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
There is no other city like Kolkata for me: It is Home. The only city where I don't have to find a reason to go to, or to love. It is one city hardwired into my identity, and despite being away for a decade, that refuses to go away. People stay away from their homeland for a variety of reasons. But, as I have come to feel, no one can be completely happy to be away. One may find fame or fortune, love and learning, in another land, but they always live an incomplete life. They bring home broken bits of their homeland into their awkward daily existence, a cushion somewhere, a broken conversation in mother tongue some other time, always rediscovering the land they left behind for that brief moment of wanting to be themselves. The cruelest punishment, therefore, for a man who lives abroad is when his love for his land is denied. It is indeed often denied, because the pursuit of work, knowledge or love seemed to have gotten priority over the attraction of the land. This is particularly
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
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.
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,
India's employment data is sobering ( see here ). The pandemic has wrecked havoc and the structural problems of the economy - service sector dependence, uneven regional development and health and education challenges - are more evident than ever. Something needs to happen, and fast. To its credit, the government acknowledges the education challenge. Belatedly - it took more than 30 years - India has come up with a new National Education Policy. It is a comprehensive policy, which covers the whole spectrum of education and perhaps overcompensates the previous neglect by advocating radical change. As I commented elsewhere on this blog, it shows a curious mixture of aspirations, cultural revival and global competitiveness put under the same hood. However, despite its radical aspirations, the policy document often betrays same-old thinking. One of these is India's approach to foreign universities. The NEP makes the case for allowing foreign universities to set up operations in Ind
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
It's not often that I get to do things I like, but, as it happens, the lockdown came with a little gift. I was asked to develop, by an Indian entrepreneur with a strong commitment to education, a framework for a Liberal Education for one of his schools. And, as a part of this exercise, I was asked to develop a critique of Indian Education, if only to set the context of the proposal I am to make. I claim to have some unusual - therefore unique - qualification to do this job. I am, after all, an outsider in all senses. I have lived outside India for a long time, but never went too far away, making it my field of work for most of the period. I have also been outside the academe but never too far away: Just outside the bureaucracy but intimately into the conversations. I worked in the 'disruptive' end of education without the intention to disrupt and in For-profit without the desire for profit. Along the way, the only thing I consistently did is study educatio
Nations are ideas. We try to fashion them as territories. But how can a river, a mountain ridge or sometimes an imaginary line in the middle of a field can explain the wide division in the lives, thoughts and futures of the people who live on different sides? Nations are not the people too. Indeed, people build nations and become its body. But the soul of the nation is an idea: People come together on an idea to build a nation. While that's what a modern nation is - an idea - and that way exceptionalism is not an American exception, very few nations are as completely defined by an idea as Pakistan. There was hardly any political, geographic or military rationale of Pakistan other than the idea of an Islamic homeland in South Asia. [In that way, the ideological brother of Pakistan in the family of nations is Israel] This, abated by the short term political calculations of some backroom colonialists, created a modern state which must be solely sustained on that singular idea. Reli
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.