The world economy is still struggling, with Japan trying to put more stimulus out and thereby, becoming even more dangerously indebted. President Obama finally realized that Wall Street does not care about jobs and decided to do something direct, which means more debts.
This is a strange world in a way, America can keep on borrowing at a very low rate because those who have the money believes in the 'resilience' of the American economy/ government. The borrowed money then goes into the banks because they are mostly 'too big to fail'. But, that's the big hole - money goes there, it stays there - the banks use the money to repair their balance sheets, as no one still knows how badly affected they really were with all the gambling they did. But, in the process, the banks, the same institutions which were meant to supply capital, siphon capital out of the economy, leaving careers and families destroyed.
Besides, the Americans [and of course there are others too] are today siphoning out the world's savings. So, if a poor farmer in China saved some money in the bank account after years of toil, that money is being lent to America at a low interest rate and that value, if it could be frozen and seen as the product of labour not consumed, is being siphoned out to the American banks. It is not just morally wrong; it is unsustainable. We are now increasingly creating the world's biggest subprime lenders, the governments, and the banks, the credit rating agencies, the international institutions and the heads of states are so cosy that we will not know till the disaster strikes us.
So, as one looks ahead to 2010, it is difficult to agree to the optimistism in the media that we shall be out of the woods. Yes, 2010 is expected to be better than 2009, but that is sort of a self-fulfilling statement. But, this thought of returning to business-as-usual is troubling, because that surely was not a good thing. The banks as black-hole can not create value, they will just destroy value. The governments are at ransom, because democracies bind them to middle classes and middle classes judge the world by their retirement savings and their houses, both of which banks control.
In a way, it sounds like a big steal and it is. It is a cascaded system of stealing, so the theft is difficult to detect. Also, it is indeed not as straightforward as I am making it sound. The bankers look exactly like you and us, with exactly the same ideosyncracies, families and all that. Their bonuses are just as hard-earned or immoral as our bonuses are. I know lots of people object to the amount they earn, but given that an average CEO earns more than 40 times of a front line worker, such quantitative theories may not lead to sound moral argument. But, it is a steal anyway - because we believe that the creation of value should be linked to rewards some way, and it is not.
So, 2010 can go either way. We can continue to try to return to business as usual. This will lead us father into the crisis, and set ourselves up for a mega-crisis few years on. Financial crisis, after a certain point, become war, as nations are pushed around too far for too long. There is already talk of Climate Wars, and it will soon become all too plausible as water becomes a commodity to fight for in South and Central Asia. Add financial turmoil to that, which will push a few nutheads into positions of power as the last Great Depression did [and the current one has started doing, in Latin America and Eastern Europe] - and you have the mix necessary to start another global war in a few years time.
Or, we can be optimitic and say that 2010 is the year we shall regain sense. We shall know what we are facing, and questioning conventional wisdom will become more common. We shall go deeper in reforming the financial system, and make sure that international aid works to make fragile nations survive. We shall see some leadership in the climate front but don't know yet how far they would go. Businesses will continue to innovate, and we shall see sustainable innovation coming to the market at a furious pace. The business climate will discourage speculation and be biased towards value-creating businesses, thereby shifting the balance, though slowly, away from rent earnings to real enterprise profits.
Like all things, I know we shall settle somewhat in the middle of the two. I know that my extreme wish that since South Asian nations will not remain viable as independent nations in the post-climate change world, they would recognize the fact now and move towards unification, is bunk: That's never going to happen before Pakistan turns into a semi-desert in 25 years time and comes very close to fire a nuclear missile to resolve a water dispute. On the other, the doom-and-gloom is not irreversible, there are people in the world who are aware of the issues and working tirelessly to promote an alternate way of thinking. But, whatever happens, 2010 will be the start - a sort of watershed year - which will decide where we go as a species and as a civilization, in the next 100 years and beyond.
Popular posts from this blog
A friend has recently forwarded me a quote from Lord Macaulay's speech in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835. I reproduce the quote below: "I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation." The email requested me to forward me to every indian I know. I was tempted, but there were two oddities about this quote. First, the language, which
Introduction : The Business of Gift Giving Business gift giving has always been common and contentious at the same time. Business gifts are usually seen as an ‘advertising, sales promotion and marketing communication medium’ (Cooper et al , 1991). Arunthanes et al (1994) points out that such gifting is practised usually for three reasons: (a) in appreciation for past client relationships, placing a new order, referrals to other clients, etc.; (b) in the hopes of creating a positive, first impression which might help to establish an initial business relationship; and (c) giving may be perceived as a quid Pro quo (i.e. returning a favour or expecting a favour in return for something). The practitioners of gift-giving generally argue that doing business is often an aggregation of personal interactions and relationships, and gift-giving should be seen as a natural way of maintaining and enhancing these relationships. ‘Business gifts, especially one given in the course of the festive s
Buzzwords have disadvantages. Right now, experiential learning is one, and that means we put the label on everything and it stops to mean anything. Also, this means reasonable conversation about experiential learning becomes difficult - at times such as this, either you preach experiential learning or you are traditional, antiquarian and hopelessly out of touch. But, overlooking the limitations of experiential learning can cause big problems. Experiential Learning does many things - putting practice at the heart of learning is an important paradigm shift - but not everything, and it is important to be aware what it does not do. Usually, we equate the terms Project-based Learning (the method) with Experiential Learning (the idea) and Learning from Experience (the ideal), treating them as one and the same and using the terms interchangeably. Any talk about distinctive meaning of these terms is usually seen as pedantic, but really represent very different ideas about education.
Today, Helen Goddard, 26, a highly popular music teacher of a City School for Girls, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison. Her crime was to carry out a year long lesbian affair with one of her pupils, who appeared in the court and admitted that the affair was consensual and it was she who pressured Helen into the affair. For Helen, a bright musician and a devout Chistian, this is an extraordinary lapse of judgement. Also, she was teaching in the £13,000 private girls only school in London. She was surely aware what the consequences of her action will be. The fact that she still could not stop herself tells us that lovers do not always act rationally, something we always knew. There is more in this affair than personal tragedies. For a start, this has all the dramatic elements: a bright, beautiful teacher more in Julia Roberts mould [as in Mona Lisa Smile], a stiff upper lip school [not unlike Wellesley] and a story like Notes On A Scandal with an added twist. Indeed, Helen
In most societies today, making profits are accepted as moral, if not especially praiseworthy. This was not as obvious as it appears today – people used to be embarrassed about making a profit not so long ago. Crazy as it seems today, it is worth thinking why it was so. Profits, as economists will put it, is the reward for risk-taking, for putting a business enterprise together in the pursuit of an objective. In this definition, remember, profits are not what it is commonly understood to be – the gross middle-line towards the bottom – but a figure net of entrepreneur’s earning [wages for his labour], dividends and interests on borrowed capital, and provisions for building and other physical assets [a sort of rent, offsetting what these assets could have earned if leased out]. This pure profit – surplus – accrues to a business as a reward to its organisation, for the act of entrepreneurship itself. Economists were divided on how this surplus comes about. The conventional wisdom was,
Introduction Erna Petri née Kürbs, a farmer’s daughter from Herressen in Thuringia, arrived in Ukraine with her three year old son to join her husband Horst in June 1942. Horst, an SS leader inspired by Nazi ideologue Dr Richard Walter Darré, settled in the plantation of Grzenda, just outside today’s Lviv, to become a German Gentleman-Farmer. Erna saw Horst beating and abusing the workers in the plantation within two days of arriving there, which was, as Horst explained, necessary for establishing authority. Erna joined in enthusiastically, settling into a combination of roles of ‘plantation mistress, prairie Madonna in apron-covered dress lording over slave labourers, infant-carrying, gun-wielding Hausfrau.’  However, there were clear rules in the plantation, and Erna was very much expected to play the woman’s role of being a Cake-and-Coffee hostess. When four Jews were caught in the estate while trying to escape from a transport to a death camp, Horst told Erna and her female
I wrote a note on Kolkata, the city I come from and would always belong to, in July 2010. Since then, the post attracted many visitors and comments, mostly critical, as most people, including those from Kolkata, couldn't see any future for the city. My current effort, some 18 months down the line, is also prompted by a recent article in The Economist, The City That Got Left Behind , which echo the pessimism somewhat. I, at least emotionally, disagree to all the pessimism: After all Kolkata is home and I live in the hope of an eventual return. Indeed, some change has happened since I wrote my earlier post: The geriatric Leftist government that ruled the state for more than 30 years was summarily dispatched, and was replaced by a lumpen-capitalist populist government. Kolkata looked without a future with the clueless leftists at the helm; it now looks without hope. However, apart from bad governance, there is no reason why Kolkata had to be poor and hopeless. It sits right
Introduction: Hastings in the history of Indian Education Whether or not one includes Warren Hastings in the history of Education in India is a matter of perspective. If writing the history of education means writing the history of schools, the impact of Hastings' administration would be quite limited. If anything, the rapid implosion of local rulers in Eastern, Southern and Northern India during Hastings' tenure had meant a bleak period for the indigenous education system, as patronage and funds would have dwindled away for many of them. The Company administration really concerned itself with the schooling of the natives only after 1813, as Nurullah and Naik rightly pointed out ( see my earlier post ) and one can legitimately start the story at this point. However, if history of Education in India is to encompass the transformation of Indian Scholarship, on which foundation the new, colonial, system of Education would be built, the story must start with Warren Hast
The ‘Why’ Question? Adolf Hitler was appointed the German Chancellor by President Von Hindenburg on 30th January 1933. This was an extraordinary turn of events. Previously, President Von Hindenburg consistently refused to appoint Hitler the Chancellor, despite the impressive electoral performance of NSDAP in July 1932, Hitler’s uncompromising demand of the Chancellor’s post and a repeat election in November 1932 which failed to break the deadlock. Explaining his refusal, Hindenburg wrote in a letter on 24th November, “a presidential cabinet led by you would develop necessarily into a party dictatorship with all its consequences for an extraordinary accentuation of the conflicts in the German people.” The question ‘why’ Hitler was appointed Chancellor, despite the President being acutely aware of what might follow, is therefore a significant one. The NSDAP had election successes throughout 1932, and was already the biggest single party in the Reichstag and various Landtags acros
In our age, the only way to be politically correct is to be democratic. This is a post-70s affair - those days, still, some people had alternative ideologies in mind. Those alternate ideas are dead and gone, long discredited, and it seems that we have only one system which can make people happy, free and live longer. So, we have this huge export industry of democracy, and democracy's warriors, which the American security establishment has lately become. The democracy's businessmen, the bond traders, the media barons and the Hollywood types, are feted everywhere. The consensus is deafening and dumbing. It is indeed awkward to ask now - whether democracy is the right system for every society. It indeed should be. Collective wisdom is better than individual autocracy. In societies where democratic elections have been few and far between, the popular vote has demonstrated the extra-ordinary political savvy of the usually disinterested masses. Democracy has proved to be an excell
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.