Tuesday, January 29, 2013

Pakistan - Just stop acting like total idiots (Pt.2) and Principled Statements

I thought I would repost by earlier article (http://chairmannick.posterous.com/pakistan-just-stop-acting-likely-total-idiots) partly because I screwed up the title (obvious considering I used the word “idiot” in the title) and also because someone commented it was “controversial”.  It struck me that this is a problem that effects our social and political system – it is increasingly controversial to make principled statements.  We seem to either pussy-foot around a subject for fear of offending cultural sensitivities or have a mass outcry when something tips over an ill-defined precipice.  To carry on my Pakistan theme, there was a perfectly reasonable outcry about the young girl who was shot for standing up to the Taleban view that girls should not be educated, but why did it take that?  Why did it take this?  Why was the pressure not being put on the Pakistani government about the treatment of girls in general?  It seems like “principals” have become increasingly identified with a lack of tolerance, and that should not be the case.  Saying that women in Pakistan should have equality with men and that their society and economy will suffer until they do is not being imperialistic, it is not being racist, it is not showing a lack of cultural sensitivity, it is just the right thing to do.

 

Nick

Posted by at No comments:

Pakistan - Just stop acting like total idiots.

28 January 2013 Last updated at 21:17 ET

Viewpoint: Pakistan's economic woes are being overlooked

By Bruce Stokes Pew Research Center
A Pakistani stockbroker watches share prices at the Karachi Stock Exchange (January 2013) Investor confidence is waning as Pakistan's economy continues its downward trend
Pakistan is a country beset with political difficulties, but they could be of secondary importance to its economic woes.
While much attention has been devoted to the dramatic Supreme Court move to order the arrest of Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf on charges of corruption and recent large-scale protests led by populist cleric Tahirul Qadri to demand the resignation of the government ahead of elections due in May, the country's financial difficulties have been overlooked.
Likewise recent deadly militant bombings have also distracted attention, as have skirmishes with India on the Line of Control (LoC) that divides the disputed Kashmir region.
These headline-grabbing events have not only served to obscure the profound economic challenges facing Pakistani society but in many cases have also nurtured and aggravated them.
'Deteriorating economy'
The truth is that the Pakistani people are deeply troubled by the plight of their economy and their own economic prospects.
A stockbroker watching share prices on a monitor during a trading session at the Karachi Stock Exchange Optimism about the state of the economy is not high
With the government likely to ask the International Monetary Fund this year for a new aid package, the nation's economic plight may soon become topic number one in the global discussion about Pakistan's future.
"Deep seated structural problems and weak macroeconomic policies have continued to sap the [Pakistani] economy's vigour," the IMF's executive board concluded in late November.
Economic growth over the past four years, after adjustment for inflation, averaged 2.9% annually, and is projected to be only 3.2% in 2012-13.
That, says the IMF, is not sufficient to achieve significant improvement in living standards and to absorb the rising labour force.
All this at a time when prices are rising about 11% per year.
Moreover, the government deficit was 8.5% in the last fiscal year and press reports suggest it may miss its budget deficit target this year by a significant amount.
The IMF expects foreign reserves this fiscal year to be half what they were just two years ago, a sign of waning investor confidence and a deteriorating international economic situation.
Hardly surprising then that the Pakistani people are extremely downbeat.
'Personal pain'
Roughly nine out of 10 say the economy is bad, including a majority (64%) who think that it is very bad, according to the 2012 Pew Global Attitudes survey.
People carrying wood on the outskirts of Islamabad Many Pakistanis will see little discernible improvements in their living standards
Just 9% rate the economy positively.
There has in fact been a sharp decline in economic ratings in Pakistan since the beginning of the global economic recession.
In 2007, 59% said the economy was doing well; by 2008, this percentage had dropped to 41% and has continued to fall since then.
A plurality (43%) believes the economy will only worsen. For many of them, this pain will be felt personally.
Their assessment of their own personal economic situation is down 19 percentage points since 2008, one of the largest fall-offs among the 15 countries for which the Pew Research Centre has comparable data.
Only 38% say they are better off than their parents.
More than half (57%) say they are worse off than five years ago. And 65% say it will be very difficult for their children to advance economically.
Unemployment is one of the public's major concerns.
Nine out of 10 people say that the lack of jobs is a very big problem, a more important issue to them than concern about corrupt political leaders or unrest in Kashmir.
However because the survey was conducted in the spring of 2012, it could be that concern about Kashmir has risen more recently because of flare-ups in January along the LoC.
While it is true that issues of life and death and war and peace will always trump economic news, the dire nature of Pakistan's economic problems could ultimately feed political and social unrest as the regional and global discussion about Pakistan's future moves to centre stage.
Polling suggests that the people of Pakistan may say this refocusing is long overdue.
Bruce Stokes is the director of global economic attitudes at the Pew Research Centre.
via bbc.co.uk
I read this article on the BBC today, shortly after reading about the possible collapse of Egypt into chaos and the wanton destruction of Timbuktu’s ancient treasures, and the question that came to me was , “why are these people acting like total idiots?” It appears like a broad swathe of Pakistani society just seems intent on creating chaos without any regard to the Pakistani people. From corrupt politicians, through religious extremists to double-dealing intelligence officers, a general state of anarchy appears to be rising inexorably, while external powers, whether it be in the form of US drone strikes, Saudi covert financing, Chinese arms sales or Indian sabre rattling merely adds petrol to the flames. This is not something that is inherent in being an Islamic society – both Turkey and Malaysia have proved that – so what is it? Whatever it is, it cannot be good in a country with nuclear weapons, massive population growth and many serious environmental issues. It appears that there is always a desire to blame others (America, India, Britain, whoever) and little willingness to look in the mirror.
Nick.
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, January 18, 2013

Shopping - the future is almost upon us.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) said retail sales volumes fell 0.1% between November and December, after economists predicted a return to growth of 0.2%. It will fuel fears that the economy contracted at the end of last year.

There were further signs that shoppers shunned the high street with the figures showing that non-store retailing volumes grew 1.6% month on month, and accounted for 10.6% of all retail sales in December.

Household goods, including electrical appliances, furniture, hardware and music and video recordings, showed the sharpest month-on-month drop with a decline of 3% - the biggest fall since January 2010.

But it was a better festive period for department stores, which saw volumes grow 0.4% month on month.

Clothes and shoe shops were the only other sector to fare better in December, posting a rise of 0.7%.

With inflation nearing 3% in December, retailers will have suffered as sales values also declined 0.1% month on month and by 0.3%, excluding fuel.

Today's figures come after a lacklustre performance in November, when sales were flat after a shock 0.8% drop in volumes in October.

Vicky Redwood, chief UK economist at Capital Economics, said the 0.6% overall decline in the final three months of the year was yet more evidence that the economy probably contracted at the end of last year.

Howard Archer, chief European and UK economist at IHS Global, said: "The problem that retailers - and the economy in general - face is that consumers' purchasing power has come under some renewed pressure after seeing appreciable improvement over the first three quarters of 2012.

"Inflation moved back up in late 2012 while earnings growth appeared to falter."

The Office for National Statistics said that retailers' internet sales helped to boost overall sales and provided a much greater proportion of business in December than they were expecting.

This has increased the pressure on the high street, where HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster UK have all gone into administration this month.

Peter Saville, partner at advisory and restructuring firm Zolfo Cooper, said: "Today's figures show a disappointing end to a tough year for many retailers. While 2013 appears to be heading in a similar direction, with the likes of Jessops, HMV and Blockbuster being the first to fall victim, the fact that many, including John Lewis, Dixons and Asos, are still performing well means that all is not lost."

PA

via independent.co.uk

Most of the news headlines and political soundbites will be focussed on this as an indication of continued economic difficulties. Whilst it is undoubtedly true that the economy remains troubled - and will remain troubled while the indigestion of the excesses (at a government, personal, corporate and financial sector level) from the decade to 2008 pass through the system (note to all: more borrowing will not help, it just pushes the problem to someone else down the line while easing the pain of those making decisions now) – I believe that there are a number of rapidly emerging trends that these figures are a harbinger of, and which will have great importance over the longer term. Some are already well documented but others less so:

• An increasing element of the population are no longer agreeing with the “shopping is a leisure pursuit” mantra that commenced in the 80s. They may like to buy things, but the whole process of getting in the car, driving to the town/mall, finding a parking space, paying for parking, trekking round the shops trying to find what you want, eating rubbish at the overpriced food court, paying for parking, paying for fuel for your car etc., etc. is not fun. Instead they log on to Amazon/eBay/whoever and a few days later the goods appear at their door; this trend is gaining rapid momentum.
• People are becoming increasingly less concerned about “ownership” as long as they retain the “ability to enjoy”. Retailers like HMV were all about selling a physical manifestation of something that is innately non-physical, e.g. music, films, computer games. Now that technology has reached the stage where the physical product is no longer needed in order to enjoy the material, why would you want something that takes up space, is less convenient? Much is made of people buying media on iTunes, but I would suggest that streaming services such as Spotify and Netflix are what is really changing the game.
• People are getting used to austerity, and are realising that certain aspects of their life are no worse as a result. Primark is booming because people still want clothes to go out in, but they can get what they want for half the price of M+S, who correspondingly are not booming. Going a step further however, many people are realising that the accumulation of more and more “things” does not make them happier, so they are just consuming less.
• The government debt crisis in many European countries and the austerity measures in the UK has seen many people re-evaluate their views on government provision of various services and benefits, so they are in turn making the logical decision: borrow less, spend less, save more.
• Retail expenditure will increasingly no longer provide easy pickings for landlords and governments/councils through rent, business rates (UK property tax) and parking charges. It is the retailers themselves that are currently going bankrupt, but these failures will have a knock on effect and I would anticipate big right downs by banks on loans secured against retail property and local councils making further budget cuts about a year down the line as this feeds through. This is not just cyclical, it is structural, so it will require a re-evaluation of town centres and their role in a community. I would also expect more than a few “out of town” shopping centres to become ghost towns.

Nick

Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

How Long Before It Snaps

This is the hidden story of the Euro crisis, the bit going on behind close doors, and the bit with the really big numbers!  Lets forget out Spain needing €110bn to recapitalise its banks; what about the €434bn (over 40% of GDP) that it owes the European Central Bank clearing system?  This is basically akin to your bank forgetting to put a stop on your credit card despite you being over the credit limit and not having made a repayment in the last year.  This article is by Terry Smith, one of the City's more colourful characters, but also one of its most insightful.

Read it and ask yourself why the politicians are not talking about this?

Nick
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, September 23, 2012

Well That Makes Sense

23 September 2012 Last updated at 13:19 ET

Lib Dem conference: Pension funds could back mortgages - Clegg

By Justin Parkinson Political reporter, BBC News, in Brighton
Housing Many young people are struggling to get on to the housing ladder

Nick Clegg has said parents should be able to use their pension schemes to help their children buy a first home.

Under the Liberal Democrats' plans, a future lump sum pension payout would be used to guarantee the mortgage.

The party says the extra security could result in making homes more attainable, as it could mean young people having to save up for a smaller deposit.

Mr Clegg said the plan could help many "desperate" young people, but the Saga group questioned its viability.

The size of deposits has risen in recent years, as banks have becoming less willing to issue mortgages.

Meanwhile, the number of young people asking for help from families, in the shape of cash sums has increased.

'Not happened before'

The Lib Dems say their scheme would help those with pension payouts due, but who lack large savings.

Mr Clegg told BBC One's Andrew Marr Show: " We are going to work out ways in which parents and grandparents who want to help their children and grandchildren buy a property of their own.

"We are going to allow those parents and grandparents to act as a guarantee if you like so their youngsters...can take out a deposit and buy a home. It is a pension from property scheme."

Liberal Democrat sources said around 250,000 people had a pension pot of £40,000, with a lump sum element of around a quarter - £10,000 - which could be used as a guarantee.

They estimate that 5% of those with a suitable lump sum would take advantage of the scheme, meaning 12,500 people could potentially benefit.

The parent's lump sum would be at risk if the child defaulted on the mortgage repayments, but the rest of the pension would be unaffected.

But Ros Altmann, the director general of Saga - which represents the over-50s - said borrowing money against the expectation of a future lump sum was dangerous.

Otto Thoresen, director general of the Association of British Insurers, said: "We would want to look closely at the detail of the 'pension for property' scheme announced today by Nick Clegg.

"Pensions are designed to mature into a decent retirement income, not for other purposes.

"Any scheme which uses pensions as a guarantee must ensure that it does not inadvertently make the saver worse off when they retire."

via bbc.co.uk

I’m sorry, but this has to be the stupidest idea of the day. Let us start with the fundamentals. Young people (any many not so young) cannot afford to buy houses because they are overvalued; the UK average house price is £238,638 (http://bbc.in/QxbsMM) while the median salary for a UK full time worker is £26,244 (http://bit.ly/QxbIvl), a multiple of 9.1 times.

It was long considered sensible to lend a maximum of 80% of the value of a house (I’ve checked my memory by referring to “Bankers’ Lending Techniques”, the standard text book for Chartered Institute of Bankers exams in the 1990s) and the normal multiple of income was the higher of 3 times the higher income and 1 times the lower income or 2.5 times the combined income. Based on a couple both earning the median income, this would imply a house valued at £164,025 and a deposit of £32,805. Now I don’t believe that I’m being overly pessimistic to think that incomes are not going to rise significantly anytime soon, so this makes house overvalued by over 30% on this basis.

So, the suggested solution is to encourage people to borrow too much to buy a fundamentally overvalued asset, and in order to protect the lender (who realises that this is a bad loan waiting to happen), we get the borrower’s parents to put their pension on the line instead. Rather than accepting that house prices are overvalued on any sensible measure, the Government continues to suggest policies that tinker at the edges because they fear to tell the millions of Express and Mail readers and all those watchers of property porn TV shows that they have been duped by a classic bubble, (not unlike the buyers of tulip bulbs in 17th century Amsterdam). They fear that they will not be re-elected unless the false prosperity of rising house prices can be delivered, and this is a fear that they share with the Labour Party, despite this fear being based on mass delusion. House price appreciation adds no economic value; building houses creates economic value, improving houses creates economic value, but just sitting back and hoping for them to rise in value adds nothing.

Nick

Posted by at No comments:

Why Creativity is the New Economy

The RSA President's Lecture: Why Creativity is the New Economy

10th Sep 2012; 18:30

Listen to the audio

(full recording including audience Q&A)
Please right-click link and choose "Save Link As..." to download audio file onto your computer.

The 2012 RSA President’s Lecture

We are living in a time of "Great Reset" - when economic crisis provides an opportunity to rethink virtually every aspect of our lives - from how and where we live, to how we work, to how we invest in individuals and infrastructure, to how we shape our cities and regions.

Taking a deeper look at the forces reshaping our economy, and giving us a provocative new way to think about why we live as we do - and where we might be headed, Richard Florida shows how these forces, when combined, will spur a fresh era of growth and prosperity, define a new geography of progress, and create surprising opportunities for all of us.

Using lessons from the last ten years to show how Creative Class theory has grown from a prediction to a prescription for an economy in turmoil, Florida argues the need for a new social compact to put us back on the path to economic growth. Florida’s Creative Compact commits to developing the full human potential and creative capabilities of every person, and suggests a new set of institutional supports to ensure a more robust and sustainable social system around the new world of work.

Speaker: Dr Richard Florida, director, the Martin Prosperity Institute and Professor of Business and Creativity at the University of Toronto and NYU; senior editor, The Atlantic and is the author of several influential global best sellers, including the award-winning 'The Rise of the Creative Class'.

Introduced by: HRH The Princess Royal, RSA President.

Chair: Luke Johnson, RSA Chair.

Twitter Logo See what people said on Twitter: #RSAFlorida

Get the latest RSA Audio

Subscribe to RSA Audio iTunes Podcast

iTunes

| RSA Audio RSS Feed

RSS

 | RSA Mixcloud page

Mixcloud

You are welcome to link to, download, save or distribute our audio/video files electronically. Find out more about our open access licence.

via thersa.org

This is a really superb lecture and discussion on how cities and the creativity they foster can produce a brighter future.

Posted by at No comments:

Monday, September 17, 2012

The Butterfly Effect

17 September 2012 Last updated at 05:19 ET

UK attitudes on immigration and welfare 'toughening'

Crowds Report author Penny Young said UK attitudes "continue to harden" towards immigration and welfare

Concerns about immigration and support for welfare reform are growing, a study of British social attitudes suggests.

The data from NatCen Social Research - based on the views of some 3,300 people - also shows a widespread anxiety about the prospect of further spending cuts.

But for the first time in nearly a decade, there was a rise in the number of those who think spending and taxes should be increased, the report says.

It comes after news the UK economy shrank by less than thought up to June.

The latest revised data from the Office for National Statistics found the economy contracted by 0.5% during the quarter between April and June - less than the 0.7% it announced in July.

The British Social Attitudes survey asks more than 3,000 people every year what it is like to live in Britain and how they think Britain is run.

Despite the tough economic climate, the study by independent social research agency NatCen reveals attitudes towards welfare and welfare claimants have toughened.

'Toughening attitude'

Only 28% of those asked wanted to see more spending on welfare - down from 35% at the beginning of the recession in 2008, and from 58% in 1991.

Report author and NatCen chief executive, Penny Young, said the study showed the public's view on welfare was "in tune... with the coalition's policies".

She said: "The recession doesn't seem to be changing things; attitudes continue to harden.

"One thing that we've seen is that even where groups are seen as perhaps more deserving - so retired people, disabled people - again for the first time since 2008 we've seen that the number of people who are prepared to see more money go on disability benefits has actually fallen."

And on immigration, the report suggests British people "strongly favour migrants they see to be socially beneficial", according to the report.

Some 51% would like to see immigration levels "reduce a lot", a figure which has risen from 39% in 1995.

The data also shows a further 24% would like to see levels "reduce a little".

Meanwhile, the proportion of people who want to see further public spending - even if this requires higher taxes - jumped from 31% to 36% between 2010 and 2011, after falling for nearly a decade from 63% in 2002.

More than half - 55% - would like spending levels to stay where they are.

At the same time, the report reveals many Britons are worried about the impact of spending cuts on public services, particularly education and health.

Satisfaction with the NHS fell from 70% in 2010 to 58% in 2011, according to the figures.

via bbc.co.uk

I can’t say that this so called “hardening” of social attitudes surprises me. The last 10 years has seen what Marx would have described as the proletariat, i.e. those who need to sell their labour for an income rather than live off of their land or capital, have seen a massive squeeze on their standard of living. The causes of this are already well known: stagnant wage growth, high housing cots, significant inflation on staples such as food, transport and utilities and increased taxation. Those same people look around and they see those both above and below not experiencing similar levels of relative decline; both the wealthy and those not working have avoided relative decline.

There has been much made of the proposed changes to housing benefit legislation, which caps the maximum level of benefit that can be received. The claim is that “the poor” will be forced out of affluent areas of London, but most ordinary working people, who are neither in receipt of six-figure salaries nor state benefits have been priced out of these areas for many years already. Such a situation is unsustainable; an enclave of the wealthy at least has greater logic than one where only the very rich and very poor can inhabit.

Societies that flourish have always been those where the “mass middle” feels happy and that their standard of living is gradually improving; the “American Dream” of the 1950s and 1960s. If governments around the developed world cannot star addressing this, then the historical conditions for the rise of demagogues will be place. There does need to be a reduced slice of the economic pie for the wealthy, the “1%” of many a protest slogan, but there also needs an elimination of the “something for nothing” benefit culture. There will be shrieks for both sides of the political aisle, but it is a necessary and inevitable, one way of the other. Even Marx would agree, being equally unsympathetic to both the idol rich and idol poor.

Nick

Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)