Some thoughts...

The Affluent Society by John Kenneth Galbraith is highly provacative, forcing us to re-examine the basic tenets of traditional economic theory.

Some thoughts:

1. On how our real wage has not increased with our rise in productivity, I suppose it could be due to the fact that there are now (usually) two working members in a family. When there's only one working member, the sole breadwinner will have to fight harder for wage increase because there is more at stake. Without his salary, his entire family will starve.

Now, however, with two working members in the family, the burden is more evenly spread out. The husband can accept a decline in real wages more meekly simply because the wife supplements some of the household income. If he doesn't accept the wage stagnation, he may well be fired as there are other workers out there willing to work for less amount(again, because of the burden spread)

2. Malthusian catastrophe--in the past, the Malthusian catastrophe did not come to pass because of the discovery of the New World, where there is new land for cultivation of crops. Hence, the surplus food removes the spectre of Malthusian horror.

Now, however, it seems that Malthusian horror is pressing down on us again. Population is pressing on the earth's resources, and yet, because it is largely invisible and does not concern our immediate needs(food, shelter, clothing), we do not care. This time, there won't be another New World for us to exploit new resources. If we do not act now, the Malthusian horror can indeed come to pass.

3.Perhaps the most widely-quoted of Joseph Schumpeter's works--"In all cases...recovery came of itself...But this is not all: our analysis leads us to believe that recovery is soundo nly if it does come of itself. For any revival which is merely due to artificial stimulus leaves part of the work of depression undone and adds, to an undigested remnant of maladjustment, new maladjustments of its own."

Reminds me of the current crisis. Inefficient banks and businesses are bailed out by the government in an attempt to alleviate the crisis, and it rankles that failed businesses are allowed to survive, with no new businesses to take over their place. Sometimes, I wonder if it is the collapse of Lehman Brothers that precipitated the sharp downfall in the markets, or is it simply the indecisiveness of the authority. If the authority has simply made a decision not to bail out anymore companies and stick to what it says, all companies will have to face up to reality and stop hoping for bailouts. Speculation may even decrease and while this medicine is bitter and hard to swallow, I wonder if it will be better in the long run.

3. This quote is a gem--"Apart from the universities where its practice has the standing of a scholarly right, the art of genteel and elaborately concealed idleness may well reach its highest development in the upper executive reaches of the modern corporation."

4. Sometimes, I feel that people go into arguments with closed minds, and that makes the whole argument pointless. The whole point of the argument is to convince your opponent, but if both participants have already obstinately closed their minds off to any ideas besides their own, then what's the purpose of argumentation? On the other hand, if you go into an argument and end up being convinced by the other party, you may be accused of being weak-minded. Thus, the result is that you argue not to prove a point. There is more at stake. You argue not to lose face.

5.Even though wants are contrived for things of least urgency(ie. wants are manufactured for goods produced through advertisements), some things may actually have a greater purpose. Energy efficiency is an example. People may not want an energy-efficient product until much influence from advertisements, but using energy-efficient products are actually beneficial to the society.

6.The sales tax is suggested as a way to increase government revenue, which will help reduce poverty through investment in better education facilities. Hence, more poor children will be able to break out of the poverty cycle when they grow up.

There is something fundamentally wrong with this logic. It focuses on the future, but not on the present. If the poor are already struggling to make ends meet, how can we place additional burdens on them when the rest of the society is relatively affluent? Because we are affluent, we are now supposed to be able to afford basic human rights and amenities for all in the society. It cannot be that we ignore the poverty problem simply because the poverty class is now a minority.

Bond

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/422001/1/.html

I dunno, but 3 officers released from their bonds does not mean 3 medical officers released from their bonds.

What are the numbers for MOs?

Parallels

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/the-dark-side-of-dubai-1664368.html

I see alot of parallels between Dubai and Singapore

And then – suddenly – Mohammed thwacked into the limits of Sheikh Mohammed's tolerance. Horrified by the "system of slavery" his country was being built on, he spoke out to Human Rights Watch and the BBC. "So I was hauled in by the secret police and told: shut up, or you will lose you job, and your children will be unemployable," he says. "But how could I be silent?"
He was stripped of his lawyer's licence and his passport – becoming yet another person imprisoned in this country. "I have been blacklisted and so have my children. The newspapers are not allowed to write about me."

He looks around at the shiny floors and Western tourists and says: "What we see now didn't occur in our wildest dreams. We never thought we could be such a success, a trendsetter, a model for other Arab countries. The people of Dubai are mighty proud of their city, and rightly so. And yet..." He shakes his head. "In our hearts, we fear we have built a modern city but we are losing it to all these expats."

Stuck

Recently I read The Return of Depression Economics by Paul Krugman. Enlightening.

Turns out that in deciding an economic policy, one practically always has to give up something for the other. For example, IMF has usually recommended fiscal austerity(raising interest rates, raising taxes) during an impending crisis, even though according to traditional economic theory, this will deepen the recession in the country. Reason for fiscal austerity is simply to try and bring confidence back into the markets and prevent a "hyperdevaluation" of the country's currency.

However, even if the country were to devalue its currency in order to export its way out of the recession, everything may not go according to script. For example, many companies may have dollar debts, hence with the weakening of the currency, their debts would simply explode and trigger a panic, causing massive financial distress.

Interesting.

Dream

Had a very peculiar dream yesterday...

There is a need for me to go somewhere deep under the sea. For what purpose exactly I have already forgotten. It's supposed to be a secret place, a cavernous hall-like palace that I must somehow navigate to and across. Anyway, it is an imperative that I reach the place.

I, together with two Somebodys(I cannot remember who), have discovered how to reach it. The place is secret, hidden from view, unplotted on any map, but we have discovered the method to reach there. Supposedly in the sea, there is a dolphin, with a whale always swimming behind it. They are the means for us to achieve our objective. By hooking the dolphin(fishing rod style), the other two can cast their ropes and catch hold of the whale. Thus, with the restraints, these two sea mammals will drag us all the way to the secret place.


We reached the place. It is huge, spacious, with many platforms leading in a spiral to the very top. But the platforms are unevenly spaced, and there are things to collect before we can reach the top. Thus, in this game-like arena, we have to jump from platform to platform, collect stuff before reaching the top. Should I miscue and miss a platform, I will fall all the way down. But in the dream I have wings, and when I miss a platform, I can spread them out and float gently to the nearest platform. This way, I finally collect all the necessary equipment and reach the top.


And there I stayed. For many many years.


I returned to the mainland after many years. I went to visit the person who has sent me there. He was surprised to see me. Unguarded, he allowed me to go near him, wanting to know what happened in the secret place. I see myself moving close to him. I see myself, with eyes full of sorrow, telling him I finally recognised pure evil for what it is, and that I see it in him. I see a knife flashed in my hand, and I see myself stabbing him. Again and again.


And then I woke up.

Collusion?

Surfing in 2010: 10-30% cheaper?

With StarHub establishing the OpCo and SingTel part of the consortium operating the physical infrastructure, is there room for collusion?

No, because IDA has mandated “they have to offer the same prices to everyone”, stressed Mr Liew. “They will not be able to provide prejudice to their own company or collaborate with another company to give lower prices.”

This is weird. When “they have to offer the same prices to everyone”, doesn't it mean that they can keep prices artificially high? And doesn't that mean collusion?

The 10 highest paid politicians in the world

The 10 highest paid politicians in the world


Wahahahaha!