issued the card! If you give the scammers your 3 Digit PIN Number, you think you're receiving a credit. However, by the time you get your statement you'll see charges for purchases you didn't make, and by then it's almost too late and/or more difficult to actually file a fraud report.
What makes this more remarkable is that on Thursday, I got a call from a 'Jason Richardson of Master Card' with a word-for-word repeat of the VISA scam. This time I didn't let him finish. I hung up! We filed a police report, as instructed by VISA. The police said they are taking several of these reports daily! They also urged us to tell everybody we know that this Scam is happening. "
--
ends Sphere: Related Content
"This one is pretty slick since they provide YOU with all the information, except the one piece they want.
"Note, the callers do not ask for your card number; they already have it....
"One of our employees was called on Wednesday from 'VISA', and I was called on Thursday from 'Master Card'.
"The scam works like this:
Caller: 'This is (name), and I'm calling from the Security and Fraud Department at VISA. My Badge number is 12460. You r card has been flagged for an unusual purchase pattern, and I'm calling to verify. This would be on your VISA card which was issued by (name of bank). Did you purchase an Anti-Telemarketing Device for $497.99 from a Marketing company based in ... ?'
"When you say 'No', the caller continues with, 'Then we will be issuing a credit to your account. This is a company we have been watching and the charges range from $297 to $497, just under the $500 purchase pattern that flags most cards. Before your next statement, the credit will be sent to (gives you your address), is that correct?'
"You say 'yes'. The caller continues - 'I will be starting a Fraud investigation. If you have any questions, you should call the 1- 800 number listed on the back of your card (1-800 -VISA) and ask for Security.'
"You will need to refer to this Control Number. The caller then gives you a 6 digit number. 'Do you need me to read it again?'
"Here's the IMPORTANT part on how the scam works.
"The caller then says, 'I need to verify you are in possession of your card'. He'll ask you to 'turn your card over and look for some numbers'. There are 7 numbers; the first 4 are part of your card number, the next 3 are the security Numbers that verify you are the possessor of the card. These are the numbers you sometimes use to make Internet purchases to prove you have the card. The caller will ask you to read the 3 numbers to him. After you tell the caller the 3 numbers, he'll say, 'That is correct, I just needed to verify that the card has not been lost or stolen, and that you still have your card. Do you have any other questions?' After you say No, the caller then thanks you and states, 'Don't hesitate to call back if you do, and hangs up.
"You actually say very little, and they never ask for or tell you the Card number. But after we were called on Wednesday, we called back within 20 minutes to ask a question.. Are we glad we did! The *real* VISA Security Department told us it was a scam and in the last 15 minutes a new purchase of $497..99 was charged to our card.
Long story - short - we made a real fraud report and closed the VISA account. VISA is reissuing us a new number. What the scammers want is the 3-digit PIN number on the back of the card, don't give it to them. Instead, tell them you'll call VISA or Master card directly for verification of their conversation. The real VISA told us that they will never ask for anything on the card as they already know the information since they issued the card! If you give the scammers your 3 Digit PIN Number, you think you're receiving a credit. However, by the time you get your statement you'll see charges for purchases you didn't make, and by then it's almost too late and/or more difficult to actually file a fraud report.
What makes this more remarkable is that on Thursday, I got a call from a 'Jason Richardson of Master Card' with a word-for-word repeat of the VISA scam. This time I didn't let him finish. I hung up! We filed a police report, as instructed by VISA. The police said they are taking several of these reports daily! They also urged us to tell everybody we know that this Scam is happening. "
--
ends Sphere: Related Content
Facebook overtakes Google, so....?
At the start of 2008, the percentage of website traffic that resorted to Google was just under 6%, while the percentage of website traffic that resorted to Facebook was around 1%.
The interesting thing is that, as website traffic continued to explode, the percentage of the traffic that resorted to Google barely moved: perhaps it is something like 7% today. Meanwhile, Facebook continued to increase its market share, till it overtook Google a couple of weeks ago.
What possible explanations might be suggested for these facts?
1. More and more people are using the web as a quick and easy way to upload pictures and the like, than are using the web to look for information.
2. As the proportion of web users who use search engines to look for information declines, Google has been unsuccessful in keeping its lead over rival search engines such as Clusty. Sphere: Related Content
The interesting thing is that, as website traffic continued to explode, the percentage of the traffic that resorted to Google barely moved: perhaps it is something like 7% today. Meanwhile, Facebook continued to increase its market share, till it overtook Google a couple of weeks ago.
What possible explanations might be suggested for these facts?
1. More and more people are using the web as a quick and easy way to upload pictures and the like, than are using the web to look for information.
2. As the proportion of web users who use search engines to look for information declines, Google has been unsuccessful in keeping its lead over rival search engines such as Clusty. Sphere: Related Content
Economists on Financial Reform proposals
The National Association for Business Economics' latest semi-annual Economic Policy Survey of its members (mostly private-sector economists), conducted between February 4 and February 22 this year, has just been released:
* Fifty-four percent feel that creating such an agency would not impair safety and soundness regulation; 25 percent believe it would be detrimental
* Forty-three percent of respondents indicate that a consumer financial protection agency would not impair access to credit while 39 percent believe it would.
* Fifty-seven percent believe that barring depository institutions from proprietary
trading and hedge fund operations will reduce systemic risk to the financial sector; 34% believe that it will not
* Fifty-nine percent believe that imposing size restrictions on these companies would not be an effective means of addressing the Too-Big-To-Fail issue. It would have been most interesting if the survey had followed this up with a question to this 59%: what do they believe WOULD be an effective way of addressing the Too-Big-To-Fail issue? Sphere: Related Content
* Fifty-four percent feel that creating such an agency would not impair safety and soundness regulation; 25 percent believe it would be detrimental
* Forty-three percent of respondents indicate that a consumer financial protection agency would not impair access to credit while 39 percent believe it would.
* Fifty-seven percent believe that barring depository institutions from proprietary
trading and hedge fund operations will reduce systemic risk to the financial sector; 34% believe that it will not
* Fifty-nine percent believe that imposing size restrictions on these companies would not be an effective means of addressing the Too-Big-To-Fail issue. It would have been most interesting if the survey had followed this up with a question to this 59%: what do they believe WOULD be an effective way of addressing the Too-Big-To-Fail issue? Sphere: Related Content
Friday, March 19, 2010
Non-Muslims in Pakistan
The Pakistani Embassy in at least one country is refusing to renew Passports for citizens who are not Muslims, asking them to convert to Islam before the Passport can be renewed.
This naturally makes it impossible for non-Muslim Pakistanis to remain abroad or to travel abroad.
I have not been in touch with any Pakistani official about this matter, as I do not know any Pakistani officials in the country concerned.
But if I was to get in touch, I would expect them to issue a routine denial, as that is not the image of "tolerant Islam" and "multicultural Pakistan" that Pakistan probably wishes to project.
However, experiences are experiences. I am retailing above the experience of someone I know personally.
To counter it persuasively (at least so far as I am concerned), Pakistani authorities would need to produce some facts rather than a mere denial.
What kinds of facts? Perhaps the figures regarding how many Passports of non-Muslims have in fact been renewed in the last year. Sphere: Related Content
This naturally makes it impossible for non-Muslim Pakistanis to remain abroad or to travel abroad.
I have not been in touch with any Pakistani official about this matter, as I do not know any Pakistani officials in the country concerned.
But if I was to get in touch, I would expect them to issue a routine denial, as that is not the image of "tolerant Islam" and "multicultural Pakistan" that Pakistan probably wishes to project.
However, experiences are experiences. I am retailing above the experience of someone I know personally.
To counter it persuasively (at least so far as I am concerned), Pakistani authorities would need to produce some facts rather than a mere denial.
What kinds of facts? Perhaps the figures regarding how many Passports of non-Muslims have in fact been renewed in the last year. Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, March 13, 2010
March Madness
March Madness is a disease apparently specific to the USA, and specific further to the time-slot March 14 and March 19.
What happens in the USA during these dates? That's when activity surrounding the NCAA basketball tournament is at its height.
What is the NCAA? The National Collegiate Athletic Association.
So does that mean the Association affiliates only colleges? Yes.
Why does the whole nation suffer from "March Madness" because of a basketball championship in which only colleges can participate? That's a good question to ask Americans. I haven't yet received a satisfactory answer....
Is there any other country in the world where a similar "madness" grips an entire nation because some young people choose to leap up and down a marked court, throwing a round bit of leather filled with air? Well, truth to tell, I can't think of any.
So what symptoms does "march madness" display? Never having been in the USA during those months (I haven't actually visited the USA that often, and when I have it has, with one exception, always either for conferences or to give one or more lectures, so I don't speak from first-hand observation), I can only tell you that apparently nearly every worker participates in gambling on the results organised within the office; all the gossip focuses on the matches, teams and players; and everyone is obsessed with watching videos of the matches.
A company called Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. (which describes itself as the USA's "first, oldest and premier outplacement consulting organization") has calculated the "business cost" of the Madness. By "business cost" it means all the salaries paid by employers but not used by employees for the purpose for which they are employed.
What is the "business cost" according to Challenger, Gray and Christmas? $1.8 billion.
That's an impressive figure.
In that calculation, I wonder if they factored in the BENEFITS to the businesses from the team-feeling that is built up by all the gossip, the joint-watching of matches and videos, and so on? Sphere: Related Content
What happens in the USA during these dates? That's when activity surrounding the NCAA basketball tournament is at its height.
What is the NCAA? The National Collegiate Athletic Association.
So does that mean the Association affiliates only colleges? Yes.
Why does the whole nation suffer from "March Madness" because of a basketball championship in which only colleges can participate? That's a good question to ask Americans. I haven't yet received a satisfactory answer....
Is there any other country in the world where a similar "madness" grips an entire nation because some young people choose to leap up and down a marked court, throwing a round bit of leather filled with air? Well, truth to tell, I can't think of any.
So what symptoms does "march madness" display? Never having been in the USA during those months (I haven't actually visited the USA that often, and when I have it has, with one exception, always either for conferences or to give one or more lectures, so I don't speak from first-hand observation), I can only tell you that apparently nearly every worker participates in gambling on the results organised within the office; all the gossip focuses on the matches, teams and players; and everyone is obsessed with watching videos of the matches.
A company called Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. (which describes itself as the USA's "first, oldest and premier outplacement consulting organization") has calculated the "business cost" of the Madness. By "business cost" it means all the salaries paid by employers but not used by employees for the purpose for which they are employed.
What is the "business cost" according to Challenger, Gray and Christmas? $1.8 billion.
That's an impressive figure.
In that calculation, I wonder if they factored in the BENEFITS to the businesses from the team-feeling that is built up by all the gossip, the joint-watching of matches and videos, and so on? Sphere: Related Content
Monday, March 01, 2010
Experiences in Los Angeles last week
If one has a rental car, check what time they allow you to return it, instead of simply assuming on the basis of logic that the relevant office will be open!
Our flight was at 0615 but the rental car office did not open till 0500...
Not only did we miss out on an hour of sleep that we could have had, we were panic-stricken at the possibility of missing the flight. Though the security guard at the office told us he'd been there 11 years and there had never been a problem, that was not much comfort to us as HE was not the person who would have heard about it if someone had missed a flight!
Still, we could not do anything about it
We did think that we'd drive to the Terminal, check in first and then return the car.
But we were defeated by the absence of road signs to the Terminal from the Car Rental Area - the road signs are otherwise plentiful and clear all across California!
So we consoled ourselves with a tea and pancakes at the Dennys nearby....where a helpful fellow-customer pointed the directions to a gas satation where we could fill up the car tank - the TomTom refused to show us any gas stations in that vicinity!
Having eventually returned the car, the shuttle got us efficiently to the Terminal, so we were quite shocked when the machine check-ins told us that it was too late to check in for the flight
the ladies at the baggage-drop counters indicated that we should check in further to our left, but as we rushed in that direction we could see nothing that looked like check in counters, so we asked the man just a bit further along who was checking paassports, but he just pointed us back in the direction of the machine terminals and seemed to have no idea of what we wanted or needed - his job was to check paassports and he knew about that but apparently not anything so exotic as passengers wanting to check in without using machine terminals
When we did find the check-in counters (further along from the man at Passport Control), the lady there was efficient and helpful and we were able to proceed without problems.... Sphere: Related Content
Our flight was at 0615 but the rental car office did not open till 0500...
Not only did we miss out on an hour of sleep that we could have had, we were panic-stricken at the possibility of missing the flight. Though the security guard at the office told us he'd been there 11 years and there had never been a problem, that was not much comfort to us as HE was not the person who would have heard about it if someone had missed a flight!
Still, we could not do anything about it
We did think that we'd drive to the Terminal, check in first and then return the car.
But we were defeated by the absence of road signs to the Terminal from the Car Rental Area - the road signs are otherwise plentiful and clear all across California!
So we consoled ourselves with a tea and pancakes at the Dennys nearby....where a helpful fellow-customer pointed the directions to a gas satation where we could fill up the car tank - the TomTom refused to show us any gas stations in that vicinity!
Having eventually returned the car, the shuttle got us efficiently to the Terminal, so we were quite shocked when the machine check-ins told us that it was too late to check in for the flight
the ladies at the baggage-drop counters indicated that we should check in further to our left, but as we rushed in that direction we could see nothing that looked like check in counters, so we asked the man just a bit further along who was checking paassports, but he just pointed us back in the direction of the machine terminals and seemed to have no idea of what we wanted or needed - his job was to check paassports and he knew about that but apparently not anything so exotic as passengers wanting to check in without using machine terminals
When we did find the check-in counters (further along from the man at Passport Control), the lady there was efficient and helpful and we were able to proceed without problems.... Sphere: Related Content
How bad is the recession in the USA?
At a diner in LA, a fellow customer mentions that he is a security guard but has been out of work for 8 months
Someone I meet somwhere in southern California last week says his parents house was woth 210K before the recession and is now worth maybe 90K
at one of my lectures, someone says that everyone in the US personally knows at least one person in financial difficulty because the have been laid off or have lost money in business: "It has never been so bad in living momory: Our parents used to tell us about conditions like this during the 30s, but we've never experienced anything like this till now" Sphere: Related Content
Someone I meet somwhere in southern California last week says his parents house was woth 210K before the recession and is now worth maybe 90K
at one of my lectures, someone says that everyone in the US personally knows at least one person in financial difficulty because the have been laid off or have lost money in business: "It has never been so bad in living momory: Our parents used to tell us about conditions like this during the 30s, but we've never experienced anything like this till now" Sphere: Related Content
Ethics at banks and investment funds
Someone who has recently completed his PhD on a topic related with this broad field writes to me as follows:
"Though I was able to graduate, the story of my dissertation is largely the story of research that never took place.... I approached (more than two dozen) banks and investment funds with a proposal to do ethics related research, and was consistently turned down. In my dissertation defense, I compared myself to a fly trying to get through a glass windowpane, (but) the financial world remained forever on the other side."
The parentheses above are mine.
As far as I can work out, his research started at the height of the boom, and he persisted with his efforts to do the research till well after the bust.
Was the refusal of the banks and funds to co-operate with the research mere cussedness, or did the banks and funds know that they should not be letting any research get done on the ethics in their companies? Sphere: Related Content
"Though I was able to graduate, the story of my dissertation is largely the story of research that never took place.... I approached (more than two dozen) banks and investment funds with a proposal to do ethics related research, and was consistently turned down. In my dissertation defense, I compared myself to a fly trying to get through a glass windowpane, (but) the financial world remained forever on the other side."
The parentheses above are mine.
As far as I can work out, his research started at the height of the boom, and he persisted with his efforts to do the research till well after the bust.
Was the refusal of the banks and funds to co-operate with the research mere cussedness, or did the banks and funds know that they should not be letting any research get done on the ethics in their companies? Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, February 13, 2010
the crash of the Euro - predicted 7 years ago - and now at hand?
The question - have consistently raised over all these years is: how long will the German taxpayer continue to pay for the Euro?
It looks as if the Germans are finally going to withdfraw the carpet from under the Euro
Expect initially a devaluation of the Euro, then of the PIGS currencies as well as of the Chinese
Expect all commodities (including gold) to decline substantially following the Chinese currency down, and loss of demand
At present, it is difficult to see where stability is to be found.
What comes to mind, as - have said rarlier, is the dollar, the Swiss Franc and perhaps the Indian Rupee (possibly also the British Pound - though the decline of the Euro may happen too fast to really benefit it). Sphere: Related Content
It looks as if the Germans are finally going to withdfraw the carpet from under the Euro
Expect initially a devaluation of the Euro, then of the PIGS currencies as well as of the Chinese
Expect all commodities (including gold) to decline substantially following the Chinese currency down, and loss of demand
At present, it is difficult to see where stability is to be found.
What comes to mind, as - have said rarlier, is the dollar, the Swiss Franc and perhaps the Indian Rupee (possibly also the British Pound - though the decline of the Euro may happen too fast to really benefit it). Sphere: Related Content
Friday, February 12, 2010
Dr Arun Gadre wins this year's Maanav Adhikaar Paaritaushik (Human Dignity Award)
NEWS RELEASE
The winner of this year's Maanav Adhikaar Paaritaushik (Human Dignity Award) of Rupees One Lakh in memory of Professor M. M. Guptara, is:
Dr Arun Gadre, of Pune, Maharashtra.
Arun Gadre is a doctor and a writer.
The citation reads:
"Dr Gadre worked for some 20 years in a rural part of Maharashtra as a gynaecologist: instead of working in a major city where he would have received a reasonable income and a comfortable quality of life, he chose rather to invest the best years of his life to helping rural women. As the only MD within a radius of 50 km, in a draught prone and poor area, with much more irregular electricity than in our cities, with scarcity of water, paucity of trained assistants, no blood transfusion facilities, and no one to assist, he conducted around 5500 deliveries as well as other major surgeries.
"In spite of his heavy duties in the challenging environment, Dr Gadre somehow found time to exercise his gift for writing, to produce in fact many different books. Two of them are due to be published soon, one on ante-natal care and one on HIV/ AIDS counselling. However, he has 14 books which are already published - three for semi-literate people on medical subjects, two medical textbooks, one on premarital counseling, one is a work of philosophy, one is autobiographical, and six are novels.
"Many of the books have won awards. His philosophical work, BHAVA PESHI, won the Shenolikar Puraskar for the best book of the year in philosophy from the Maharashtra Sahitya Parishad Pune, as well as the Marathwada Sahitya Mandal Puraskar. His novel, EK HOTA FENGADYA, won the Shankar Patil Puraskar for the best novel of the year, from the Maharashtra Sahitya Parishad, Pune. His novel GHATACHAKRA won the H. N. Apte Puraskar from Maharashtra State as well as the VS Khandekar Puraskar for the best novel of the year from the Maharashtra Sahitya Parishad Pune. His latest novel, VADHASTAMBH, won the Vikhe Patil Puraskar, as well as the Vaman Malhar Joshi Puraskar for the best novel of the year from Maharashtra Sahitya Parishad Pune. His latest book, a biography of the (now practically unknown) founder of modern India, William Carey, has just been published under the title: “Ase Hote William Carey” (Rajhans Prakashan, Pune).
"We probably have many people in our country who have put in decades of medical work in poverty-stricken, resource-poor and ill-connected rural areas, but there are hardly any who have combined that with outstanding literary work– and all of Dr. Gadre's works, whether philosophical, biographical, fictional or medical, provide evidence of a deep commitment to humane values which seem to be under threat in our world. We hope that the award will inspire many people to follow Dr Gadre's example of self-sacrice, and of the triumph of the human spirit over adverse circumstances, and that it will therefore inspire even more people to serve our rural areas with distinction".
Dr Gadre is the second winner of the Maanav Adhikaar Paaritaushik (Human Dignity Award). The first winner was Dr John Dayal, a Member of the Indian National Commission for Minorities.
Recognising that the award is only a token, the Guptara family deeply appreciates Dr. Gadre's lifetime of outstanding service to our country.
Dr Gadre is available for interview. Please email Professor Prabhu Guptara for contact details. Sphere: Related Content
The winner of this year's Maanav Adhikaar Paaritaushik (Human Dignity Award) of Rupees One Lakh in memory of Professor M. M. Guptara, is:
Dr Arun Gadre, of Pune, Maharashtra.
Arun Gadre is a doctor and a writer.
The citation reads:
"Dr Gadre worked for some 20 years in a rural part of Maharashtra as a gynaecologist: instead of working in a major city where he would have received a reasonable income and a comfortable quality of life, he chose rather to invest the best years of his life to helping rural women. As the only MD within a radius of 50 km, in a draught prone and poor area, with much more irregular electricity than in our cities, with scarcity of water, paucity of trained assistants, no blood transfusion facilities, and no one to assist, he conducted around 5500 deliveries as well as other major surgeries.
"In spite of his heavy duties in the challenging environment, Dr Gadre somehow found time to exercise his gift for writing, to produce in fact many different books. Two of them are due to be published soon, one on ante-natal care and one on HIV/ AIDS counselling. However, he has 14 books which are already published - three for semi-literate people on medical subjects, two medical textbooks, one on premarital counseling, one is a work of philosophy, one is autobiographical, and six are novels.
"Many of the books have won awards. His philosophical work, BHAVA PESHI, won the Shenolikar Puraskar for the best book of the year in philosophy from the Maharashtra Sahitya Parishad Pune, as well as the Marathwada Sahitya Mandal Puraskar. His novel, EK HOTA FENGADYA, won the Shankar Patil Puraskar for the best novel of the year, from the Maharashtra Sahitya Parishad, Pune. His novel GHATACHAKRA won the H. N. Apte Puraskar from Maharashtra State as well as the VS Khandekar Puraskar for the best novel of the year from the Maharashtra Sahitya Parishad Pune. His latest novel, VADHASTAMBH, won the Vikhe Patil Puraskar, as well as the Vaman Malhar Joshi Puraskar for the best novel of the year from Maharashtra Sahitya Parishad Pune. His latest book, a biography of the (now practically unknown) founder of modern India, William Carey, has just been published under the title: “Ase Hote William Carey” (Rajhans Prakashan, Pune).
"We probably have many people in our country who have put in decades of medical work in poverty-stricken, resource-poor and ill-connected rural areas, but there are hardly any who have combined that with outstanding literary work– and all of Dr. Gadre's works, whether philosophical, biographical, fictional or medical, provide evidence of a deep commitment to humane values which seem to be under threat in our world. We hope that the award will inspire many people to follow Dr Gadre's example of self-sacrice, and of the triumph of the human spirit over adverse circumstances, and that it will therefore inspire even more people to serve our rural areas with distinction".
Dr Gadre is the second winner of the Maanav Adhikaar Paaritaushik (Human Dignity Award). The first winner was Dr John Dayal, a Member of the Indian National Commission for Minorities.
Recognising that the award is only a token, the Guptara family deeply appreciates Dr. Gadre's lifetime of outstanding service to our country.
Dr Gadre is available for interview. Please email Professor Prabhu Guptara for contact details. Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
Having seriously damaged its own economy, the UK ....
is now being encouraged to resist global initiatives to prevent continuing such damage, both in the UK and in other countries:
in a report published today, the European Union committee of the House of Lords (the upper chamber of the British Parliament) has urged the UK to withhold its consent to European Union rules regulating the hedge fund and private equity industries!
I hope that the House of Lords will have the good sense to reject such moves, which will only add to pressures that are steadily taking us towards increasing the likelihood of wars around the world, if globalisation continues to unravel. Sphere: Related Content
in a report published today, the European Union committee of the House of Lords (the upper chamber of the British Parliament) has urged the UK to withhold its consent to European Union rules regulating the hedge fund and private equity industries!
I hope that the House of Lords will have the good sense to reject such moves, which will only add to pressures that are steadily taking us towards increasing the likelihood of wars around the world, if globalisation continues to unravel. Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, February 06, 2010
visit to Shanghai and Changxing
Shanghai: the temperature is only 7 degrees but does not feel too cold as there is hardly any breeze
We landed, were greeted, whisked through customs, and escorted to a small 11-seater bus, two side-by-side, with an aisle down the middle, each seat with a foldaway tables, except for the front seat which has a spacious fixed desk in front of it to signal the importance of the Leader
The smooth and swift drive to Chongxing takes about 2 hrs though we are fogged out throughout - maximum visibility about 400yds, but most of the time more like 150yds
Our translator is from another province, with the first foreign language French, but quite competent English
In the translator's generation there is the beginning of a move now away from the larger cities to smaller cities, on the basis of better quality of life in the smaller cities, but I wonder whether the rwality in China is not rather that everyone has to work equally hard in every part of the country
In any case, I am interested to learn that the translator orders clothes on the internet and gets them 2 or 3 days later; and that, according to the translator, one should be able to get delivery evem in the remotest parts of China in 4 days: the delivery cost is about 6 Yuan in this part of the world, and about 10 Yuan for the remotest parts
Apparently, two months ago a drunken driving rule was introduced throughout the country - penalty 2 weeks jail - but perhaps the rich may still find that money facilitates a way out?
On arriving in Chongxing, we are taken to a huge hotel of the sort that one might have in Delhi or Agra: it is almost empty
the Tea Tribute Tea House from the 8th century, restored to its former glory recently, has to be specially opened for our small delegation - the advantage of being official guests!
Why is everything so deserted? Partly because this is winter: most Chinese and most foreigners prefer Chongxing between Spring and Autumn. And yes, they do get plenty of national and foreign visitors apparently. The newly built Exhibition Cente is very appropriate both for its scale and for its technical wizardry in view of the purpose for which it is designed: impressing foreigners so as to attract investment as well as impressing the best-qualified Chinese so as to attract them here as workers. The descriptive plaques here are in Mandarin, though the Tea House has everything in English as well
I am interested that in the hotel's welcome fruit basked there is a rather outsize (from the Indian point of view) version of a wild fruit that we call "Baer" in Hindi; this Chinese version may be cultivated?
On the tour of the Exhibition Centre, there is more than one reference to a "golden spike" which, I discover, refers to "the only standard of global stratigraphic division and correlation in in chronostratigraphic research". It is not golden, and it is not a spike in the normal sense of that word....
Changxing is still a relatively sleepy little town becuase most of the land around was occupied by the army. For some reason the army appears to have relinquished this land and moved elsewhere, when leases were taken by unknown (to our colleagues) parties, who developed the land in cooperation with the government which built the school, hospital, administrative centre, roads and high-speed railway (the last to be completed end-2010). The privately-developed houses, buildings and flats are available for sale to private individuals or western companies (though land itself cannot be sold in most or all of China). How much of these developments in China have actually been sold or rented cannot be discovered so far with any degree of reliability.
This applies also to the highly-impressive area of Pudong in Shanghai, which continues to become even more impressive each year. Though rumour has it that the buildings here are sinking because the land is marshy, that rumour is also impossible to establish or refute. Perhaps, to play safe, anyone who is interested in seeing this modern wonder should haste here in case it becomes like Venice. We don't get much time to be tourists, but the Bund is certainly a most interesting viewing platform to look on to Pudong. However, we do have time to look at one of the more fashionable bars and one of the most impressive restaurants, and I can assure my readers that Shanghai is as "cosmopolitan" (or "decadent", depending on one's point of view) in terms of culture, design and lifestyle
The city bustles away, very much on the make, with a population that apparently tops 20 million. In spite of that, traffic moves impressively swiftly on all the new roads that have been built.
There seems to be some competition between Shanghai and Beijing, in the same way as there is between Oxford and Cambridge, or between New York and Washington DC: when the 2008 Olympics were held in Beijing, there was no reference to them in Shanghai; and there is no reference in Beijing to the 2010 World Expo being held in Shanghai!
We visit one university, which is most impressive for its size and facilities. The city as a whole appears to be doing its best to maintain green spaces inside the city (much better than the smaller Swiss towns seem to be doing on that matter!).
Fascinating mixture of architectural styles, from some (too few!) traditional buildings, through the lovely the French-style colony called the French Concession, and early 20th century buildings (e.g. the neoclassical HSBC Building and the art deco Sassoon House) to the more eccentric modern buildings.
Too short a visit, but it is always most interesting to return to a city that has grown and grown since the 90s, and seems to be continuing to grow apace inspite of the current crisis. Sphere: Related Content
We landed, were greeted, whisked through customs, and escorted to a small 11-seater bus, two side-by-side, with an aisle down the middle, each seat with a foldaway tables, except for the front seat which has a spacious fixed desk in front of it to signal the importance of the Leader
The smooth and swift drive to Chongxing takes about 2 hrs though we are fogged out throughout - maximum visibility about 400yds, but most of the time more like 150yds
Our translator is from another province, with the first foreign language French, but quite competent English
In the translator's generation there is the beginning of a move now away from the larger cities to smaller cities, on the basis of better quality of life in the smaller cities, but I wonder whether the rwality in China is not rather that everyone has to work equally hard in every part of the country
In any case, I am interested to learn that the translator orders clothes on the internet and gets them 2 or 3 days later; and that, according to the translator, one should be able to get delivery evem in the remotest parts of China in 4 days: the delivery cost is about 6 Yuan in this part of the world, and about 10 Yuan for the remotest parts
Apparently, two months ago a drunken driving rule was introduced throughout the country - penalty 2 weeks jail - but perhaps the rich may still find that money facilitates a way out?
On arriving in Chongxing, we are taken to a huge hotel of the sort that one might have in Delhi or Agra: it is almost empty
the Tea Tribute Tea House from the 8th century, restored to its former glory recently, has to be specially opened for our small delegation - the advantage of being official guests!
Why is everything so deserted? Partly because this is winter: most Chinese and most foreigners prefer Chongxing between Spring and Autumn. And yes, they do get plenty of national and foreign visitors apparently. The newly built Exhibition Cente is very appropriate both for its scale and for its technical wizardry in view of the purpose for which it is designed: impressing foreigners so as to attract investment as well as impressing the best-qualified Chinese so as to attract them here as workers. The descriptive plaques here are in Mandarin, though the Tea House has everything in English as well
I am interested that in the hotel's welcome fruit basked there is a rather outsize (from the Indian point of view) version of a wild fruit that we call "Baer" in Hindi; this Chinese version may be cultivated?
On the tour of the Exhibition Centre, there is more than one reference to a "golden spike" which, I discover, refers to "the only standard of global stratigraphic division and correlation in in chronostratigraphic research". It is not golden, and it is not a spike in the normal sense of that word....
Changxing is still a relatively sleepy little town becuase most of the land around was occupied by the army. For some reason the army appears to have relinquished this land and moved elsewhere, when leases were taken by unknown (to our colleagues) parties, who developed the land in cooperation with the government which built the school, hospital, administrative centre, roads and high-speed railway (the last to be completed end-2010). The privately-developed houses, buildings and flats are available for sale to private individuals or western companies (though land itself cannot be sold in most or all of China). How much of these developments in China have actually been sold or rented cannot be discovered so far with any degree of reliability.
This applies also to the highly-impressive area of Pudong in Shanghai, which continues to become even more impressive each year. Though rumour has it that the buildings here are sinking because the land is marshy, that rumour is also impossible to establish or refute. Perhaps, to play safe, anyone who is interested in seeing this modern wonder should haste here in case it becomes like Venice. We don't get much time to be tourists, but the Bund is certainly a most interesting viewing platform to look on to Pudong. However, we do have time to look at one of the more fashionable bars and one of the most impressive restaurants, and I can assure my readers that Shanghai is as "cosmopolitan" (or "decadent", depending on one's point of view) in terms of culture, design and lifestyle
The city bustles away, very much on the make, with a population that apparently tops 20 million. In spite of that, traffic moves impressively swiftly on all the new roads that have been built.
There seems to be some competition between Shanghai and Beijing, in the same way as there is between Oxford and Cambridge, or between New York and Washington DC: when the 2008 Olympics were held in Beijing, there was no reference to them in Shanghai; and there is no reference in Beijing to the 2010 World Expo being held in Shanghai!
We visit one university, which is most impressive for its size and facilities. The city as a whole appears to be doing its best to maintain green spaces inside the city (much better than the smaller Swiss towns seem to be doing on that matter!).
Fascinating mixture of architectural styles, from some (too few!) traditional buildings, through the lovely the French-style colony called the French Concession, and early 20th century buildings (e.g. the neoclassical HSBC Building and the art deco Sassoon House) to the more eccentric modern buildings.
Too short a visit, but it is always most interesting to return to a city that has grown and grown since the 90s, and seems to be continuing to grow apace inspite of the current crisis. Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
President Obama's Proposals for a Second Fiscal Stimulus
President Obama's budget for 2010-2011 proposes a US$200 billion fiscal stimulus focused mainly on small businesses.
Does the proposal stand up to scrutiny?
Well, if one considers that it will put the American government (and therefore the American citizen) deeper in national debt, it is of course not a good idea.
However, the fact that such a "second stimulus" package has been proposed acknowledges that the first stimulus has not worked.
As I had predicted, it has placed a "floor" under the crisis so that there is not a complete collapse, but it has not and it cannot sort out the mess, let alone provide a substantial basis for growth; meanwhile, the propoganda machinery is in full swing trying to pretend that real growth is taking place in China - when that bubble is pricked, it will be terrible; but let us return to the topic of this post.
My reading of the situation is that the US Government now recognises that the effectiveness of the earlier stimulis package is coming (or will soon come) to an end, and that is why this second stimulus is needed.
The problem is that President Obama and the US Congress are focusing on the buzzwords "job creation" and trying to get the 2nd package through on that basis.
Job creation is of course very good in itself in nearly all circumstances, provided it is the creation of *real* jobs and not merely make-believe jobs.
The problem is that the 2nd stimulus package is unlikely to lead to the creation of even make-believe jobs.
What the 2nd stimulus package will do (assuming that the President can get at least this proposal successfully through the labyrinth of government) is that the package will provide at least some further minimal stabilisation for the economy, and particularly for that very important part of the economy (small- to mid-size companies) which have already suffered so hugely and will come under even more pressure before there is any chance of this current crisis passing.
So the package is at least some minimal good news for the economy and for the small business sector.
The package is, however, bad news for the small-business sector as a whole, bad news for the economy, and bad news for President Obama.
Why bad news for the sector as a whole? Because it is not enough to prevent the sector going down, and because it will therefore politicise the sector: if there is not enough money to go around, someone (read: someone in political power, and therefore a political appointee) will have to decide who gets the money and who does not, with consequences that are clear to see (politicisation of the small business sector)...
Why bad news for the econmy as a whole? Because increasing the public debt sizably while not really sorting out the crisis means that its net contribution to sorting out the crisis will be pretty close to zero.
And finally, why bad for President Obama? Because he is already being perceived as an "empty suit", having ducked the opportunity for genuine global leadership with the issue of climate change, and having failed with the issue of healtcare reform, he has now nailed his flag to the mast of job creation - which is precisely what will not be delivered by a mere 200 billion.
Of the 8 million jobs which have been lost during this recession in the US alone, President Obama would have to "bring back" if not all 8 million, then at least 4 million, or even 3 million to claim any reasonable degree of credit.
The $200bn in the 2nd stimulus package should certainly staunch the losses, so that the rate of loss does not get any worse. It may even improve that, so that the further losses will not be steeper. Will the package actually "recover" any of the jobs? Perhaps. I certainly hope so. Will the package recover 8 million jobs, or 6 million jobs, or 4 million jobs, or even 3 million jobs? I seriously doubt it.
Most small companies which get any financing as a result of the 2nd package are going to do exactly what the big companies have done as a result of the 1st package: in order not to run into bankruptcy, they are going to bolster their credit position and their ability to trade; adding jobs will be their last priority.
I seriously hope that I am totally wrong and the President Obama's will be able to add not merely 3 million jobs, or 4 million jobs, but 8 million jobs, or even more.
But if any of that happens, it will happen not because my (rather superficial) analysis above is wrong. It will happen not because the 2nd stimulus package has been up to the job. It will happen only because of a divine miracle.
As a follower of Jesus the Lord, I pray for a divine miracle, which is the only thing that can save that many jobs.
I pray for a divine miracle which is the only thing that can prevent the slow slide into much worse economic, social and political trouble (which I have written about elsewhere).
And I pray for a divine miracle which is the only thing that will save Obama's term as President from becoming wholly ineffective and at least partly tragic.
Is there anything short of divine miracles which will be good for job creation, good for the small business sector, good for the economy as a whole, and good for President Obama?
Yes, the creation and implementation of global standards in health and safety, pensions and environmental standards for industry and commerce. That will mean the creation of a genuinely level playing field at least in these matters.
A fully level playing field may be too much to hope for, because that would also involve imposing fiscal and monetary guiidelines for admitting countries to the WTO - and that may be too much to hope for. But if at least the minimum can be achieved, there is some hope.
Failing even that minimum, it does not matter how many "stimulus packages" are produced out of the thin air, the US will continue to lose investments and lose jobs - at present, primarily to China. Sphere: Related Content
Does the proposal stand up to scrutiny?
Well, if one considers that it will put the American government (and therefore the American citizen) deeper in national debt, it is of course not a good idea.
However, the fact that such a "second stimulus" package has been proposed acknowledges that the first stimulus has not worked.
As I had predicted, it has placed a "floor" under the crisis so that there is not a complete collapse, but it has not and it cannot sort out the mess, let alone provide a substantial basis for growth; meanwhile, the propoganda machinery is in full swing trying to pretend that real growth is taking place in China - when that bubble is pricked, it will be terrible; but let us return to the topic of this post.
My reading of the situation is that the US Government now recognises that the effectiveness of the earlier stimulis package is coming (or will soon come) to an end, and that is why this second stimulus is needed.
The problem is that President Obama and the US Congress are focusing on the buzzwords "job creation" and trying to get the 2nd package through on that basis.
Job creation is of course very good in itself in nearly all circumstances, provided it is the creation of *real* jobs and not merely make-believe jobs.
The problem is that the 2nd stimulus package is unlikely to lead to the creation of even make-believe jobs.
What the 2nd stimulus package will do (assuming that the President can get at least this proposal successfully through the labyrinth of government) is that the package will provide at least some further minimal stabilisation for the economy, and particularly for that very important part of the economy (small- to mid-size companies) which have already suffered so hugely and will come under even more pressure before there is any chance of this current crisis passing.
So the package is at least some minimal good news for the economy and for the small business sector.
The package is, however, bad news for the small-business sector as a whole, bad news for the economy, and bad news for President Obama.
Why bad news for the sector as a whole? Because it is not enough to prevent the sector going down, and because it will therefore politicise the sector: if there is not enough money to go around, someone (read: someone in political power, and therefore a political appointee) will have to decide who gets the money and who does not, with consequences that are clear to see (politicisation of the small business sector)...
Why bad news for the econmy as a whole? Because increasing the public debt sizably while not really sorting out the crisis means that its net contribution to sorting out the crisis will be pretty close to zero.
And finally, why bad for President Obama? Because he is already being perceived as an "empty suit", having ducked the opportunity for genuine global leadership with the issue of climate change, and having failed with the issue of healtcare reform, he has now nailed his flag to the mast of job creation - which is precisely what will not be delivered by a mere 200 billion.
Of the 8 million jobs which have been lost during this recession in the US alone, President Obama would have to "bring back" if not all 8 million, then at least 4 million, or even 3 million to claim any reasonable degree of credit.
The $200bn in the 2nd stimulus package should certainly staunch the losses, so that the rate of loss does not get any worse. It may even improve that, so that the further losses will not be steeper. Will the package actually "recover" any of the jobs? Perhaps. I certainly hope so. Will the package recover 8 million jobs, or 6 million jobs, or 4 million jobs, or even 3 million jobs? I seriously doubt it.
Most small companies which get any financing as a result of the 2nd package are going to do exactly what the big companies have done as a result of the 1st package: in order not to run into bankruptcy, they are going to bolster their credit position and their ability to trade; adding jobs will be their last priority.
I seriously hope that I am totally wrong and the President Obama's will be able to add not merely 3 million jobs, or 4 million jobs, but 8 million jobs, or even more.
But if any of that happens, it will happen not because my (rather superficial) analysis above is wrong. It will happen not because the 2nd stimulus package has been up to the job. It will happen only because of a divine miracle.
As a follower of Jesus the Lord, I pray for a divine miracle, which is the only thing that can save that many jobs.
I pray for a divine miracle which is the only thing that can prevent the slow slide into much worse economic, social and political trouble (which I have written about elsewhere).
And I pray for a divine miracle which is the only thing that will save Obama's term as President from becoming wholly ineffective and at least partly tragic.
Is there anything short of divine miracles which will be good for job creation, good for the small business sector, good for the economy as a whole, and good for President Obama?
Yes, the creation and implementation of global standards in health and safety, pensions and environmental standards for industry and commerce. That will mean the creation of a genuinely level playing field at least in these matters.
A fully level playing field may be too much to hope for, because that would also involve imposing fiscal and monetary guiidelines for admitting countries to the WTO - and that may be too much to hope for. But if at least the minimum can be achieved, there is some hope.
Failing even that minimum, it does not matter how many "stimulus packages" are produced out of the thin air, the US will continue to lose investments and lose jobs - at present, primarily to China. Sphere: Related Content
Euro breakup chances
I am interested to see that Professor Nouriel Roubini has now joined the debate regarding whether the Euro might break up.
Someone who has been following my lectures, broadcasts and writings may perhaps care to inform him that I have been consistently pointing out over the years that the Euro is a historically unprecedented and untested currency. It has escaped testing till now because of the artificially-induced boom into which the Euro was born. Now it is starting to face its first real test.
No one sensible builds in an unsound way or on unsound foundation. The Euro is a child of the same kind of thinking that produced the boom of the last couple of decades.
Dr. Roubini points out that Greece is merely a "problem" for the eurozone, because it is a very small economy. But what is bigger than a mere "problem" is Spain, the Eurozone's fourth-largest economy, which has an unemployment rate just shy of 20%, and a domestic banking system much weaker than that of Greece. "The eurozone could drift essentially with a bifurcation, with a strong center and a weaker periphery and eventually some countries might exit the monetary union", he opines.
This is the most positive possible outlook. It ignores how the market would respond to even the smallest country exiting the Euro. Further, it ignores the fact that the Euro has basically been paid for by the German taxpayer, and that it remains to be seen how long the German taxpayer has the ability and willingness to continue to fund this Frankensteinian creation. Well, I am being ungenerous. In spite of its defects-at-birth, the Euro has played a very positive role (not least for German industry). The question is: are we now at the start of the historical time-frame of its demise. Sphere: Related Content
Someone who has been following my lectures, broadcasts and writings may perhaps care to inform him that I have been consistently pointing out over the years that the Euro is a historically unprecedented and untested currency. It has escaped testing till now because of the artificially-induced boom into which the Euro was born. Now it is starting to face its first real test.
No one sensible builds in an unsound way or on unsound foundation. The Euro is a child of the same kind of thinking that produced the boom of the last couple of decades.
Dr. Roubini points out that Greece is merely a "problem" for the eurozone, because it is a very small economy. But what is bigger than a mere "problem" is Spain, the Eurozone's fourth-largest economy, which has an unemployment rate just shy of 20%, and a domestic banking system much weaker than that of Greece. "The eurozone could drift essentially with a bifurcation, with a strong center and a weaker periphery and eventually some countries might exit the monetary union", he opines.
This is the most positive possible outlook. It ignores how the market would respond to even the smallest country exiting the Euro. Further, it ignores the fact that the Euro has basically been paid for by the German taxpayer, and that it remains to be seen how long the German taxpayer has the ability and willingness to continue to fund this Frankensteinian creation. Well, I am being ungenerous. In spite of its defects-at-birth, the Euro has played a very positive role (not least for German industry). The question is: are we now at the start of the historical time-frame of its demise. Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
How to Internationalise Chinese Companies: The Key Issues
On the request of one of my readers, following my previous post on the subject, I am entering the text of my piece in the Mandarin-language business magazine, GLOBAL ENTREPRENEUR:
Chinese companies began to internationalise at least in some sense almost immediately after the "open up" policy was introduced in China in 1978. The generation born after that has grown up without any experience of the Soviet-style regimentation, inward-focus and isolation from the outside world that was in place earlier. This generation has also seen and benefited from the positive results of the "open up" policy.
As a result of "opening up", for every country, the questions that are raised are:
- Can internationalisation be measured?
- How internationalised are Chinese companies?
- What are the remaining barriers for Chinese internationalisation?
Can internationalisation be measured?
Yes. Many different sets of measures have been proposed. Academic debates, regarding which of these sets of measures should be adopted, are both instructive and entertaining, but as far as I can see, any set of measurement systems is more or less equally useful from a practical point of view.
Once an organisation has got the maximum benefit from using any one particular set of measures, then the organisation can certainly move on to other sets of measures, if it wishes, but what must be avoided is premature jumping around between sets of measures, because that creates more confusion than benefit.
The elements of such sets are indicated below.
However, the best set of measures for any particular company is a set that is specifically developed for that company by any experienced consultant(s).
2. How internationalised are Chinese companies in comparison to other companies?
The answer depends on which countries one chooses for comparison. Among Asian countries, Indian companies are more internationalised; but American and European companies are certainly the most international in the world. Clearly, Chinese companies have already made major strides in the last few years and are now more keen to learn as well as better organised to learn.
3. What are the remaining barriers for our internationalisation?
That question requires a longer answer. One should think of a company's internationalisation as consisting of several steps, which are part of a historical process - internationalisation has many layers or dimensions.
The first step that any company takes in order to internationalise is simply selling its products abroad. In some ways, this is the easiest thing to do. But in other ways it is quite complicated. Not only does the company have to engage with different customer tastes and different national legal requirements, but also with such issues as: doing business with foreigners (often in a foreign language!), and handling different practices regarding what is done and what is not done. Product distribution systems often vary by country. Of course there is the huge problem of currency risk - so the company, sooner or later, has to wrestle with rather sophisticated financial arrangements such as hedges, swaps and options.
If the company is successful in one or more foreign countries, it will wish to work not only through agents and other such intermediaries, but also through developing its own operations, which could include: sales, marketing, R&D, design, finance, administration, manufacture, and indeed creating a formal subsidiary in another country or countries. The moment one enters that whole combination of possibilities, one is face to face with needing to deal with some or all of the following: recruiting people from a different educational system and structure, with different work values and work-related expectations, and patterns of time-keeping and levels of autonomy, as well as different ways of indicating a "yes" or a "no" or a "let me think about it", and different ways and levels of indicating (or not indicating!) pleasure or dissatisfaction - not to mention entirely different ways of working together as teams! Which brings up, of course, the whole question of working in multi-cultural teams - and those have a whole list of their own challenges!
There is also the vexed question of how the work of subordinates is to be rated (some cultures are relatively generous in their ratings, while other cultures are relatively stingy), what organisational levels people of non-Chinese nationality should be promoted to, and so on.
Most importantly, there is the question of whether and how (and how far!) to get involved in the politics and legislative processes of the foreign country.
Many Chinese companies have now jumped over the initial steps mentioned above, so that they are confronted with a steep learning curve through the foreign companies they have acquired. For Chinese companies that acquire foreign companies, the challenge is wisdom regarding how far to maintain and even encourage different local and regional ways of doing things, versus how far to encourage, as far as possible, a uniform culture throughout the international company - and, if the company decides to go for a uniform culture around the world, then the question is: which culture? Chinese? American? German? French?
We come now to the final and most fundamental challenge: internationalising the mind-set of headquarters. It is relatively easy to run a Chinese company which does all its key activities in China, and simply exports the products (see "The first step", above). As we go down the succeeding steps, it is not only the number of challenges that increases, but also their profundity, inter-relatedness and complexity: we move from simply exporting products to having to deal with challenges at the level of the individuals, at the level of teams, at the level of divisions or subsidiaries, at the level of the organisation as a whole, and finally with the question of the organisation in its political context.
At this stage, it is worth distinguishing between "international companies", "multinational companies", "global companies" and "transnational companies":
• International ones import and export but have no investment outside the home country (the overwhelmingly important culture is that of the home country)
• Multinational ones do have investment in other countries but do not coordinate their product offerings; rather they adapt their products and service to local markets (cultural dominance at headquarters remains that of the mother country, but in the local market the dominant influence is usually the local one)
• Global ones invest and may be present in many countries but co-ordinate the marketing of their products by using a common brand in all markets (the dominant culture may be that of the home country, or it may be significantly absorptive of influences from other countries - the key is not culture but the emphasis on volume, cost control and efficiency)
• Transnational ones simultaneously pursue different degrees of coordination, integration and local adaptation in strategy as well as in operations, depending on technological, legal, financial, business and market conditions. Some activities might be globally coordinated - e.g. purchasing, R&D - while other activities may be rather more adapted to local conditions - e.g. packaging, marketing (naturally, there may or may not be a dominant culture in such a firm, or there may possibly a culture that is dominant but only among the elite in the company).
In view of all that, the principal barrier to further internationalization of Chinese companies is simply the Chinese belief that China is the centre of the world - an attitude that harks back to ancient Chinese history and culture.
Some of my Chinese friends believe that I am mistaken and that China is fully prepared to learn from foreigners. That may be more or less true at the level of individuals, but I find that is already less true when one thinks of family life, and I suggest specifically that Chinese corporations must make more deliberate and vigorous efforts to shed the old-fashioned and unhelpful mentality, particularly so as to be able to compare, study and benefit from the different ways that other countries have of developing, articulating, and implementing a company's vision, mission, structure and policies.
Further, the sooner Chinese companies actively lobby and work to get rid of political control and interference, the more effective they can be in pursuing internationalization and all its benefits.
But I want to raise a crucial question: are Chinese business leaders interested in internationalization only to make more money? If so, that will be a disaster for China as well as for the rest of the world. I very much hope the opposite: that while Chinese business leaders of course want to be very successful, they will define success not only in terms of making money but also in terms of what they do to make the world better.
What do I mean by "better"? I mean: with global rules that enhance the possibility of (i) reducing global economic volatility and vulnerability, (ii) reducing the gap between the poor and the rich, and (iii) increasing care for the environment.
That is very different from the kind of internationalization which we have at present, which is doing largely the opposite on each of these three dimensions.
I am interested, and I hope Chinese leaders will be interested, rather in the right kind of internationalization. That will benefit not only Chinese companies, or even the whole of Chinese society, it will be very good for the whole of the world.
ENDS Sphere: Related Content
Chinese companies began to internationalise at least in some sense almost immediately after the "open up" policy was introduced in China in 1978. The generation born after that has grown up without any experience of the Soviet-style regimentation, inward-focus and isolation from the outside world that was in place earlier. This generation has also seen and benefited from the positive results of the "open up" policy.
As a result of "opening up", for every country, the questions that are raised are:
- Can internationalisation be measured?
- How internationalised are Chinese companies?
- What are the remaining barriers for Chinese internationalisation?
Can internationalisation be measured?
Yes. Many different sets of measures have been proposed. Academic debates, regarding which of these sets of measures should be adopted, are both instructive and entertaining, but as far as I can see, any set of measurement systems is more or less equally useful from a practical point of view.
Once an organisation has got the maximum benefit from using any one particular set of measures, then the organisation can certainly move on to other sets of measures, if it wishes, but what must be avoided is premature jumping around between sets of measures, because that creates more confusion than benefit.
The elements of such sets are indicated below.
However, the best set of measures for any particular company is a set that is specifically developed for that company by any experienced consultant(s).
2. How internationalised are Chinese companies in comparison to other companies?
The answer depends on which countries one chooses for comparison. Among Asian countries, Indian companies are more internationalised; but American and European companies are certainly the most international in the world. Clearly, Chinese companies have already made major strides in the last few years and are now more keen to learn as well as better organised to learn.
3. What are the remaining barriers for our internationalisation?
That question requires a longer answer. One should think of a company's internationalisation as consisting of several steps, which are part of a historical process - internationalisation has many layers or dimensions.
The first step that any company takes in order to internationalise is simply selling its products abroad. In some ways, this is the easiest thing to do. But in other ways it is quite complicated. Not only does the company have to engage with different customer tastes and different national legal requirements, but also with such issues as: doing business with foreigners (often in a foreign language!), and handling different practices regarding what is done and what is not done. Product distribution systems often vary by country. Of course there is the huge problem of currency risk - so the company, sooner or later, has to wrestle with rather sophisticated financial arrangements such as hedges, swaps and options.
If the company is successful in one or more foreign countries, it will wish to work not only through agents and other such intermediaries, but also through developing its own operations, which could include: sales, marketing, R&D, design, finance, administration, manufacture, and indeed creating a formal subsidiary in another country or countries. The moment one enters that whole combination of possibilities, one is face to face with needing to deal with some or all of the following: recruiting people from a different educational system and structure, with different work values and work-related expectations, and patterns of time-keeping and levels of autonomy, as well as different ways of indicating a "yes" or a "no" or a "let me think about it", and different ways and levels of indicating (or not indicating!) pleasure or dissatisfaction - not to mention entirely different ways of working together as teams! Which brings up, of course, the whole question of working in multi-cultural teams - and those have a whole list of their own challenges!
There is also the vexed question of how the work of subordinates is to be rated (some cultures are relatively generous in their ratings, while other cultures are relatively stingy), what organisational levels people of non-Chinese nationality should be promoted to, and so on.
Most importantly, there is the question of whether and how (and how far!) to get involved in the politics and legislative processes of the foreign country.
Many Chinese companies have now jumped over the initial steps mentioned above, so that they are confronted with a steep learning curve through the foreign companies they have acquired. For Chinese companies that acquire foreign companies, the challenge is wisdom regarding how far to maintain and even encourage different local and regional ways of doing things, versus how far to encourage, as far as possible, a uniform culture throughout the international company - and, if the company decides to go for a uniform culture around the world, then the question is: which culture? Chinese? American? German? French?
We come now to the final and most fundamental challenge: internationalising the mind-set of headquarters. It is relatively easy to run a Chinese company which does all its key activities in China, and simply exports the products (see "The first step", above). As we go down the succeeding steps, it is not only the number of challenges that increases, but also their profundity, inter-relatedness and complexity: we move from simply exporting products to having to deal with challenges at the level of the individuals, at the level of teams, at the level of divisions or subsidiaries, at the level of the organisation as a whole, and finally with the question of the organisation in its political context.
At this stage, it is worth distinguishing between "international companies", "multinational companies", "global companies" and "transnational companies":
• International ones import and export but have no investment outside the home country (the overwhelmingly important culture is that of the home country)
• Multinational ones do have investment in other countries but do not coordinate their product offerings; rather they adapt their products and service to local markets (cultural dominance at headquarters remains that of the mother country, but in the local market the dominant influence is usually the local one)
• Global ones invest and may be present in many countries but co-ordinate the marketing of their products by using a common brand in all markets (the dominant culture may be that of the home country, or it may be significantly absorptive of influences from other countries - the key is not culture but the emphasis on volume, cost control and efficiency)
• Transnational ones simultaneously pursue different degrees of coordination, integration and local adaptation in strategy as well as in operations, depending on technological, legal, financial, business and market conditions. Some activities might be globally coordinated - e.g. purchasing, R&D - while other activities may be rather more adapted to local conditions - e.g. packaging, marketing (naturally, there may or may not be a dominant culture in such a firm, or there may possibly a culture that is dominant but only among the elite in the company).
In view of all that, the principal barrier to further internationalization of Chinese companies is simply the Chinese belief that China is the centre of the world - an attitude that harks back to ancient Chinese history and culture.
Some of my Chinese friends believe that I am mistaken and that China is fully prepared to learn from foreigners. That may be more or less true at the level of individuals, but I find that is already less true when one thinks of family life, and I suggest specifically that Chinese corporations must make more deliberate and vigorous efforts to shed the old-fashioned and unhelpful mentality, particularly so as to be able to compare, study and benefit from the different ways that other countries have of developing, articulating, and implementing a company's vision, mission, structure and policies.
Further, the sooner Chinese companies actively lobby and work to get rid of political control and interference, the more effective they can be in pursuing internationalization and all its benefits.
But I want to raise a crucial question: are Chinese business leaders interested in internationalization only to make more money? If so, that will be a disaster for China as well as for the rest of the world. I very much hope the opposite: that while Chinese business leaders of course want to be very successful, they will define success not only in terms of making money but also in terms of what they do to make the world better.
What do I mean by "better"? I mean: with global rules that enhance the possibility of (i) reducing global economic volatility and vulnerability, (ii) reducing the gap between the poor and the rich, and (iii) increasing care for the environment.
That is very different from the kind of internationalization which we have at present, which is doing largely the opposite on each of these three dimensions.
I am interested, and I hope Chinese leaders will be interested, rather in the right kind of internationalization. That will benefit not only Chinese companies, or even the whole of Chinese society, it will be very good for the whole of the world.
ENDS Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Response to my interview in a Chinese business magazine
A Chinese colleague responds as follows to my interview, in a Mandarin-language business magazine, regarding the future of China in a globalising economy:
"I totally agree with you that the China-centric sentiment will hinder China's globalization process. The traditional value system was destroyed during and even before the cultural revolution. In the last three decade, it gradually comes back and with the fast economic development, some Chinese indulge themselves in the old dream of the central kingdom again. Even in management, there is a voice that the Chinese management style is better than the Western one. Personally I believe that without fully appreciating the Western management concepts, Chinese business will face big problem not only abroad, but also in their own country." Sphere: Related Content
"I totally agree with you that the China-centric sentiment will hinder China's globalization process. The traditional value system was destroyed during and even before the cultural revolution. In the last three decade, it gradually comes back and with the fast economic development, some Chinese indulge themselves in the old dream of the central kingdom again. Even in management, there is a voice that the Chinese management style is better than the Western one. Personally I believe that without fully appreciating the Western management concepts, Chinese business will face big problem not only abroad, but also in their own country." Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Inexplicable Chinese cyberattcks?
Why did the Chinese launch their attacks against global software companies, against US state agencies, as well as against Indian government offices and agencies all on the same day and at the same time?
Having puzzled about the matter ever since I heard about it, here is the only explanation that I can think of: China may have reached the limit of its capacity to stimulate its economy, having already put in a fiscal and monetary stimulus of around 50% of its GDP over the last 2 years.
China is confronted with with overflowing warehouses, enormous overproduction and perhaps as much as 50% overcapacity, in real figures probably 75 million unemployed, and a credit crunch as all of China's banks are squeezed because of capital adequacy requirements and most banks are squeezed because of bad debts; China therefore faces stagflation for the foreseeable future, and a war could do China good, in the cynical calculations of some of the elite there. It would also weaken the US, Europe and Japan.
Conclusion: If the Chinese are willing to be open about their problems, and are willing to receive international help, the world may be able to help China solve its problems. Otherwise, we are pretty close to China sparking a war în relation to any or all of the following: Taiwan, Spratly Islands, India, Russia.
In view of the above, the Chinese cyberattacks can be understood as a diversionary move from its internal problems - or from the viewpoint of the outside world, as a first strike.
An interesting question is: why is Defense Secretary Gates in India right now with so many of the top defence officials from the US? Is it because, in the US assessment, China regards India as the softest target? Sphere: Related Content
Having puzzled about the matter ever since I heard about it, here is the only explanation that I can think of: China may have reached the limit of its capacity to stimulate its economy, having already put in a fiscal and monetary stimulus of around 50% of its GDP over the last 2 years.
China is confronted with with overflowing warehouses, enormous overproduction and perhaps as much as 50% overcapacity, in real figures probably 75 million unemployed, and a credit crunch as all of China's banks are squeezed because of capital adequacy requirements and most banks are squeezed because of bad debts; China therefore faces stagflation for the foreseeable future, and a war could do China good, in the cynical calculations of some of the elite there. It would also weaken the US, Europe and Japan.
Conclusion: If the Chinese are willing to be open about their problems, and are willing to receive international help, the world may be able to help China solve its problems. Otherwise, we are pretty close to China sparking a war în relation to any or all of the following: Taiwan, Spratly Islands, India, Russia.
In view of the above, the Chinese cyberattacks can be understood as a diversionary move from its internal problems - or from the viewpoint of the outside world, as a first strike.
An interesting question is: why is Defense Secretary Gates in India right now with so many of the top defence officials from the US? Is it because, in the US assessment, China regards India as the softest target? Sphere: Related Content
The new proposals from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
New regulations have been proposed by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to try to curb speculation and domination of commodity markets by a few players.
The proposals amount to placing position limits on commodity trades. The size of the position limits is so massive that it will affect only the largest players.
This is a useful way to try to ensure that the whole market is not affected, and ensures that the biggest players are limited in their activities and impact.
One can think of it as the equivalent of the work of the UK's Monopolies and Mergers Commission which tries to prevent the natural tendency of capitalism to monopoly, by breaking up monopolies, duopolies and even oligopolies.
The only problem with the device of position limits is that it will encourage the largest players to either break up into smaller units (no bad thing even in itself), or encourage them to deal, in effect, through the layers of players immediately below the regulated level.
But I guess that if the CFTC is vigilant it can spot this and ameliorate it. The question is the ability and willingness of the CFTC to be vigilant.
Unfortunately, that is not guaranteed, if one judges on the basis of its performance over the last 25 years or so (of its 35 year existence). Sphere: Related Content
The proposals amount to placing position limits on commodity trades. The size of the position limits is so massive that it will affect only the largest players.
This is a useful way to try to ensure that the whole market is not affected, and ensures that the biggest players are limited in their activities and impact.
One can think of it as the equivalent of the work of the UK's Monopolies and Mergers Commission which tries to prevent the natural tendency of capitalism to monopoly, by breaking up monopolies, duopolies and even oligopolies.
The only problem with the device of position limits is that it will encourage the largest players to either break up into smaller units (no bad thing even in itself), or encourage them to deal, in effect, through the layers of players immediately below the regulated level.
But I guess that if the CFTC is vigilant it can spot this and ameliorate it. The question is the ability and willingness of the CFTC to be vigilant.
Unfortunately, that is not guaranteed, if one judges on the basis of its performance over the last 25 years or so (of its 35 year existence). Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
The USA's two-class society
According to the National Leadership Index published by the Center for Public Leadership at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government in the USA, some 52% of Americans believe that corporate bosses work mainly to benefit themselves, while 31% believe they work to benefit a small coterie. Only 10% of Americans believe business leaders generally work for the greater good of society. That' 83% versus 10%. My guess is that the 10% are either business leaders themselves or others who are close to them, or in positions where they can anticipate becoming business leaders themselves, while the 31% are middle-managers or those who aspire to middle-management positions. That leaves the vast majority of Americans....
If things have got that bad in the USA, usually the world's lead society in terms of trends in fashion and ideas, then we can imagine what the sentiment is or will soon be in the rest of the world.
Unless business leaders really start working for the good of society as a whole, and not only for their shareholders, we will ultimately arriv at the brink of global revolution and chaos. Sphere: Related Content
If things have got that bad in the USA, usually the world's lead society in terms of trends in fashion and ideas, then we can imagine what the sentiment is or will soon be in the rest of the world.
Unless business leaders really start working for the good of society as a whole, and not only for their shareholders, we will ultimately arriv at the brink of global revolution and chaos. Sphere: Related Content
Friday, January 08, 2010
Are consumers from Emerging Markets more interested in "green" products?
According to research published by Accenture (http://newsroom.accenture.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=4921), emerging-market consumers are much more willing than their developed-world counterparts to pay a premium for products which are supposed to be environmentally friendly.
As many as 84% of consumers in China, India, Malaysia, and Singapore say they would accept a higher price for green products, compared with only 50% in the U.S., Japan, France, and Germany.
This is of course related to what people say....
The question is what people DO....
My guess is that, if research were able to be done on actual purchasing behaviour, the findings would indicate the opposite - at least if the elites are either excluded or included as a normal part of the population. Sphere: Related Content
As many as 84% of consumers in China, India, Malaysia, and Singapore say they would accept a higher price for green products, compared with only 50% in the U.S., Japan, France, and Germany.
This is of course related to what people say....
The question is what people DO....
My guess is that, if research were able to be done on actual purchasing behaviour, the findings would indicate the opposite - at least if the elites are either excluded or included as a normal part of the population. Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Why do some people disfigure their bodies?
I don't know, but I am hugely reassured this morning by a survey from Pew Research
http://people-press.org/report/573
Many recent innovations are popular and seen as beneficial (e.g. cell phones, "green" products, email, and the internet).
However, some others are not particularly popular - e.g. reality TV shows and "more people getting tattoos," were seen as improvements by only 8% and 7%, respectively, but seen as "a change for the worse" by 63% and 40% respectively.
Reality TV must therefore divide people more than the survey suggests. Why? Because it is clearly hugely popular with a small number of people but clearly hugely unpopular with most others.
The same can be said for tatoos.
The only difference is: you can turn off reality TV, but you basically can't undo a tattoo.
So why do people disfigure their bodies, either more or less permanently (with tattoos) or at least temporarily (with various metal studs and loops through nose, ears, and even eyebrows, cheeks and lips)?
How come they either dislike or despise their own bodies so much?
On discussing this with a few friends, it turns out that while I consider tatoos and studs/loops as mutilation, some suggest that these could be seen in the same light as the use of perfume or cream - a sort of enhancement rather than a disfigurement. Particularly as perfumes, creams, lipstick et al can be at least mildly disliked by some people....
That is true. But I remain unpersuaded. It is far easier to stop using a particular perfume (and it has fewer after-effects!) than taking out a stud or loop, or undoing a tattoo.
Anyway, according to the survey, other things (wider acceptance of gays and lesbians, cable news talk and opinion shows, and the growing number of people with money in the stock market) also divide Americans relatively strongly.
All of which makes for interesting discussion about politically incorrect and therefore generally undiscussed topics. Sphere: Related Content
http://people-press.org/report/573
Many recent innovations are popular and seen as beneficial (e.g. cell phones, "green" products, email, and the internet).
However, some others are not particularly popular - e.g. reality TV shows and "more people getting tattoos," were seen as improvements by only 8% and 7%, respectively, but seen as "a change for the worse" by 63% and 40% respectively.
Reality TV must therefore divide people more than the survey suggests. Why? Because it is clearly hugely popular with a small number of people but clearly hugely unpopular with most others.
The same can be said for tatoos.
The only difference is: you can turn off reality TV, but you basically can't undo a tattoo.
So why do people disfigure their bodies, either more or less permanently (with tattoos) or at least temporarily (with various metal studs and loops through nose, ears, and even eyebrows, cheeks and lips)?
How come they either dislike or despise their own bodies so much?
On discussing this with a few friends, it turns out that while I consider tatoos and studs/loops as mutilation, some suggest that these could be seen in the same light as the use of perfume or cream - a sort of enhancement rather than a disfigurement. Particularly as perfumes, creams, lipstick et al can be at least mildly disliked by some people....
That is true. But I remain unpersuaded. It is far easier to stop using a particular perfume (and it has fewer after-effects!) than taking out a stud or loop, or undoing a tattoo.
Anyway, according to the survey, other things (wider acceptance of gays and lesbians, cable news talk and opinion shows, and the growing number of people with money in the stock market) also divide Americans relatively strongly.
All of which makes for interesting discussion about politically incorrect and therefore generally undiscussed topics. Sphere: Related Content
Which decade was the worst of the last five?
According to a survey by Pew Research http://people-press.org/report/573, the current decade is regarded by Americans as the worst since the Sixties.
The Sixties themselves were regarded as "positive" by 34%, while 15% regarded them as "negative"; on the other hand 42% regarded them as "neither", and 8% said they did not know.
The Seventies, Eighties and Nineties improved on those scores more or less uniformly.
The proportions were, respectively:
Positive: 40, 56, and 57 (that is, more and more people regarded them favourably)
Negative: 16, 12 and 19 (a mixed trend, but relatively minor)
Neither: 37, 27 and 22 (fewer and fewer people were sitting on the fence)
Don't knows: 7, 5 and 3 (probably the least important, but reinforcing the trend above)
From these figures, one could conclude that Americans view these decades as increasingly positive.
With the current decade, however, we see an abrupt reversal: Only 27% regard the decade as positive, 50% regard it as negative, the proportion of people who regard the decade as neither postive nor negative, as well as those who don't know drops further (respectively to 21% and 2%).
Probably many factors contribute to this sudden change in view in the USA. In India and China, I am pretty confident that most people would regard the current decade as either "positive" or at least no worse than previous decades. I wonder what the verdict would be in most other countries in the world. Sphere: Related Content
The Sixties themselves were regarded as "positive" by 34%, while 15% regarded them as "negative"; on the other hand 42% regarded them as "neither", and 8% said they did not know.
The Seventies, Eighties and Nineties improved on those scores more or less uniformly.
The proportions were, respectively:
Positive: 40, 56, and 57 (that is, more and more people regarded them favourably)
Negative: 16, 12 and 19 (a mixed trend, but relatively minor)
Neither: 37, 27 and 22 (fewer and fewer people were sitting on the fence)
Don't knows: 7, 5 and 3 (probably the least important, but reinforcing the trend above)
From these figures, one could conclude that Americans view these decades as increasingly positive.
With the current decade, however, we see an abrupt reversal: Only 27% regard the decade as positive, 50% regard it as negative, the proportion of people who regard the decade as neither postive nor negative, as well as those who don't know drops further (respectively to 21% and 2%).
Probably many factors contribute to this sudden change in view in the USA. In India and China, I am pretty confident that most people would regard the current decade as either "positive" or at least no worse than previous decades. I wonder what the verdict would be in most other countries in the world. Sphere: Related Content
Sunday, January 03, 2010
Outlook Business magazine now the best in India?
There are scores of magazines in India that cover Indian business. Some do so as only a part of their total offering. Others are wholly focussed on business in India.
Of these latter, I have no idea what the current figures are on circulation, but Outlook Business is now clearly at least one of the best in terms of content.
I have never before Tweeted even a single story from an Indian business mag, and I just tweeted two today:
1. "Indian companies that make you want to jump out of bed and rush to work!: Outlook Business magazine: http://preview.tinyurl.com/yd6ynyd"
and
2. "survey results: to win the war ahead for talent, Indian companies shd encourage better work-life balance http://preview.tinyurl.com/ye9ky3a" Sphere: Related Content
Of these latter, I have no idea what the current figures are on circulation, but Outlook Business is now clearly at least one of the best in terms of content.
I have never before Tweeted even a single story from an Indian business mag, and I just tweeted two today:
1. "Indian companies that make you want to jump out of bed and rush to work!: Outlook Business magazine: http://preview.tinyurl.com/yd6ynyd"
and
2. "survey results: to win the war ahead for talent, Indian companies shd encourage better work-life balance http://preview.tinyurl.com/ye9ky3a" Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, January 02, 2010
Is the USA now over-emphasising homeland security?
According to US government figures, there were NO violent deaths from terrorism on US soil in the period 2002 -2006 (when the statistics stop, but probably the figure was still zero in 2009).
The US government can no doubt argue that this is because there are now hundreds of thousands of people employed to prevent terrorism.
On the other hand, some people might like to ask: how many ordinary people are affected by these measures? Sixty six million passengers flew through Atlanta in 2008, 50 million through Heathrow, and so on.
Meanwhile, Americans might want to ponder the fact that there were a quarter of a millio (252,966 to be exact) violent deaths during 2002-2006 on US roads (not to mention those who were injured).
Moreover, there were 146,814 deaths in the USA from firearms during the same period, 2002-2006. Of those who were killed, 1610 were up to 14 years old; 12,242 were 15 to 19 years old; and 20,563 were 19 to 24 years old. That's approximately 34,000 YOUNG people killed just in these five years when no one was killed due to terrorism.
So should the US stop all measures against foreign terrorism on US soil? No, but the US might want to be more balanced and sensible about countering such terrorism.
If President Obama is serious about improving Homeland Security, I would recommend the following three steps as the minimum:
1. Decrease emphasis on gathering every conceivable bit of information on every visitor, emphasise analysis of all the information that the US already gathers through existing channels, and (more important) emphasise follow through on the basis of the information collected.
2. Throw out all the redundant information that is collected, which clogs up the possibility of adequate analysis - for example, all foreign visitors to the USA must not only give BOTH eye-scans but also all TEN fingerprints. This is overkill with a vengeance! One eye-scan and one index finger print should be more than adequate for almost any purpose but if the US wants to insist, perhaps it could be satisfied with two eye-scans and two index-finger-prints? Does the formality of the pre-travel registration really help anything beyond creating additional bother for all passengers travelling to the USA?
3. Order an assessement of the IQ of all employees connected with anything to do with homeland security. One or two agents who are not up to the mark or are mentally lazy are all that are needed to stymie a whole system - because, as in the recent case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Anyone who has any contact with any official to do with TSA or homeland security knows that many of these officials may be (just) able to follow procedures, but following procedures is never going to provide security; following procedures intelligently is what is going to provide security. All TSA/ homeland security employees with an IQ of less than 120 should be let go. A slimmer but more intelligently organised and much better co-ordinated corps can help deliver security, but the present bloated, ill-organised, uncoordinated and unintelligent scattering leaves the security of the USA very much to chance.
A friend sharing a coffee break says that perhaps the US likes and wants to have a bloated, ill-organised, uncoordinated and unintelligent scattering of agents and this huge amount of undigestible information as part of scaring its own population into paying for the sales of all the security-related equipment and for providing employment during a downturn.
Another person (an American) argues even more cynically that it is part of an elaborate plot by the US elite to limit freedoms in the USA, and that the limits on freedom are going to get much tighter with even more scare-mongering.
Please let's not be that cynical! Specially at the start of a new year and a new decade! Let's be positive and seek to spread truth, intelligence, balance, justice, love and all the other good things - which are what new beginnings are all about. Sphere: Related Content
The US government can no doubt argue that this is because there are now hundreds of thousands of people employed to prevent terrorism.
On the other hand, some people might like to ask: how many ordinary people are affected by these measures? Sixty six million passengers flew through Atlanta in 2008, 50 million through Heathrow, and so on.
Meanwhile, Americans might want to ponder the fact that there were a quarter of a millio (252,966 to be exact) violent deaths during 2002-2006 on US roads (not to mention those who were injured).
Moreover, there were 146,814 deaths in the USA from firearms during the same period, 2002-2006. Of those who were killed, 1610 were up to 14 years old; 12,242 were 15 to 19 years old; and 20,563 were 19 to 24 years old. That's approximately 34,000 YOUNG people killed just in these five years when no one was killed due to terrorism.
So should the US stop all measures against foreign terrorism on US soil? No, but the US might want to be more balanced and sensible about countering such terrorism.
If President Obama is serious about improving Homeland Security, I would recommend the following three steps as the minimum:
1. Decrease emphasis on gathering every conceivable bit of information on every visitor, emphasise analysis of all the information that the US already gathers through existing channels, and (more important) emphasise follow through on the basis of the information collected.
2. Throw out all the redundant information that is collected, which clogs up the possibility of adequate analysis - for example, all foreign visitors to the USA must not only give BOTH eye-scans but also all TEN fingerprints. This is overkill with a vengeance! One eye-scan and one index finger print should be more than adequate for almost any purpose but if the US wants to insist, perhaps it could be satisfied with two eye-scans and two index-finger-prints? Does the formality of the pre-travel registration really help anything beyond creating additional bother for all passengers travelling to the USA?
3. Order an assessement of the IQ of all employees connected with anything to do with homeland security. One or two agents who are not up to the mark or are mentally lazy are all that are needed to stymie a whole system - because, as in the recent case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Anyone who has any contact with any official to do with TSA or homeland security knows that many of these officials may be (just) able to follow procedures, but following procedures is never going to provide security; following procedures intelligently is what is going to provide security. All TSA/ homeland security employees with an IQ of less than 120 should be let go. A slimmer but more intelligently organised and much better co-ordinated corps can help deliver security, but the present bloated, ill-organised, uncoordinated and unintelligent scattering leaves the security of the USA very much to chance.
A friend sharing a coffee break says that perhaps the US likes and wants to have a bloated, ill-organised, uncoordinated and unintelligent scattering of agents and this huge amount of undigestible information as part of scaring its own population into paying for the sales of all the security-related equipment and for providing employment during a downturn.
Another person (an American) argues even more cynically that it is part of an elaborate plot by the US elite to limit freedoms in the USA, and that the limits on freedom are going to get much tighter with even more scare-mongering.
Please let's not be that cynical! Specially at the start of a new year and a new decade! Let's be positive and seek to spread truth, intelligence, balance, justice, love and all the other good things - which are what new beginnings are all about. Sphere: Related Content
Sunday, December 27, 2009
"Positivitis"
There is a new epidemic in the world.
I call it "Positivitis".
It is a mental disease, which causes the victim to systematically over-evaluate everything that puts her or him in a "positive" frame of mind, and to discount everything that might put her or him in a "negative" frame of mind.
Victims of this disease insist on defining "positive" and "negative" according to their own whim or fancy.
Generally, however, "positive" equals "anything that enables me to continue feeling happy with my chosen way of life".
"Negative", for those suffering from this disease, equals "anything that causes me to question any aspect of my lifestyle, opinions or moods".
Probably, throughout history, there have been individuals who have suffered from "Positivitis".
However, these individuals usually belonged to the ruling elite and were therefore only a handful in any society.
Since the 1980s, the number in the global elite has greatly increased.
We who read this Blog in all probability belong to the global elite, because of education, access to the internet and other technical resources, as well as financial resources that, even among the so-called "middle class" today are greater than most kings enjoyed through history.
That is something that is well hidden from us because of the incessant propaganda which tends to prompt us to be focused on the rat race.
We therefore do not even realise that confronted with an enormously significant choice: to use our resources and situation merely to live as comfortably as possible, or to use our status and resources to struggle for making the world better.
Those who attempt the latter are trying to be true realists. Those who attempt the former choose the disease that I call "Positivitis".
If the disease affected only the individuals who make a deliberate choice of "Posititivitis", that would be bad enough.
But some sufferers of "Positivitis" choose an extreme form of the disease: "Fundamentailst Positivism" or even "Fascist Positivism".
"Fascist Positivists" are those who deliberately blind themselves so totally to reality that they ferociously and violently attack anyone who is a realist.
Unlike "Fascist Positivists, "Fundamentalist Positivists" do not to attack those who are realists. But "Fundamentalist Positivists" do feel compelled to use their position to distort reality for others, by producing propaganda about "Positivism".
A headline from a recent newsletter from one of the most respected Business Schools in the world provides an instructive case study.
Here is the headline: "All Is Not Doom and Gloom for Artists".
From the headline, one would expect that there is something objectively good starting to happen for artists. Perhaps a new source of funding. Or a new channel of publicity. Or an opportunity to have more cheaply the supplies they need for their profession.
But on examining the article, one finds that there is no additional source of funding, no additional channel for publicising their work, no means of obtaining the supplies they need more cheaply. In fact, nothing objectively better at all: "For working artists, the recession has meant lower income from sales and reduced support from grants".
So what's the good news? Apparently, "about one-third ...say they are experiencing more openness to collaboration, one-third say they are able to experiment more, and one-tenth of the respondents say they are able to get cheaper work space now.".
Let's think about those three elements.
On the first element, if one-third say that they are experiencing more openness to collaboration, does that mean that perhaps one seventh are experiencing the same level of openness to collaboration, while the rest (the majority) are actually experiencing less openness to collaboration?
On the 2nd element: if one third say they are able to experiment more, what does that tell us about the other two-thirds? Are the vast majority (two-thirds) actually experimenting less?!
Similarly, on the third element: if only one-tenth are able to get cheaper work space now, does that mean that nine-tenths are not able to get cheaper work space even with the decline in real estate prices since some time in 2007?
The kind of "Positivitis" displayed by the Business School newsletter is particulary galling in view of the following facts that are also quoted:
* Two-thirds of artists hold at least one job in addition to making art
* Artists’ incomes are relatively low (two-thirds made less than $40,000 in 2008), and 51% reported an actual decrease even in that small art-related income from 2008 to 2009
* Forty percent of artists do not have adequate health insurance and more than 50%are worried about losing what they do have.
All that such "Fundamentalistically Positivitist" articles do is to put a "positive spin" on a worsening situation for artists.
"Fundamentalistically Positivist" articles and feel-good speeches help to create or perpetuate an illusion - in this case, that the situation is not so bad for artists after all, so that we are discouraged from concern about the situation of artists, and de-motivated from doing anything to improve the situation. Sphere: Related Content
I call it "Positivitis".
It is a mental disease, which causes the victim to systematically over-evaluate everything that puts her or him in a "positive" frame of mind, and to discount everything that might put her or him in a "negative" frame of mind.
Victims of this disease insist on defining "positive" and "negative" according to their own whim or fancy.
Generally, however, "positive" equals "anything that enables me to continue feeling happy with my chosen way of life".
"Negative", for those suffering from this disease, equals "anything that causes me to question any aspect of my lifestyle, opinions or moods".
Probably, throughout history, there have been individuals who have suffered from "Positivitis".
However, these individuals usually belonged to the ruling elite and were therefore only a handful in any society.
Since the 1980s, the number in the global elite has greatly increased.
We who read this Blog in all probability belong to the global elite, because of education, access to the internet and other technical resources, as well as financial resources that, even among the so-called "middle class" today are greater than most kings enjoyed through history.
That is something that is well hidden from us because of the incessant propaganda which tends to prompt us to be focused on the rat race.
We therefore do not even realise that confronted with an enormously significant choice: to use our resources and situation merely to live as comfortably as possible, or to use our status and resources to struggle for making the world better.
Those who attempt the latter are trying to be true realists. Those who attempt the former choose the disease that I call "Positivitis".
If the disease affected only the individuals who make a deliberate choice of "Posititivitis", that would be bad enough.
But some sufferers of "Positivitis" choose an extreme form of the disease: "Fundamentailst Positivism" or even "Fascist Positivism".
"Fascist Positivists" are those who deliberately blind themselves so totally to reality that they ferociously and violently attack anyone who is a realist.
Unlike "Fascist Positivists, "Fundamentalist Positivists" do not to attack those who are realists. But "Fundamentalist Positivists" do feel compelled to use their position to distort reality for others, by producing propaganda about "Positivism".
A headline from a recent newsletter from one of the most respected Business Schools in the world provides an instructive case study.
Here is the headline: "All Is Not Doom and Gloom for Artists".
From the headline, one would expect that there is something objectively good starting to happen for artists. Perhaps a new source of funding. Or a new channel of publicity. Or an opportunity to have more cheaply the supplies they need for their profession.
But on examining the article, one finds that there is no additional source of funding, no additional channel for publicising their work, no means of obtaining the supplies they need more cheaply. In fact, nothing objectively better at all: "For working artists, the recession has meant lower income from sales and reduced support from grants".
So what's the good news? Apparently, "about one-third ...say they are experiencing more openness to collaboration, one-third say they are able to experiment more, and one-tenth of the respondents say they are able to get cheaper work space now.".
Let's think about those three elements.
On the first element, if one-third say that they are experiencing more openness to collaboration, does that mean that perhaps one seventh are experiencing the same level of openness to collaboration, while the rest (the majority) are actually experiencing less openness to collaboration?
On the 2nd element: if one third say they are able to experiment more, what does that tell us about the other two-thirds? Are the vast majority (two-thirds) actually experimenting less?!
Similarly, on the third element: if only one-tenth are able to get cheaper work space now, does that mean that nine-tenths are not able to get cheaper work space even with the decline in real estate prices since some time in 2007?
The kind of "Positivitis" displayed by the Business School newsletter is particulary galling in view of the following facts that are also quoted:
* Two-thirds of artists hold at least one job in addition to making art
* Artists’ incomes are relatively low (two-thirds made less than $40,000 in 2008), and 51% reported an actual decrease even in that small art-related income from 2008 to 2009
* Forty percent of artists do not have adequate health insurance and more than 50%are worried about losing what they do have.
All that such "Fundamentalistically Positivitist" articles do is to put a "positive spin" on a worsening situation for artists.
"Fundamentalistically Positivist" articles and feel-good speeches help to create or perpetuate an illusion - in this case, that the situation is not so bad for artists after all, so that we are discouraged from concern about the situation of artists, and de-motivated from doing anything to improve the situation. Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Has Twitter been hacked?
Never usually have difficulties getting in and out of Twitter - but having difficuty today!
Has Twitter been hacked?!
As I try to log out, it takes ages and doesn't succeed in logging me out. On trying several times, I notice that the URL reads: "http://twitter.com/sessions/destroy". Is that normal? I don't recollect having seen that URL earlier... Sphere: Related Content
Has Twitter been hacked?!
As I try to log out, it takes ages and doesn't succeed in logging me out. On trying several times, I notice that the URL reads: "http://twitter.com/sessions/destroy". Is that normal? I don't recollect having seen that URL earlier... Sphere: Related Content
Sunday, December 20, 2009
The division of Chinese state-owned companies into two classes
Following the impact of the financial crisis on China's corporations, which slashed profits in the last quarter of 2008, profits remained negative on an annualised basis for 9 months to the third quarter of this year.
By current quarter, most industries appear to have returned to profit.
But an interesting picture emerges of the new class-division of Chinese companies.
The top-performing companies are the 131 centrally-controlled companies, whose profits were up 3.4% for the year through November.
Worst performing are the Local-government-controlled companies who suffered a loss of 8.9%.
Total losses by state-owned companies were 1.9%.
The reasons for the difference in performance are interesting to speculate about, but of course no one except the Party really knows. Sphere: Related Content
By current quarter, most industries appear to have returned to profit.
But an interesting picture emerges of the new class-division of Chinese companies.
The top-performing companies are the 131 centrally-controlled companies, whose profits were up 3.4% for the year through November.
Worst performing are the Local-government-controlled companies who suffered a loss of 8.9%.
Total losses by state-owned companies were 1.9%.
The reasons for the difference in performance are interesting to speculate about, but of course no one except the Party really knows. Sphere: Related Content
Copenhagen's NON-agreement: developing countries shoot themselves in the foot
It was clear for a long time that neither China nor the USA were keen on any real or binding agreement at Copenhagen.
The final result is a non-binding "promise" of a measly USD 10 billion a year for the next three years, with the idea that this might be increased by 2020. Given that there is no agreement about which specific countries will provide this money, which countries it will go to, in which amounts, on what conditions and by which mechanisms - and given the non-history of the "Millennium Development Goals"! - it is clear that what emerged from Copenhagen was a grand total of nothing.
Non-binding offers of cuts in carbon emissions, such as from China immediately before the summit can be considered to have been either mere posturing or in line with what the Chinese were planning anyway - and had no relation to the summit.
What is not clear is why the rest of the developing world (including India) wee so keen to avoid confronting China and the USA on the matter and arriving at an international deal that committed everyone else. That would have isolated the two bad guys and exercised at least some moral pressure on them - not that America has in recent times shown itself amenable to international pressure - let alone China of course.
So Copenhagen can be summed up as follows: duped by China and the US, the developing countries have shot themselves in the foot.
Assuming the consensus thinking about climate change is anywhere near correct, guess which countries are going to suffer most from the consequences? China and India. We have the largest coastlines, and the largest populations near them. We are more dependent on the monsoon and on the water that flows from the Himalayas than any other countries in the world. Naturally, in proportional terms small island states may be completely wiped out, but in terms of actual numbers of people, the damage in China and India will be much worse.
However, the economic and moral impact of the lack of an agreement at Copenhagen will be most on the USA. Not only has it delcined from providing leadership on a matter of global importance, its industry will continue to be hollowed out as more and more of that is outsourced to countries with lower environmental and human standards.
Global trade without global rules disproportionately disadvantages countries with the best environmental and human standards. Sphere: Related Content
The final result is a non-binding "promise" of a measly USD 10 billion a year for the next three years, with the idea that this might be increased by 2020. Given that there is no agreement about which specific countries will provide this money, which countries it will go to, in which amounts, on what conditions and by which mechanisms - and given the non-history of the "Millennium Development Goals"! - it is clear that what emerged from Copenhagen was a grand total of nothing.
Non-binding offers of cuts in carbon emissions, such as from China immediately before the summit can be considered to have been either mere posturing or in line with what the Chinese were planning anyway - and had no relation to the summit.
What is not clear is why the rest of the developing world (including India) wee so keen to avoid confronting China and the USA on the matter and arriving at an international deal that committed everyone else. That would have isolated the two bad guys and exercised at least some moral pressure on them - not that America has in recent times shown itself amenable to international pressure - let alone China of course.
So Copenhagen can be summed up as follows: duped by China and the US, the developing countries have shot themselves in the foot.
Assuming the consensus thinking about climate change is anywhere near correct, guess which countries are going to suffer most from the consequences? China and India. We have the largest coastlines, and the largest populations near them. We are more dependent on the monsoon and on the water that flows from the Himalayas than any other countries in the world. Naturally, in proportional terms small island states may be completely wiped out, but in terms of actual numbers of people, the damage in China and India will be much worse.
However, the economic and moral impact of the lack of an agreement at Copenhagen will be most on the USA. Not only has it delcined from providing leadership on a matter of global importance, its industry will continue to be hollowed out as more and more of that is outsourced to countries with lower environmental and human standards.
Global trade without global rules disproportionately disadvantages countries with the best environmental and human standards. Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Ten Lies that perpetuate the crisis
1: "Bankers and traders are cleverer than regulators"
2: "Booms and busts are inevitable"
3: "No one saw it coming"
4: "Bubbles cannot be identified till well after the fact"
5: "Legislation is the same as intervention"
6: "Markets free of state interference are good (true), so we should have markets without rules (false)"
7: "We can have markets without rules and without umpires"
8: "We can have global markets without global rules"
9: "Markets cannot be global without a global currency" (global currency competition actually helps global financial stability; there is a trade-off between efficiency and stabilty - too many currencies are inefficient, but too few make for instability and therefore concentration of power)
10: "Capitalism is the best, why change it?" (Since the 80s, we haven't had "capitalism", what we've had is "casinoism") Sphere: Related Content
2: "Booms and busts are inevitable"
3: "No one saw it coming"
4: "Bubbles cannot be identified till well after the fact"
5: "Legislation is the same as intervention"
6: "Markets free of state interference are good (true), so we should have markets without rules (false)"
7: "We can have markets without rules and without umpires"
8: "We can have global markets without global rules"
9: "Markets cannot be global without a global currency" (global currency competition actually helps global financial stability; there is a trade-off between efficiency and stabilty - too many currencies are inefficient, but too few make for instability and therefore concentration of power)
10: "Capitalism is the best, why change it?" (Since the 80s, we haven't had "capitalism", what we've had is "casinoism") Sphere: Related Content
Thursday, December 17, 2009
How many American families are losing their homes?
Well, according to Sojourners, on average the figure is one American family every 13 seconds (that's 6,600 per day).
This is not due to the subprime issue caused by unbridled speculation making life too expensive for people who had just been able to afford their mortgages. No, that was all two years ago.
So what is causing this new wave of foreclosures? Apparently, it is due to Americans losing employment. As the unemployment rate has climbed and climbed (and looks set to continue climbing, in spite of the temporary improvement just recently), an increasing number of Americans are losing their homes. Apparently, 50% of American homeowners have so little saved that if they are likely to lose their homes if they are out of work for as little as one month.
Savings rates are improving in the US, but not improving so very much yet. Meanwhile, the more Americans turn to saving, and the less they spend, the more it will hurt the export-oriented economies, led by China. Sphere: Related Content
This is not due to the subprime issue caused by unbridled speculation making life too expensive for people who had just been able to afford their mortgages. No, that was all two years ago.
So what is causing this new wave of foreclosures? Apparently, it is due to Americans losing employment. As the unemployment rate has climbed and climbed (and looks set to continue climbing, in spite of the temporary improvement just recently), an increasing number of Americans are losing their homes. Apparently, 50% of American homeowners have so little saved that if they are likely to lose their homes if they are out of work for as little as one month.
Savings rates are improving in the US, but not improving so very much yet. Meanwhile, the more Americans turn to saving, and the less they spend, the more it will hurt the export-oriented economies, led by China. Sphere: Related Content
Eleven Lessons for a Realistic Human Rights Policy
Dr. Friedbert Pflueger, who is a Member of the International Advisory Board of the World Security Network Foundation, in the course of his eminently sane analysis of US policy since Carter to Obama, during his recent inaugural lecture as Visiting Professor, Department of War Studies, King's College, London, enunciated the following 11 principles of a realistic human rights policy:
"Human Rights should be one cornerstone of a democracy's foreign policy. The spread of individual freedom, democracy and justice enhances also the security of free nations. Human rights can only be protected and saveguarded at home, if they are also a serious issue abroad. A democracy, which enjoys rights at home, but does not care about rights abroad, will loose the support of its own people.
Different cultures, historical backgrounds or religious traditions do not allow to apply the concept of a Westminster democracy everywhere at any time. Therefore human rights policies should concentrate on gross violations of rights such as torture. Its aim should be to fight the hell, not to create heaven.
Accordingly not preaching, a „we-know-better"attitude, arrogance or self-righteousness should be avoided. Human rights policy may not come about as moral imperialism.
While free elections in a specific country should be an aim, they are by far not the most important indicator for a free society. More emphasis should be given to the rule of law, the Habeas Corpus principle and of accountability and reliability of the government.
While the concept of human rights is a concept of individual rights vis a vis the government, those rights need social conditions to flourish such as basic standards concerning food, housing, education the rights of women etc.
Human rights can not the only aim of a countries foreign policy, often not even the most important one. It has to be balanced with other aims. So hard compromises are inevitable. You would like to criticise the Chinese human rights record, but on the other hand you need the Chinese as a partner of nuclear non-proliferation policy against Iran. Or: You would like to criticise Russia for closing down a free TV-station, but you want to achieve an important disarmament or climate agreement at the same time. So you have to develop skills and ideas to pursue the one cause without entirely give up the other. There are no clear formulas for a decision; it has to be case-by-case. The criticism of double standards is to a certain extend inevitable.
Sometimes you serve your cause better by quiet diplomacy. There are cases, when a statesman visiting a foreign country has the chance to free imprisoned dissidents or improve their living conditions. Sometimes he/she would harm his cause by speaking out and reaches results by interfering in a way, where the country in question can save its face. But quiet diplomacy should never become an alibi for doing nothing.
Use, wherever possible, multilateral institutions to foster human rights. Strengthen the International Court of Justice, reform the UN-human rights commission, use summits and every possible international forum to work for progress in the field of human rights.
If there is a real humanitarian catastrophy or genocide, do not rule out the use of force - a humanitarian intervention might be necessary. Without the willingness to fight for the idea of freedom, nobody would have stopped Adolf Hitler and Srebrenica would have been repeated. The threshold for such an intervention should be very high and in accordance with international law.
Be on the other hand aware of the limits of your countries power. Henry Kissinger explained his reluctance with aggressive human rights policy not with moral ambiguity or a lack of interest, but: "Imperatives impose limits in our ability to produce internal changes in foreign countries. Consciousness of our limits is recognition of the necessity of peace". (Statement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 19. 9. 1974)
The best way to serve the cause of human rights is the example a country gives with the practise at home. That has made the United States a beacon of freedom to the world Therefore Guantanamo was a grave mistake and should become history soon. John Quincy Adams stated in his famous address on the tasks of the American nation on July 4th 1821: "Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the contenance of her voice and the benignant sympathy of her example".
It seems to me that the trouble with Professor Pflueger's entirely sensible suggestions is that they assume, on the one hand, genuine commitment to human rights on the part of leaders, and, on the other hand, the acceptance by the public that leaders are acting in good faith. Is either of these true today? Sphere: Related Content
"Human Rights should be one cornerstone of a democracy's foreign policy. The spread of individual freedom, democracy and justice enhances also the security of free nations. Human rights can only be protected and saveguarded at home, if they are also a serious issue abroad. A democracy, which enjoys rights at home, but does not care about rights abroad, will loose the support of its own people.
Different cultures, historical backgrounds or religious traditions do not allow to apply the concept of a Westminster democracy everywhere at any time. Therefore human rights policies should concentrate on gross violations of rights such as torture. Its aim should be to fight the hell, not to create heaven.
Accordingly not preaching, a „we-know-better"attitude, arrogance or self-righteousness should be avoided. Human rights policy may not come about as moral imperialism.
While free elections in a specific country should be an aim, they are by far not the most important indicator for a free society. More emphasis should be given to the rule of law, the Habeas Corpus principle and of accountability and reliability of the government.
While the concept of human rights is a concept of individual rights vis a vis the government, those rights need social conditions to flourish such as basic standards concerning food, housing, education the rights of women etc.
Human rights can not the only aim of a countries foreign policy, often not even the most important one. It has to be balanced with other aims. So hard compromises are inevitable. You would like to criticise the Chinese human rights record, but on the other hand you need the Chinese as a partner of nuclear non-proliferation policy against Iran. Or: You would like to criticise Russia for closing down a free TV-station, but you want to achieve an important disarmament or climate agreement at the same time. So you have to develop skills and ideas to pursue the one cause without entirely give up the other. There are no clear formulas for a decision; it has to be case-by-case. The criticism of double standards is to a certain extend inevitable.
Sometimes you serve your cause better by quiet diplomacy. There are cases, when a statesman visiting a foreign country has the chance to free imprisoned dissidents or improve their living conditions. Sometimes he/she would harm his cause by speaking out and reaches results by interfering in a way, where the country in question can save its face. But quiet diplomacy should never become an alibi for doing nothing.
Use, wherever possible, multilateral institutions to foster human rights. Strengthen the International Court of Justice, reform the UN-human rights commission, use summits and every possible international forum to work for progress in the field of human rights.
If there is a real humanitarian catastrophy or genocide, do not rule out the use of force - a humanitarian intervention might be necessary. Without the willingness to fight for the idea of freedom, nobody would have stopped Adolf Hitler and Srebrenica would have been repeated. The threshold for such an intervention should be very high and in accordance with international law.
Be on the other hand aware of the limits of your countries power. Henry Kissinger explained his reluctance with aggressive human rights policy not with moral ambiguity or a lack of interest, but: "Imperatives impose limits in our ability to produce internal changes in foreign countries. Consciousness of our limits is recognition of the necessity of peace". (Statement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 19. 9. 1974)
The best way to serve the cause of human rights is the example a country gives with the practise at home. That has made the United States a beacon of freedom to the world Therefore Guantanamo was a grave mistake and should become history soon. John Quincy Adams stated in his famous address on the tasks of the American nation on July 4th 1821: "Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the contenance of her voice and the benignant sympathy of her example".
It seems to me that the trouble with Professor Pflueger's entirely sensible suggestions is that they assume, on the one hand, genuine commitment to human rights on the part of leaders, and, on the other hand, the acceptance by the public that leaders are acting in good faith. Is either of these true today? Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Does Modern Communication Technology Increase Isolation - or Doesn't It?
Just as some "research" finds that a particular item in your diet is good for your heart, while other "research" finds that the same item is bad for your cholesterol - or something equally idiotic - so we have opposing results of "research" on the topic of whether new communication technologies increase or reduce social interaction.
A widely-reported 2006 study showed that, since 1985, Americans have become more socially isolated: the size of their discussion networks declined, and the diversity of those people with whom they discuss important matters has decreased. Americans have fewer close ties to those from their neighborhoods and from voluntary associations. Internet and mobile phone technologies enable and support social ties that are relatively weak and geographically dispersed, not the strong, often locally-based ties that used to be a part of peoples’ discussion network before such technologies became pervasive. The result is that people are pulled away from traditional social settings, neighborhoods, voluntary associations, and public spaces.
By contrast, the Pew Internet & American Life Project, which does a lot of useful work, has just relesed the results of its "Personal Networks and Community Survey", involving telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of 2,512 adults. The interviews were conducted in English by Princeton Data Source, LLC between July 9, 2008 and August 10, 2008, on behalf of Princeton Survey Research International.
The survey was undertaken specifically to explore issues that were not probed directly in the 2006 study and other related research: the role of the internet and mobile phone in people’s core social networks.
This Pew survey finds that Americans are "not as isolated as has been previously reported. People’s use of the mobile phone and the internet is associated with larger and more diverse discussion networks. And, when we examine people’s full personal network – their strong and weak ties – internet use in general and use of social networking services ... are associated with more diverse social networks."
The phrasing above seems to suggest that the 2006 study was wrong. However, common sense tells you that the two pieces of "research" were examining different things:
If you relate to a larger number of people they will by definition be more diverse; and if you relate to a larger number of people, as there are only 24 hours in each day, your interactions on average will certainly be less deep. Indeed, your interactions may ALL become less deep.
Common sense also tells you that, if you use the new communication technologies, the possibility of connecting with people in more distant places will reduce the time you have available to relate to people nearer by. You can see this most clearly on any underground, bus or airplane: in the pre-tech days, people chatted much more easily with their (temporary) neighbours. Now practically no interaction takes place with one's temporary neighbours as everyone is too busy either listening to music or chatting with someone far away - and, as the conversation is taking place more or less in public, the conversation can't be about anything very deep. The same thing can be seen in real neighbourhoods, where people tend less and less to know their next-door neighbours and can now link up with people very far away. Equally, people may link with even a larger number of voluntary associations, but they now relate much less actively with any of them.
In brief, we don't need such "research" to tell us what we already know: these technologies have their uses, but they also have their drawbacks. All new technologies are double-edged. What we really need to learn is how to use them well and wisely. That is something for which research cannot be designed. Research leads to mere quantification of specific elements of what is needed for the sort of holistic knowledge on the basis of which life can flourish. And it has long been known that there is a wide gulf between knowledge and wisdom. Sphere: Related Content
A widely-reported 2006 study showed that, since 1985, Americans have become more socially isolated: the size of their discussion networks declined, and the diversity of those people with whom they discuss important matters has decreased. Americans have fewer close ties to those from their neighborhoods and from voluntary associations. Internet and mobile phone technologies enable and support social ties that are relatively weak and geographically dispersed, not the strong, often locally-based ties that used to be a part of peoples’ discussion network before such technologies became pervasive. The result is that people are pulled away from traditional social settings, neighborhoods, voluntary associations, and public spaces.
By contrast, the Pew Internet & American Life Project, which does a lot of useful work, has just relesed the results of its "Personal Networks and Community Survey", involving telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of 2,512 adults. The interviews were conducted in English by Princeton Data Source, LLC between July 9, 2008 and August 10, 2008, on behalf of Princeton Survey Research International.
The survey was undertaken specifically to explore issues that were not probed directly in the 2006 study and other related research: the role of the internet and mobile phone in people’s core social networks.
This Pew survey finds that Americans are "not as isolated as has been previously reported. People’s use of the mobile phone and the internet is associated with larger and more diverse discussion networks. And, when we examine people’s full personal network – their strong and weak ties – internet use in general and use of social networking services ... are associated with more diverse social networks."
The phrasing above seems to suggest that the 2006 study was wrong. However, common sense tells you that the two pieces of "research" were examining different things:
If you relate to a larger number of people they will by definition be more diverse; and if you relate to a larger number of people, as there are only 24 hours in each day, your interactions on average will certainly be less deep. Indeed, your interactions may ALL become less deep.
Common sense also tells you that, if you use the new communication technologies, the possibility of connecting with people in more distant places will reduce the time you have available to relate to people nearer by. You can see this most clearly on any underground, bus or airplane: in the pre-tech days, people chatted much more easily with their (temporary) neighbours. Now practically no interaction takes place with one's temporary neighbours as everyone is too busy either listening to music or chatting with someone far away - and, as the conversation is taking place more or less in public, the conversation can't be about anything very deep. The same thing can be seen in real neighbourhoods, where people tend less and less to know their next-door neighbours and can now link up with people very far away. Equally, people may link with even a larger number of voluntary associations, but they now relate much less actively with any of them.
In brief, we don't need such "research" to tell us what we already know: these technologies have their uses, but they also have their drawbacks. All new technologies are double-edged. What we really need to learn is how to use them well and wisely. That is something for which research cannot be designed. Research leads to mere quantification of specific elements of what is needed for the sort of holistic knowledge on the basis of which life can flourish. And it has long been known that there is a wide gulf between knowledge and wisdom. Sphere: Related Content
A Global Civil War?
One of the organisers of the event mentioned below summarised my talk there, which I have adapted slightly as follows:
"Under a barrel ceiling dating back to before Christopher Columbus, and facing a stained-glass window depicting the Pilgrim Fathers praying as they left Holland for America on the Mayflower, some 200 people gathered on Friday to discuss with half a dozen speakers the topic of what the next twenty years might bring.
The English Reformed Church was formerly the chapel for a sisterhood of the Beguines, a 14th-century order of deaconnesses residing in an enclosed courtyard called The Begijnhof. The courtyard is entered through an inconspicuous archway making it a restful haven in the centre of the city. After the city sided with the Reformation, the church was presented to English-speaking Protestant dissidents living in the city, among them the Pilgrim Fathers. Since then, the church has continued to be used by the English-speaking community in Amsterdam down to the present day.
The occasion was an opportunity to reflect both on the past and on the future.
Prabhu Guptara, originally from India but based in Switzerland, asked where globalisation is leading us. Until a few months ago, he said, that was easy to answer. One view of the future was, until recently, clearly winning; the view that said that greed is good.
The view that was losing was the values of the Protestant Reformation, which had for the last 500 years shaped everything that makes the West the envy of the rest of the wrold - e.g. universal literacy, freedom of thought, freedom of expression (and therefore open debate), science and technology, the rule of law, material abundance, loving those who disagree with you(or at least tolerating them), environmental responsibility, humanitarian concern, freedom of association, political democracy.... These values are not perfectly respresented in the West, but they did start originally being embodied in society for the first time with the Protestant Reformation, and did increasingly mark society first in the West and then, by its influence, in the rest of the world - till the 1980s.
However, a great change took place around the 1980s. Ayn Rand’s philosophy, that greed is good, was endorsed by the majority of the elite on both sides of the Atlantic.
The exponential, irresponsible and risky growth in recent decades stemmed from this view. The new practical godlessness created the boom of recent years, claimed Prabhu, until the last few months.
While World War 2 ended with a balance of power between the USSR and the USA, communism’s collapse twenty years ago had left one superpower. But then 9/11 had introduced a multipolar world, accentuated by the latest crisis. Whether a multipolar world is good for humanity remains to be seen, and it will be determined by the choices made by the new powers such as China and India, as much as by the old powers. There is also the related question of whether the new powers, such as hina, will be continue to be able to negotiate the turbulent waters of the sort of global casino that we have created since the 1980s.
What then lies ahead? Greater peace or increased regional conflicts? A new world war even? Increasing protectionism and competitive devaluation of currencies could still lead to the second possibility, he pointed out, in the same way as these precise factors had led to World War I and World War II. Protectionism and devaluation are therefore factors to watch closely.
The other key factor to watch is the current global discussion about the reform of the financial sector, in order to return it to the sort of responsible social function it had till the 1980s.
This is one example of a key area where global society is being confronted with a huge choice. If the wrong options are chosen, a new feudalism could return, in which a few super-rich would keep the rest of population under control.
Alternatively, biblical values could produce a world that is genuinely humane, just and environmentally responsible. Due to technological advances, which of course also go back to the Protestant Reformation, we have for the first time the possibility and means of clothing, housing and feeding everybody.
Global society is, in fact, facing a global civil war, between two sets of ideas: one of human responsibilty to society and to God, stemming from the Protestant Reformation but originating much earlier, in the Hebrew Bible; and the other rooted in the equally ancient "values" of human rationality, capacity and greed.
The future will have a more explicit clash between these two sets of values, predicted Prabhu, as he stepped from the podium." Sphere: Related Content
"Under a barrel ceiling dating back to before Christopher Columbus, and facing a stained-glass window depicting the Pilgrim Fathers praying as they left Holland for America on the Mayflower, some 200 people gathered on Friday to discuss with half a dozen speakers the topic of what the next twenty years might bring.
The English Reformed Church was formerly the chapel for a sisterhood of the Beguines, a 14th-century order of deaconnesses residing in an enclosed courtyard called The Begijnhof. The courtyard is entered through an inconspicuous archway making it a restful haven in the centre of the city. After the city sided with the Reformation, the church was presented to English-speaking Protestant dissidents living in the city, among them the Pilgrim Fathers. Since then, the church has continued to be used by the English-speaking community in Amsterdam down to the present day.
The occasion was an opportunity to reflect both on the past and on the future.
Prabhu Guptara, originally from India but based in Switzerland, asked where globalisation is leading us. Until a few months ago, he said, that was easy to answer. One view of the future was, until recently, clearly winning; the view that said that greed is good.
The view that was losing was the values of the Protestant Reformation, which had for the last 500 years shaped everything that makes the West the envy of the rest of the wrold - e.g. universal literacy, freedom of thought, freedom of expression (and therefore open debate), science and technology, the rule of law, material abundance, loving those who disagree with you(or at least tolerating them), environmental responsibility, humanitarian concern, freedom of association, political democracy.... These values are not perfectly respresented in the West, but they did start originally being embodied in society for the first time with the Protestant Reformation, and did increasingly mark society first in the West and then, by its influence, in the rest of the world - till the 1980s.
However, a great change took place around the 1980s. Ayn Rand’s philosophy, that greed is good, was endorsed by the majority of the elite on both sides of the Atlantic.
The exponential, irresponsible and risky growth in recent decades stemmed from this view. The new practical godlessness created the boom of recent years, claimed Prabhu, until the last few months.
While World War 2 ended with a balance of power between the USSR and the USA, communism’s collapse twenty years ago had left one superpower. But then 9/11 had introduced a multipolar world, accentuated by the latest crisis. Whether a multipolar world is good for humanity remains to be seen, and it will be determined by the choices made by the new powers such as China and India, as much as by the old powers. There is also the related question of whether the new powers, such as hina, will be continue to be able to negotiate the turbulent waters of the sort of global casino that we have created since the 1980s.
What then lies ahead? Greater peace or increased regional conflicts? A new world war even? Increasing protectionism and competitive devaluation of currencies could still lead to the second possibility, he pointed out, in the same way as these precise factors had led to World War I and World War II. Protectionism and devaluation are therefore factors to watch closely.
The other key factor to watch is the current global discussion about the reform of the financial sector, in order to return it to the sort of responsible social function it had till the 1980s.
This is one example of a key area where global society is being confronted with a huge choice. If the wrong options are chosen, a new feudalism could return, in which a few super-rich would keep the rest of population under control.
Alternatively, biblical values could produce a world that is genuinely humane, just and environmentally responsible. Due to technological advances, which of course also go back to the Protestant Reformation, we have for the first time the possibility and means of clothing, housing and feeding everybody.
Global society is, in fact, facing a global civil war, between two sets of ideas: one of human responsibilty to society and to God, stemming from the Protestant Reformation but originating much earlier, in the Hebrew Bible; and the other rooted in the equally ancient "values" of human rationality, capacity and greed.
The future will have a more explicit clash between these two sets of values, predicted Prabhu, as he stepped from the podium." Sphere: Related Content
Manipulation of Official Statistics
As my regular readers will know, I have a personal campaign against the manipulation of official statistics. In the course of this campaign, I often cites US figures. As a non-American, I am conscious that I should really quote Swiss or British or Indian figures as these are the economies which I know best. However, to its credit, the fact remains that the US is still the most transparent country in the world. More facts are more easily available to everyone in the world about this country than about any other.
For those who would like to follow vigorous discussions about facts regarding the US but from a US source, you might find it interesting to look at the website titled, "ECONOMY IN CRISIS America's Economic Report - Daily".
You will find there, for example,Thomas Heffner's post, "A Sinking Ship Full Steam Ahead", in which he takes on GDP, productivity and job creation figures http://preview.tinyurl.com/y8hhouh
[Open in new window] Sphere: Related Content
For those who would like to follow vigorous discussions about facts regarding the US but from a US source, you might find it interesting to look at the website titled, "ECONOMY IN CRISIS America's Economic Report - Daily".
You will find there, for example,Thomas Heffner's post, "A Sinking Ship Full Steam Ahead", in which he takes on GDP, productivity and job creation figures http://preview.tinyurl.com/y8hhouh
[Open in new window] Sphere: Related Content
Another misleading headline, this time about Singapore
A piece by an analyst today reads: "Is Positive Growth in Singapore Sustainable?".
This would seem to indicate that "positive growth" is taking place in Singapore, and the question that is going to be asked by the piece is whether that growth is sustainable.
However, when one reads the piece, one finds that there is NO growth taking place taking place in Singapore: all that is happening is that the decline is slowing down!:
"the pace of contraction in retail and auto sales decelerated significantly in October 2009. Retail sales contracted 4.4% y/y, the smallest decline in 10 month, in October after falling a revised 12% y/y in September. Auto sales contracted 14.6% y/y in October after plunging 36.3% y/y in September...". Sphere: Related Content
This would seem to indicate that "positive growth" is taking place in Singapore, and the question that is going to be asked by the piece is whether that growth is sustainable.
However, when one reads the piece, one finds that there is NO growth taking place taking place in Singapore: all that is happening is that the decline is slowing down!:
"the pace of contraction in retail and auto sales decelerated significantly in October 2009. Retail sales contracted 4.4% y/y, the smallest decline in 10 month, in October after falling a revised 12% y/y in September. Auto sales contracted 14.6% y/y in October after plunging 36.3% y/y in September...". Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, December 12, 2009
"Unsocial Hours: Unsocial Families?"
Though I am an admirer of the work of The Relationships Foundation and generally try to keep up with their work, I have only just got around to reading their pamphlet ‘Unsocial Hours: Unsocial Families’.
It is necessary reading for everyone concerned with the health of individuals, of families and of society.
Written by Clare Lyonette and Michael Clark, "Unsocial Hours: Unsocial Families?" surveys the international literature on the impact of long and atypical hours working on family life, but particularly on the effects on couple relationships and the wellbeing of children.
Available at: http://preview.tinyurl.com/ydr544s
[Open in new window] Sphere: Related Content
It is necessary reading for everyone concerned with the health of individuals, of families and of society.
Written by Clare Lyonette and Michael Clark, "Unsocial Hours: Unsocial Families?" surveys the international literature on the impact of long and atypical hours working on family life, but particularly on the effects on couple relationships and the wellbeing of children.
Available at: http://preview.tinyurl.com/ydr544s
[Open in new window] Sphere: Related Content
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Propaganda or Illiteracy?
Here is a headline from a recent newletter: "Japan Recovery Stalls: GDP Growth Climbs to 0.3% q/q in Q3"
The headline contradicts itself by saying first that the recovery "stalls", and then that growth "climbs".
The newsletter goes on to say: "Japan's real GDP growth for Q3 2009 was revised down to 0.3% q/q from a preliminary estimate of 1.2% q/q."
So only after you read that sentence is it clear that the growth rate was not what it was estimated to be. Indeed, that the growth rate was actually less than the estimate.
Nothing happened to the real growth rate: it was what it was. The recovery neither resumed nor stalled.
What happened was that the earlier guess or estimate was wrong, and we now know what the real growth rate was: a measly 0.3%.
So was the newsletter indulging in propaganda or is it that its writers and editors are simply illiterate - or perhaps suffering from temporary linguistic amnesia?
I don't know. But it certainly isn't communication! Sphere: Related Content
The headline contradicts itself by saying first that the recovery "stalls", and then that growth "climbs".
The newsletter goes on to say: "Japan's real GDP growth for Q3 2009 was revised down to 0.3% q/q from a preliminary estimate of 1.2% q/q."
So only after you read that sentence is it clear that the growth rate was not what it was estimated to be. Indeed, that the growth rate was actually less than the estimate.
Nothing happened to the real growth rate: it was what it was. The recovery neither resumed nor stalled.
What happened was that the earlier guess or estimate was wrong, and we now know what the real growth rate was: a measly 0.3%.
So was the newsletter indulging in propaganda or is it that its writers and editors are simply illiterate - or perhaps suffering from temporary linguistic amnesia?
I don't know. But it certainly isn't communication! Sphere: Related Content
Monday, December 07, 2009
oil to fall, dollar to rise
Given the enormous over-supply of oil at present, look for the price of oil to fall significantly, perhaps even catastrophically, over the next few weeks. That will impact all commodities...
Gold? Rather more complex at present. Unlikely to fall significantly. Probably will continue rising at least till mid-January.
Look for the Remnimbi to hold steady or, more likely, decline further.
The Indian Rupee should continue to improve.
The Euro will come under pressure, perhaps huge pressure, as spreads widen on the EU's peripheral countries.
Contrariwise, expect the dollar to rise. Could rise dramatically. Sphere: Related Content
Gold? Rather more complex at present. Unlikely to fall significantly. Probably will continue rising at least till mid-January.
Look for the Remnimbi to hold steady or, more likely, decline further.
The Indian Rupee should continue to improve.
The Euro will come under pressure, perhaps huge pressure, as spreads widen on the EU's peripheral countries.
Contrariwise, expect the dollar to rise. Could rise dramatically. Sphere: Related Content
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Financial and asset bubbles cannot be avoided, but....
We are constantly bombarded with the propaganda that financial and asset bubbles cannot be avoided.
This is meant by interested parties as a move to paralyse debate about the number and size of bubbles and whether anything can be done to limit those.
An exactly parallel statement might be that life is full of dangers. But that does not mean that nothing can or should be done about such dangers and, in reality, each of us goes about reducing such dangers as far as possible.
Even those among us who enjoy extremely dangerous activities such as going to the frozen wastes of the Antarctic or the Himalayas, or take to bungee jumping and such, do take all the training possible, all the equipment possible and all the safeguards possible to minimise risk.
So the intelligent question to ask is NOT "Can asset and financial bubbles be avoided" (which would be like asking "Can dangers be eliminated from life") but: "Can the frequency, number and size of bubbles be contained?"
And the answer to that question is a clear "YES".
Two DVDs have recently been produced which provide easy-to-follow light on related subjects:
1. Dr. Bernard Lietaer's "Money for the Future" (the German-language version, "Geld für Zukunft" is on the same DVD), and
2. Dr. Margrit Kennedy's "Re-inventing Money" (the German-language version is "Geld new gestalten", also on the same DVD).
The first lasts 50 minutes, the second 65 minutes. Both are produced by Zeitfilm Media GmbH, Rutschbahn 33, 20146 Rotherbaum, Hamburg, Germany (Telephone: +49 40 414699-40). The cost is Euros 17.80 each, or 30 euros for the two. Regretfully, Zeitfulm does not seem to have an email ID that is publicly available, nor is their website in English at least at present! However, an order in English to the following should secure your copies: zeitnah@zeitfilm.de Sphere: Related Content
This is meant by interested parties as a move to paralyse debate about the number and size of bubbles and whether anything can be done to limit those.
An exactly parallel statement might be that life is full of dangers. But that does not mean that nothing can or should be done about such dangers and, in reality, each of us goes about reducing such dangers as far as possible.
Even those among us who enjoy extremely dangerous activities such as going to the frozen wastes of the Antarctic or the Himalayas, or take to bungee jumping and such, do take all the training possible, all the equipment possible and all the safeguards possible to minimise risk.
So the intelligent question to ask is NOT "Can asset and financial bubbles be avoided" (which would be like asking "Can dangers be eliminated from life") but: "Can the frequency, number and size of bubbles be contained?"
And the answer to that question is a clear "YES".
Two DVDs have recently been produced which provide easy-to-follow light on related subjects:
1. Dr. Bernard Lietaer's "Money for the Future" (the German-language version, "Geld für Zukunft" is on the same DVD), and
2. Dr. Margrit Kennedy's "Re-inventing Money" (the German-language version is "Geld new gestalten", also on the same DVD).
The first lasts 50 minutes, the second 65 minutes. Both are produced by Zeitfilm Media GmbH, Rutschbahn 33, 20146 Rotherbaum, Hamburg, Germany (Telephone: +49 40 414699-40). The cost is Euros 17.80 each, or 30 euros for the two. Regretfully, Zeitfulm does not seem to have an email ID that is publicly available, nor is their website in English at least at present! However, an order in English to the following should secure your copies: zeitnah@zeitfilm.de Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Going fast versus going further
While in Birmingham, UK, recently, I was reminded of an old saying that is too easily forgotten (at least by me!): "If you want to go fast, go alone; but if you want to go further, go with others".
Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, November 21, 2009
How Airlines Can Improve Profits While Encouraging Healthy Habits Among Passengers
On a recent flight, I noticed that the following alcoholic drinks were on offer: two kinds of beer, three kinds of white wine, two kinds of red wine, and at least a dozen different kinds of spirits.
By contrast, there were only two kinds of non-alcoholic drinks: orange juice and apple juice.
I should point out that I have nothing against people consuming alcohol in reasonable quantities outside aircraft and airports. But I do get irritated by the consumption of alcohol in airports and flights because alcohol dries out the human body, which is why the medical advice is that one should not consume alcohol for a sufficient time before getting on a flight, nor should alcohol be consumed during a flight.
The body dries up during flights anyway - partly as a result of the radiation that comes through the body of an airplane at high altitudes, and partly because of the processed air that one has to breathe during flights. Adding the dehydration caused by alcohol is pretty stupid. On long flights, consuming alcohol can contribute to the formation of blood clots and what is called deep vein thrombosis.
So we have airlines encouraging unhealthy behaviour.
But the really interesting thing is that airlines are encouraging unhealthy behaviour at an increased cost to themselves!
Fruit juices are not only much healthier to consume during flights but also cost much less than alcoholic drinks. And there is such a wonderful array of fruit juices that could be offered! BTW I am always puzzled when I am offered orange juice in countries where no oranges grow - and I am even more puzzled when restaurants in many countries cannot offer me the juice of any of the fruits that do grow in their country.
Anyway, my point is that airlines can contribute to the health of their passengers at the same time as they can improve their profits if they stop serving alcoholic drinks during flights. Sphere: Related Content
By contrast, there were only two kinds of non-alcoholic drinks: orange juice and apple juice.
I should point out that I have nothing against people consuming alcohol in reasonable quantities outside aircraft and airports. But I do get irritated by the consumption of alcohol in airports and flights because alcohol dries out the human body, which is why the medical advice is that one should not consume alcohol for a sufficient time before getting on a flight, nor should alcohol be consumed during a flight.
The body dries up during flights anyway - partly as a result of the radiation that comes through the body of an airplane at high altitudes, and partly because of the processed air that one has to breathe during flights. Adding the dehydration caused by alcohol is pretty stupid. On long flights, consuming alcohol can contribute to the formation of blood clots and what is called deep vein thrombosis.
So we have airlines encouraging unhealthy behaviour.
But the really interesting thing is that airlines are encouraging unhealthy behaviour at an increased cost to themselves!
Fruit juices are not only much healthier to consume during flights but also cost much less than alcoholic drinks. And there is such a wonderful array of fruit juices that could be offered! BTW I am always puzzled when I am offered orange juice in countries where no oranges grow - and I am even more puzzled when restaurants in many countries cannot offer me the juice of any of the fruits that do grow in their country.
Anyway, my point is that airlines can contribute to the health of their passengers at the same time as they can improve their profits if they stop serving alcoholic drinks during flights. Sphere: Related Content
Thursday, November 19, 2009
British Woman now occupies most powerful post in the EU
It is ironic that the British, who are so very anti-EU, are going to supply, with effect from December 1 this year, the person who will occupy the most powerful post in the EU: Baroness Catherine Ashton is to be the "High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy" - a title that is impressively long as it is important.
The Baroness has been the EU's Commissioner for Trade, a position in which she has not made many waves, but in which she has no doubt built up considerable and appropriately high-level experience of the workings of the EU.
I was chatting a few days ago in Oxford with my friend Professor Miguel Mesquita da Cunha, who used to be an Adviser to an earlier EU President, and whose opinion it is that ever since the UK joined the EU, it has supplied people for key posts in the EU. Most British people do not realise what a sea-change has come about in the EU over the years that they have been part of the EU: when they joined, the EU was dominated by the French and the first language of the Commission was, for all practical purposes, French. With the accession of an increasing number of countries, the French influence has been marginalised. And, as most of the "new" countries prefer English, that has become clearly the dominant language. Not only that, English-language thought-forms and Anglo-American values are clearly winning out over traditional Continental European values. At least, that has been the trend up to now. So much for Miguel's view.
It remains to be seen whether the current crisis, and the operation of the new Lisbon Treaty from December the first, will change the trend and, if so, in what direction. Sphere: Related Content
The Baroness has been the EU's Commissioner for Trade, a position in which she has not made many waves, but in which she has no doubt built up considerable and appropriately high-level experience of the workings of the EU.
I was chatting a few days ago in Oxford with my friend Professor Miguel Mesquita da Cunha, who used to be an Adviser to an earlier EU President, and whose opinion it is that ever since the UK joined the EU, it has supplied people for key posts in the EU. Most British people do not realise what a sea-change has come about in the EU over the years that they have been part of the EU: when they joined, the EU was dominated by the French and the first language of the Commission was, for all practical purposes, French. With the accession of an increasing number of countries, the French influence has been marginalised. And, as most of the "new" countries prefer English, that has become clearly the dominant language. Not only that, English-language thought-forms and Anglo-American values are clearly winning out over traditional Continental European values. At least, that has been the trend up to now. So much for Miguel's view.
It remains to be seen whether the current crisis, and the operation of the new Lisbon Treaty from December the first, will change the trend and, if so, in what direction. Sphere: Related Content
Friday, November 13, 2009
The UK is trying really hard to address the challenge of unemployment in the country
There are now two separate agencies checking passports on arrival at Heathrow - at least there were this morning when I landed from the US.
One agency was checking at the end of the arrival pier, the other at the normal Passport Control kiosk. Sphere: Related Content
One agency was checking at the end of the arrival pier, the other at the normal Passport Control kiosk. Sphere: Related Content
Inter-religious Dialogue
A friend , John, who is a Christian, copies me on a letter he writes to a Muslim friend of his:
"I was prompted by Karen Armstrong’s article in the Guardian today, where she suggested that truly Socratic dialogue should be conducted by expressing yourself clearly as a gift to your debating partners.
"The question arises as to what followers of Jesus can offer to members of other faiths that seems to be unique to Jesus.
"If we just list common points between the faiths the result can look can look rather like a list of middle class values!
"The combination of the following things seems to me to be unique to Jesus. They were revolutionary in Jesus’ time and continue to be so. The problem is that the conflict between virtue and power usually results in power getting the upper hand.
"Jesus’ responses to his own persecution and his entreaty to his followers are quite sublime.
"I quote from the New International Version of the Bible.
1. “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” Mathew 5 v 43
2. Jesus on the cross said -
“ Father forgive them for they do not know what they are doing” Luke 23 v 34
3. The “Sermon on the Mount” Mathew 5 vv 3-11
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are all the peacemakers, for they will be called the sons of God.
Blessed are you when people insult you persecute you and falsely say all kinds of things against you because of me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is you reward in heaven, for in the same way they
persecuted the prophets who were before you.
5. The Lord’s prayer. Mathew 6 vv 5 – 14
“ Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name.
Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us our daily bread.
Forgive us our debts, as we have forgiven our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver is from the evil one.
For if you forgive men when they have sinned against you, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins your Father will to forgive your sins.”
6. The parables of Jesus in the gospels ------in which he says “ The kingdom of heaven is like this…………….”
"Would it be possible and valuable for you to set out the unique gifts other faiths can offer to each other?
"I once attended a dinner in London hosted by Sigi Sternberg where Muslim Jews and followers of Jesus shared their faith in after dinner discussion. It was quite inspiring".
As someone who finds formal "inter-faith dialogue" totally boring, but always values more personal sharing, I thought the point that John made at the end rather more my cup of tea.
Though I should say that what John regards as "middle class values" are in fact, historically speaking, Biblical values that were the cultural creation of the Protestant Reformation, even though that has not yet quite succeeded in overcoming bourgeois values.
However, I responded to John somewhat as follows:
Dear John
many thanks for copying me on this
I seem somehow to be under the impression that what is unique about Jesus the Living Lord is His promise to come and live in the hearts of those who choose to follow Him, so as to renew in them day by day a desire to grow more closely into God's moral/ spiritual/ emotional likeness...
his teachings are at best beautiful thoughts, though arguably more beautifully expressed than by others, if we do not have the experience of His living in us
warmly
Prabhu Sphere: Related Content
"I was prompted by Karen Armstrong’s article in the Guardian today, where she suggested that truly Socratic dialogue should be conducted by expressing yourself clearly as a gift to your debating partners.
"The question arises as to what followers of Jesus can offer to members of other faiths that seems to be unique to Jesus.
"If we just list common points between the faiths the result can look can look rather like a list of middle class values!
"The combination of the following things seems to me to be unique to Jesus. They were revolutionary in Jesus’ time and continue to be so. The problem is that the conflict between virtue and power usually results in power getting the upper hand.
"Jesus’ responses to his own persecution and his entreaty to his followers are quite sublime.
"I quote from the New International Version of the Bible.
1. “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” Mathew 5 v 43
2. Jesus on the cross said -
“ Father forgive them for they do not know what they are doing” Luke 23 v 34
3. The “Sermon on the Mount” Mathew 5 vv 3-11
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are all the peacemakers, for they will be called the sons of God.
Blessed are you when people insult you persecute you and falsely say all kinds of things against you because of me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is you reward in heaven, for in the same way they
persecuted the prophets who were before you.
5. The Lord’s prayer. Mathew 6 vv 5 – 14
“ Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name.
Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us our daily bread.
Forgive us our debts, as we have forgiven our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver is from the evil one.
For if you forgive men when they have sinned against you, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins your Father will to forgive your sins.”
6. The parables of Jesus in the gospels ------in which he says “ The kingdom of heaven is like this…………….”
"Would it be possible and valuable for you to set out the unique gifts other faiths can offer to each other?
"I once attended a dinner in London hosted by Sigi Sternberg where Muslim Jews and followers of Jesus shared their faith in after dinner discussion. It was quite inspiring".
As someone who finds formal "inter-faith dialogue" totally boring, but always values more personal sharing, I thought the point that John made at the end rather more my cup of tea.
Though I should say that what John regards as "middle class values" are in fact, historically speaking, Biblical values that were the cultural creation of the Protestant Reformation, even though that has not yet quite succeeded in overcoming bourgeois values.
However, I responded to John somewhat as follows:
Dear John
many thanks for copying me on this
I seem somehow to be under the impression that what is unique about Jesus the Living Lord is His promise to come and live in the hearts of those who choose to follow Him, so as to renew in them day by day a desire to grow more closely into God's moral/ spiritual/ emotional likeness...
his teachings are at best beautiful thoughts, though arguably more beautifully expressed than by others, if we do not have the experience of His living in us
warmly
Prabhu Sphere: Related Content
Dialogue on Religion and Business
I have just participated in a discussion on the subject, as part of the agenda at one of the more important business fora in the world. At the session, moderated by the Chairman of Lazard International, Ken Costa, there were representatives of Protestant, Roman, Muslim, Buddhist, and Jain traditions (not all apeaking only on their own behalf).
While the others said nice things, the most useful contributions for the business audience came from the Buddhist, Robert Thurman, who pointed out that leaders "are always in danger of being misled about the real situation in their firms by their own subordinates" and by the Protestant, Rick Warren, who argued persuasively that we need to think not only of the "two-legged stool" of Public-Private Partnerships but rather of the "three-legged stool" of Public, Private and Faith-based partnerships: the power of faith-based institutions to contribute to the elimination or amelioration of social evils is hugely underestimated or ignored.
He also spoke stirringly of the Five Global Goliaths in today's world: Conflict (spiritual, perpersonal, inter-generational...), Corruption or unethical leadership, Extreme Poverty, Pandemics and Illiteracy.
Altogether, the speakers offered a paean of praise for religion that seemed to me perhaps justified in view of the brief time dedicated to the subject. However, it did seem to me open to the charge of being unduly uncritical of religion.
Religion has, and continues to be, itself a source of corruption in most parts of the world, it continues to justify and participate in economic and social exploitation, and it is too closely allied to and often itself becomes a base for power. At least that is my viewpoint as a disciple of someone who was so anti-religious that the religious-political establishment decided that the best way to deal with his criticisms was to eliminate him. The establishment, having found this to be an ineffective strategy, then proceeded to try and co-opt his followers into the power structures - a challenge with which his followers still struggle.
Anyway, from my point of view, the discussion would have been much more useful if there had been, on the part of the religious leaders on the podium, a little less self-congratulation, and a little more engagement with the ethical mess in which business is today. The topics slated for discussion were: "Has global business lost its moral context? If so, has this loss contributed to the global downturn? Can belief systems help us generate the co-operation that is needed to renew growth?" - excellent topics that were wholly ignored by the speakers, who went on far beyond their allotted time (as is, I think cynically, surely an occupational hazard for them), leaving then little time even for the participants to pick up the slack. Sphere: Related Content
While the others said nice things, the most useful contributions for the business audience came from the Buddhist, Robert Thurman, who pointed out that leaders "are always in danger of being misled about the real situation in their firms by their own subordinates" and by the Protestant, Rick Warren, who argued persuasively that we need to think not only of the "two-legged stool" of Public-Private Partnerships but rather of the "three-legged stool" of Public, Private and Faith-based partnerships: the power of faith-based institutions to contribute to the elimination or amelioration of social evils is hugely underestimated or ignored.
He also spoke stirringly of the Five Global Goliaths in today's world: Conflict (spiritual, perpersonal, inter-generational...), Corruption or unethical leadership, Extreme Poverty, Pandemics and Illiteracy.
Altogether, the speakers offered a paean of praise for religion that seemed to me perhaps justified in view of the brief time dedicated to the subject. However, it did seem to me open to the charge of being unduly uncritical of religion.
Religion has, and continues to be, itself a source of corruption in most parts of the world, it continues to justify and participate in economic and social exploitation, and it is too closely allied to and often itself becomes a base for power. At least that is my viewpoint as a disciple of someone who was so anti-religious that the religious-political establishment decided that the best way to deal with his criticisms was to eliminate him. The establishment, having found this to be an ineffective strategy, then proceeded to try and co-opt his followers into the power structures - a challenge with which his followers still struggle.
Anyway, from my point of view, the discussion would have been much more useful if there had been, on the part of the religious leaders on the podium, a little less self-congratulation, and a little more engagement with the ethical mess in which business is today. The topics slated for discussion were: "Has global business lost its moral context? If so, has this loss contributed to the global downturn? Can belief systems help us generate the co-operation that is needed to renew growth?" - excellent topics that were wholly ignored by the speakers, who went on far beyond their allotted time (as is, I think cynically, surely an occupational hazard for them), leaving then little time even for the participants to pick up the slack. Sphere: Related Content
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)