singapore's income gap

After my last post on Singapore's GDP, a friend commented that we have a record high GDP but the common person is not seeing any of it. I guess that's as good a segue as any to look into my next topic: the income gap.

This post is part of my horizon scanning research project.

The most common measure of income inequality or the income gap is the Gini Coefficient. When I first studied this ten years ago in university, I distinctly remember having the impression that Singapore had a very low Gini Coefficient.

Well according to the 2009 UN Development Programme report, Singapore had the second highest Gini Coefficient in the world after Hong Kong. Here's an article from Businessweek. In a nutshell, here are the top three winners:

No. 1 Hong Kong
Gini score: 43.4
GDP 2007 (US$ billions): 207.2
Share of income or expenditure (%)
Poorest 10%: 2.0
Richest 10%: 34.9
Ratio of income or expenditure, share of top 10% to lowest 10%: 17.8
Renowned for its high concentration of Rolls-Royces, expensive real estate, and posh shops, the Chinese special administrative region has plenty of rich who enjoy showing off their wealth. However, Hong Kong also has one of the largest public housing sectors in the world, with about half the population living in government-supported or -subsidized housing estates. The city has no minimum wage—except for domestic helpers from the Philippines, Indonesia, and other countries.

No. 2 Singapore
Gini score: 42.5
GDP 2007 (US$ billions): 161.3
Share of income or expenditure (%)
Poorest 10%: 1.9
Richest 10%: 32.8
Ratio of income or expenditure, share of top 10% to lowest 10%: 17.7
Singapore is one of the world's most open economies, and it suffered badly following the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers last year. Recently, though, the city-state's economy has rebounded, with GDP growing an annualized 14.9% rate in the third quarter compared with the previous quarter.

No. 3 U.S.
Gini score: 40.8
GDP 2007 (US$ billions): 13,751.4
Share of income or expenditure (%)
Poorest 10%: 1.9
Richest 10%: 29.9
Ratio of income or expenditure, share of top 10% to lowest 10%: 15.9
The share of income for the top percentile of Americans was 23.5% in 2007, the highest since 1928, according to Emmanuel Saez, a Berkeley economist who won the prestigious John Bates Clark Medal in April. Income for the top 0.01% hit a record-high 6.04%. And the recession may be exacerbating income inequality.

I also found an interesting analysis of Singapore's recent Gini Coefficient performance at squareCircleZ. Here's the graph that it compiled based on Straits Times data, and the observation that "The rapid rise from 2002 and spike in 2007 were due to several factors, including rapid population increases (through immigration) of higher-income people, and a subsequent boost in the overall economy. The drop in 2008 and 2009 is due to the Global Financial Crisis, where many high-paying jobs either disappeared, or bonuses were slashed."
So what does it mean for us if the income gap is widening? According to my favourite academic resource Wikipedia, there are a few broad outcomes of income inequality. These include an erosion of social cohesion (less trust and less community involvement), poorer population health (with negative impact on life expectancy, economic growth and infant mortality) and lower economic growth (Gini Coefficient of below .25 or above .40 is bad for growth).

In Singapore's case, the rise in income inequality is almost definitely due to the recent emphasis on attracting foreign talents, so an argument for the necessity of income inequality would go along the same lines: these people may seem overpaid, but they are the ones driving profits and creating employment that will eventually benefit the entire country. The lower income groups may seem relatively worse of, but in absolute terms they are still in a better position.

Mr Brown made a case against just such an argument in 2006, and it cost him his column in Today. Here's the account as reported by fellow blogger Alex Au aka Yawning Bread.

Lee Kin Mun, who writes under the pseudonym "Mr Brown", wrote a harsh, though humorous, commentary on June 30 concerning Singapore’s rising cost of living, mentioning that latest official statistics showed that one in every three Singaporean households had suffered a reduction in income over the last five years. The irony, which was not lost on the island state’s government, was that Lee cited official statistics to bolster his argument.

Of course, Mr Brown wrote that article in 2006, in the aftermath of 9/11, the dot.com bust and a worldwide recession. Looking at the numbers again, the last five years seem to have been a lot better for the average Singaporean. Here is a table put together from SingStat's Key Household Income Trends, 2009 report and the Time Series on CPI & Inflation Rate. The real change in household income is definitely overall positive for these last few years, especially 2005-2008.


Of course, someone looking to buy a car might not appreciate how much his real income has increased, as shown in this chart from Singapore Real Estate. This is also a sharp reversal of the trend that saw Cat A COE prices fall from $30,000+ in 2003 down to $10,000+ in 2008. I don't have any good data showing the price of public transport, but it's pretty clear that that is going up too. Yet the CPI measure for transport has barely moved (from 98.3 to 100) from 2005 to 2009, it will be interesting to see when the figures for 2010 are released.

And as mentioned in the previous post, someone looking to buy a house (like me) isn't exactly spoilt for choice either. The CPI measure for housing has increased almost 25% (from 84.1 to 100) from 2005 to 2009.

Lastly, here's another recent article on the cost of living in Singapore. HR Consultancy Mercer has ranked Singapore the 11th most expensive city in the world. It should be noted that this is for expatriate employees, who would not be eligible for government subsidised housing, hence clearly accomodation would be a huge chunk of their expense. Nevertheless, given our cheap food and cheap (relative to others) public transport, I'm quite surprised to see us so high on the list. Is this another wake up call?

Up till now, I've just been getting a grasp on the current situation. It is definitely worse than I thought before I started doing this research, but I'm not quite ready to draw an conclusions yet until I read a little more on income inequality. One thing is clear, as my friend pointed out, is that this could have an impact on the next election. In democracies, the lower income groups may have disproportionately small spending power, but they have equal voting power, especially when the lower income group is disproportionately large.

And finally, another interesting way to visualise the income distribution is as a parade of dwarfs and giants, as depicted by Dutch economist Jan Pen in 1971. This is the concept:

Suppose that every person in the economy walks by, as if in a parade. Imagine that the parade takes exactly an hour to pass, and that the marchers are arranged in order of income, with the lowest incomes at the front and the highest at the back. Also imagine that the heights of the people in the parade are proportional to what they make: those earning the average income will be of average height, those earning twice the average income will be twice the average height, and so on. We spectators, let us imagine, are also of average height.

Pen then described what the observers would see. Not a series of people of steadily increasing height—that’s far too bland a picture. The observers would see something much stranger. They would see, mostly, a parade of dwarves, and then some unbelievable giants at the very end.

A friend sent me the Singapore version of the parade some years back, and it is quite an interesting read. Unfortunately I cannot find it online to link to or attribute, so at the risk of making this the longest and most un-original blog post ever, I am going to reproduce it in full. I am quite curious how the parade would look today, after the foreign talent policy.

In literally the first few seconds after commencement, we observe a number of people of negative height passing. On closer inspection they look like businessmen who have suffered losses. In fact, they are not necessarily short people – some of them are awfully tall, with their feet on the ground but their heads deep in the earth; they are in a severe liquidity constrained position. The market is never sentimental – many are attracted to the successes of private enterprise, which, however pass them by. Indeed, an EPD study found that only less than half of new firms set-up survive the sixth year.

After this tragic-comic opening, tiny gnomes rush by, the size of a matchstick then a cigarette. This contingent could include: housewives who do some part-time work, school kids working at McDonalds, etc.

The heights of the next group of participants though still very small – about 3 feet – increase by leaps and bounds. They are quite a mixed bunch: they may include a few owners of small shops, but mostly people not in formal paid employment – retirees, people with physical handicaps.

The ordinary workers, about whom there is nothing out of the ordinary except that they are in the lowest jobs. The contingent of cleaners & labourers is clearly visible. The unskilled clerks and other admin workers march in front of the unskilled manual workers. We have ample opportunity to observe them at our leisure. It takes almost fifteen minutes before the passing marchers reach a height of substantially more than four feet. For the spectators it can be a rather disturbing sight: fifteen minutes is a long time to keep watching small people pass by who barely reach to our midriff. More than a third are women. In embarrassment we avert our gaze and look towards the direction of the next contingent in hope of catching sight at long last of normal height persons.

But a surprise awaits us – we keep on seeing dwarfs. They are gradually becoming a little taller, but it's a slow process. They include the masses of workers, just ordinary people from the heartlands sometimes with not inconsiderable technical knowledge - a testimony to our excellent ITE training programmes. After ten minutes, the small people approach our collar bones. We see the skilled manufacturing workers, those from our polytechnics. There are also office workers, all respectable persons.

We are now half-hour into the parade; we know that the entire event will last an hour and hope to be able to look at the marchers straight in the eye, this is not so. We still look down on the top of their heads, and even in the distance we do not pick up an obvious improvement.

It is after 45 minutes or about 12 minutes before the end that the average income recipients pass by. We are interested in who these people are and crane our necks to get a better look: SBS bus drivers, lower grade teachers and civil servants, some IT people, older NCOs in the SAF, shopkeepers, sales representatives, insurance agents, foremen.

After the average income recipients have passed, the scene changes rather quickly. The marchers' height grows; seven minutes later we see the arrival of the top 10%. The head of this group to our surprise are still people with fairly modest jobs: school principals, analysts at brokerage firms, small contractors (PCK Ltd?), mid-ranking army officers (perhaps up to the rank of Colonel), SilkAir pilots. These are people who never thought they belonged to the top ten percent. Again office staff, department/division heads, but not the genuine top executives.

In the last few minutes, giants suddenly loom. A lawyer, not exceptionally successful, 18 feet tall. A Brigadier-General of similar height. Some (private sector) doctors come into sight, engineers at the large pharmaceutical companies.

There is still one minute to go, and now we see towering fellows. A Permanent Secretary about thirteen yards tall, a High Court judge, CEOs of some GLCs, eye surgeons, corporate lawyers.

During the last seconds, the scene is dominated by colossal figures. Most of them prove to be successful businessmen, managing directors of large firms sitting on many boards, top TCS stars.

The rear of the parade is brought up by a few participants who are measured in miles; their heads disappear into the clouds – Khoo Teck Puat, Kwek Leng Beng, Wee Cho Yaw and perhaps Olivia Lum.

Suddenly the parade is gone – the income recipients disappear from sight.

It appears that we have organised a parade of dwarfs. Indeed, a striking fact is that we had to wait so long for the average income recipient. This of course reflects the rich people bringing up the rear. Not only do they attract the attention of the spectator so much, but they also raise the average; it shifts to well above the great mass of income recipients. For that reason by far the greater part of the parade consists of small men and women, and not to mention the dwarfs. If we were to exclude from the parade those who bring up the rear, say during the last minute, the average height would drop considerably. Those remaining in the parade would not become taller mind you, but the impression would be removed that we have organised a parade of dwarfs.

Each of us has a particular spot in the marching contingents at every parade. Each of us is a participant and witness of a dramatic spectacle.

will the casino save us?

The headlines of 2010 and 2008 are an interesting contrast.

Singapore officially in recession, 21 Nov 2008, BBC
Singapore's economy shrank between July and September, confirming it was the first Asian country in recession in the current financial crisis.

Singapore May Pass China as Asia's Fastest-Growing Economy, 9 Jul 2010, Bloomberg
Singapore may overtake China as Asia’s fastest-growing economy this year

This post is part of my horizon scanning research project.

From the first country in Asia to enter recession to the fastest growing economy in the world. What is the significance of this?

1. Is this just an indicator of how reliant we are on international trade; are we merely a volatile indicator of the health of the world's economy?

2. Does the answer lie in PM Lee's national day message? "This exceptional performance is the fruit of Singaporeans’ united response during the crisis. This enabled us to take full advantage of improved global conditions." Have we improved the fundamentals of our economy, to fare better in the future regardless of fair or foul business conditions?
3. Or is this just the coincidental timing of the opening of our two new Integrated Resorts, and the flood of foreign investment and tourism they have brought with them. And if so, will this rush last, and how sensitive will it be to future business cycles?

I've been asking myself these questions because of a bigger question in my mind. How well will Singapore weather a double dip recession, if we get hit by one in the near future?

After several weeks of surfing the net in my spare time, I'm no closer to finding the answer to these questions. I have, however, made a few interesting observations, particularly about the third point.

The graph below from SingStat shows manufacturing is on the decline. The growth industries over the last few years are construction and business services, both of which are probably influenced greatly by casino-related activities in the past five years. So the casino definitely has had a positive impact, and the question remains whether this impact will be long-term, and how sensitive it will be to business cycles.

Tourism as an industry seems to be quite susceptible to the health of the global economy. Singapore's own visitor arrivals reflect this, with dips corresponding with the recession in 2001-2003 and the global financial crisis from 2007-2009.
Since I can't find any research on the sensitivity of casinos to the economic cycle, the next best thing was a dataset provided by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. This allows me to view GDP data by industry and metropolitan area over the last ten years. So for example, I can see how the GFC has affected the gambling and entertainment industries in Las Vegas and Atlantic City. I can also compare it to the growth of other core industries such as Finance in NYC and Chicago, or a mix of industries in Philadelphia as controls.

This table shows the absolute GPD figures for each metropolitan area and industry

This chart show normalised growth rates by dividing the GDP by the first year

The first observation is that Las Vegas did really well, in fact both its gaming and hospitality industries did the best over the eight-year period. Atlantic City was also growing in the later years. So maybe they really are immune to economic trends. But then again, the third best performer is the finance industry of New York. Is it possible that the global financial crisis - the worst recession since the great depression - missed Wall Street?

The Economics of Casino Gambling seems to be the most widely cited paper on the topic of the economics of the casino industry. And while it didn't answer my questions, I did learn quite a bit about casinos.

• Social resistance to the casinos will probably be a passing phase. Gambling and casinos were illegal and frowned upon in most U.S. states until the 1970's, because of concerns that introducing casinos would bring with them many social problems. Sounds familiar? And most of the policies introduced to mitigate these social concerns were more symbolic than effective. Having been to both Las Vegas and Atlantic City, and the surroundings, I don't recall much overt opposition to the casinos in the present day.


• The casino might lead to growth that is sustainable over a decent length of time. "Nevada was among the three fastest growing states in the United States for each of the last four decades of the 20th century. Nevada's major city, Las Vegas, was one of the five fastest growing metropolitan areas in the country in each decade over the same period."

On the bright side, if we do go into recession again, housing might become affordable again.

the folly of god's sacrifice

I saw an interesting video excerpt from the recent Global Atheist Convention in Melbourne.

On a forum, the celebrity atheist Richard Dawkins is ridiculing the fact that the omnipotent God of Christians could find no other way to save mankind from their sins than to sacrifice his son.

Edit: Thanks to Cal, I now have the link to the actual video (from 4:15 onwards), and his exact words below.

You believe in the New Testament that God, the all-powerful creator of the universe, couldn't think of a better way to forgive humanity's sins than to have himself put on earth, tortured and executed in atonement for the sins of humanity. What kind of a horrible depraved notion is that?

The Christian on the panel, who was obviously not chosen for his debating skills, could only weakly affirm that yes, this is what Christians believe, while the audience roared with laughter.

It annoyed me a bit that the Christian panelist had no explanation, but I'd probably have forgotten about it if the same Christian doctrine hadn't come up in a book I was reading later that same day.

In the Life of Pi, Pi is 14 when he first encounters the story of Jesus, and his reaction is very similar to Richard Dawkins. The son of a zookeeper, this is how he describes it:

The first thing that drew me in was disbelief. What? Humanity sins but it’s God’s Son who pays the price? I tried to imagine my Father saying to me, “Piscine, a lion slipped into the llama pen today and killed two llamas. Yesterday another one killed a black buck. Last week two of them ate the camel. The week before it was painted storks and grey herons. And who’s to say for sure who snacked on our golden agouti? The situation has become intolerable. Something must be done. I have decided that the only way the lions can atone for their sins is if I feed you to them.”

“Yes, Father, that would be the right and logical thing to do. Give me a moment to wash up.”

“Hallelujah, my son.”

“Hallelujah, Father.”

Pi constrasts this pathetically weak god to the awesome Hindu gods he knows. Rama, Krishna, Bhraman; all would never allow themselves to be subjected to such indignity. How could this happen? Love. That was Father Martin’s answer. (The full excerpt of this encounter can be found here.)

A third perspective on God's sacrifice is a story I once heard, which I will try to reproduce here.

A judge with a great reputation for justice one day has to preside over his own son for an extremely severe offence.

The judge loves his son dearly, and would like nothing better than to give him a light sentence. But he is duty-bound to uphold the law and sentences his son to death.

He then pronounces that the law also allows someone to die in his son's place, and he chooses to do so for his son.

Just as we would not respect a leader who makes rules but does not keep them, so I think we would not respect a God who changes the rules at his own whim and fancy, just because he can. This is a story about consistency and faithfulness. It is also a story, as Pi learned, of love.

I also got another interesting perspective from Pi on atheists and agnostics. Pi is the Indian son of a zookeeper, who goes on to double major in zoology and religious studies in Toronto. He has been variously a Hindu, a Christian and a Muslim ... I haven't finished the book yet. Many of his fellow scientists are atheists, and this is how he describes them:

Atheists are my brothers and sisters of a different faith, and every word they speak, speaks of faith. Like me, they go as far as the legs of reason will carry them – and then they leap.

It is not atheists who get stuck in my craw, but agnostics. Doubt is useful for a while. We must all pass through the garden of Gethsemane. If Christ played with doubt, so must we. If Christ spent an anguished night in prayer, if He burst out from the Cross, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ then surely we are also permitted doubt. But we must move on. To choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation.

(Thanks to Cori for transcribing these quotes. She has a very interesting Christian blog, together with her atheist husband.)

He finds it amazing that some people can believe a supreme being exists, but not be bothered to figure out who it is or what it is like. I find myself nodding in agreement.

horizon scanning: trends and challenges for singapore

I have often asked myself what the biggest challenges facing Singapore's survival are. Ten years ago, I was afraid our manufacturing economy would be crushed by low-cost labour in China, and that we were too exposed to global financial markets. Today, I worry that the greatest dangers are internal: loss of national identity with the influx of PRs and foreign talents, and the growing income gap. The truth is, I don't know.

So over the next few months, I will try to compile a list of the possible threats to our future survival, prioritise and research each one to understand it better. Hopefully at the end of this exercise, I'll be able to form a more educated opinion on the question I posed above. And for whoever else is interested, perhaps this will be an interesting exercise too.

Comments and suggestions are welcome, the first step is to compile the list of trends (and some of the direct effects) that will shape our future. That can be found at the bottom of the page. From that list, I'm also posing myself some questions, which I hope to answer soon.

Questions

1. How will Singapore be affected by a double-dip recession, and how has the casino affected the resilience of our economy and our exposure to the rest of the world?
2. What are the biggest military threats to Singapore, and are we equipped to handle them? What else needs to be done?
3. How will the combination of declining birth rate, Singaporeans working overseas and increasing immigration affect our identity as Singaporeans and national institutions such as national service?
4. What are the threats to racial and religious harmony in Singapore, and what is the significance of recent government actions to restrict certain activities among religious groups?
5. What does the rise of China mean for Singapore? How will it affect our economic, diplomatic and defence policies? How will it affect our society?
6. Taking into account recent changes in CPF policy (such as cuts in employer contributions), is this system able to to support our aging population?

This list will continue to grow and priorities may shift, as I do more preliminary research into the list below.

General Trends (Laundry list of ideas)

Global
Dependence on Global Economy
- Double dip recession
- Global impact on local export-led economy
- Decline of USD as world reserve currency
- Revaluation of Yuan
- Impact of casino
- Status as trade and transport hub
Security Threats
- Terrorism
- Cyber Crime / Cyber Warfare
- Conventional threats
Globalisation
- Decline of nation-state, national identity and nationalism
- Growing PR population and NS
- Brain Drain
Rising China
- Risk of global power transition / contest for influence in Southeast Asia
- Conflict over Taiwan / Spratly Islands

Regional
- Political and ethnic instability in Malaysia
- Political unrest in Thailand
- Resolution of longstanding bilateral issues
- Relations with neighbours

Domestic
Aging population / Declining birth rate
Racial and religious harmony
Growing income gap
Income Tax and CPF
Environment
- Environmental Damage and Pollution
- Water

Useful References
Statistics - Economic Indicators (Singstat charts)
4 Challenges Facing Singapore (National Day Rally 2009)

giving christians a bad name

This was another part of a very interesting and thought-provoking conversation I had with two friends, an e.

They were telling me that Christians in Singapore should do something about the Charismatic churches, because they are giving Christians a bad name through their provocative public attempts at evangelism and insulting other religions. And if nothing was done soon, the government would probably crack down on them with the religious harmony act.

Firstly, what is a charismatic? Charismatics associated with the use of spiritual gifts (such as speaking in tongues), akin to Christians of the New Testament. Some say it is a denomination, but I think it is more accurate to describe it as a movement as churches of other denominations might also be charismatic to various degrees. And the most prominent Charismatic churches are non-denominational (or independant).

Secondly, what should other Christians do about them? Although I may not agree entirely with the extravagance of their styles of worship, or teachings such as the prosperity gospel, I am not aware that any of their doctrine is wrong. Other churches that deviate from the Bible are labeled as cults and churches would actively warn their members against them, the differences with charismatics are more like the ceremonial or cultural differences you'd find between denominations. Furthermore, there is no higher authority to censure non-denominational churches for such actions.

But, my friends argue, the charismatic churches have come to dominate the public face of Christianity. (I infer that they are referring to unwelcome street evangelism, extravagant property investment and pastors restrained for speaking against other religions.) Hence they feel that this is damaging to Christians in general. This is not about theology, it is about society. So shouldn't the rest of the Christians do something before the government is forced to take some sort of action?

So let's look at the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act. From what I can gather, the key clause of concern here is 8(1)(a):

8. —(1) The Minister may make a restraining order against any priest, monk, pastor, imam, elder, office-bearer or any other person who is in a position of authority in any religious group or institution or any member thereof for the purposes specified in subsection (2) where the Minister is satisfied that that person has committed or is attempting to commit any of the following acts:

(a) causing feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility between different religious groups;

Most of the other clauses are more concerned with political or subversive activities "under the guise of, propagating or practising any religious belief". So the actual act of evangelism is perfectly legal, as long as you do not provoke "feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility".

I can't claim any expertise in these matters, and I have just been trying to deepen my own understanding in these matters with a little help from Google. Any comments or corrections on the statements here are welcomed.

is religion selfish?

I had an interesting philosophical discussion over lots of wine the other day with an atheist and an agnostic friend, both impressively well versed with Christianity and other religions.

There are many reasons why people have religion, but I figure it usually ties in to the meaning of life and what happens after death. In my very logical way, I deduce that if you believe there is a god, then you would want to figure out which is the true god. Clearly most religions, especially monotheistic ones, are mutually exclusive, and various religions offer different teachings about how you should live your life, and what happens after life. Many religions preach good works, others teach confession or faith, for example; the afterlife implications include entering heaven or hell, attaining enlightenment or being reincarnated as a cockroach. So whether the prospect is of damnation or reincarnation, wouldn't most people want to figure out which is the right god and religion?

My agnostic friend rejected this view as being too selfish. If there really is a god, a supreme being, shouldn't religion be about worshiping and glorifying this god, and developing your personal commune with this god, rather than looking out for your own selfish interests, he asked.

I was rather stumped at the point. Had I been so selfish all along? Too much wine perhaps. So we moved on to another interesting topic of charismatic churches which I will write about another time. But later that night, I think I sorted it out in my head.

At least for Christianity, we are taught that God first loved us, and because we had destroyed our own lives with sin, he suffered and died for us so that we could once again be saved and spend eternity with him in heaven. So is it selfish to want to go to heaven? On one level, I guess it is. But at the same time, we are not just satisfying our own desires, but also God's desire for us. The Bible's parable of the Prodigal Son is God's own analogy for his relationship with us. The prodigal son sinned greatly against his father, and when he was penniless and destitute he was too ashamed to return to his father's house. Would it have been selfish of him to want to re-enter the family mansion - yes, certainly. Yet in the end it was because his father loved him so much, he would not bear to see his son suffer and brought him home. It is natural to want salvation and eternity in heaven, yet we should rightly be ashamed of our human condition, and recognise that we are not worthy; but ultimately if we have the personal commune with God, we would also do it because we want to make him happy. And we would also do our utmost to bring all the other prodigal children home as well.

survivor (kabul) - an afghanistan exit strategy

The lunchtime conversation turned to how the coalition forces could make a respectable exit from Afghanistan, and quickly began to converge around three key themes:

1. And lasting solution must involve Afghanistan's neighbours (Iran, Pakistan), since they have the biggest long-term stake in its stability.
2. Any regime set up must be led by a "strong man", not someone the West is artificially propping up
3. The regime need not be democratic, because we shouldn't enforce Western norms on a very non-Western society. But the people should be given a say in the type of government that is formed.

Merging these themes together, I came to the logical conclusion that Afghanistan needs a radio talk show, an idea that came to be dubbed Survivor (Kabul). The rules are simple:

1. Anyone can audition, from all parts of Afghanistan and surrounding countries.
2. Participants will take part on discussions on the future system of governance for Afghanistan that will be aired day and night. No decision needs to be reached, but views will be shared, as they no doubt will be around all the radio receivers. (It has to be a radio talk show because there is very limited TV in Afghanistan.)
3. Every week, inhabitants of Afghanistan will use their mobile phones (the only modern piece of technology they own) to vote people off the show.
4. Others will probably be blown up by IEDs and suicide bombs, but this should be accepted as a normal part of tribal rivalry for ascendancy.
5. At the end of several weeks, the number of participants should be whittled down to a committee that could then be charged with drafting up the final design of what the government should look like, and maybe even form part of that government.

By the end of the show, we would hopefully have a few strong men: politicians representing the strongest constituencies and interest groups, and warlords with the financial and political clout to buy the necessary SMSes. We should also have a few slumdogs, who have a clear grasp of the political sentiment on the ground and the political acumen to reach the top without getting killed. And we should have some representation from the surrounding countries, which can surely afford to buy a enough SMSes for their favourite representatives.

It's an out of the box idea, but why shouldn't it work? And what would the coalition lose by trying?

google nexus one review - first impressions

Much has already been written about whether the Nexus One is an iPhone-killer, with its beautiful AMOLED screen, lightning-fast Snapdragon processor and lamentable music player. After using it for a week, what I am writing here are my observations on how well the Nexus serves to increase my personal productivity and mobility.

My points of comparison are not the iPhone which I have never owned, but various HP, Dopod, Palm and Nokia smartphones and PDAs that I have been using over more than 10 years. So this is as much about the phone as it is about how Android compares with Windows Mobile, Symbian and Palm OS.

Data Connectivity

My first impression of the Nexus One was when I popped in my Virgin Mobile pre-paid card and it connected seamlessly to the Virgin 3G network, without so much as a prompt about configuration. To me this was not a trivial matter considering it had taken me 2 days of phone and e-mail support to get my previous HP IPaq 612 online. And also considering that the Nexus One is not meant to be sold in Australia, this gives me confidence that it can connect seamlessly anywhere in the world.

Google Contacts

No review ever talks about Google Contacts (GC), but I think this is one of the best parts of a Google phone. GC first pulled all my contacts from GMail onto the phone. That's probably a no-brainer. It then merged these with all the matching profiles of friends that it found on Facebook. I was then able to upload in CSV format, all my remaining contacts from Outlook as well as my Nokia phone. I keep two lists because everyone I ever met is in my Outlook, but I wouldn't want that on my Nokia phone which has been my primary device for making calls. In GC, I am able to specify a My Contacts group that resides on the phone, while everyone else is kept safely out of the way in the GC cloud.

The real beauty of this is that for the first time, I have got all the phone, e-mail and even Facebook info of all my acquaintances in one place. And then I can run the Find Duplicates function to weed out multiple entries.

Notifications

I think it's just great how my phone now notifies me when I have new e-mail, Facebook messages, auctions ending and I'm sure the list can go on forever. It definitely saves me from actively logging in to check. My previous HP phone wouldn't last a day if I left it permanently connected, but the Nexus does a pretty decent job even with me playing games and going through my photos. These are things I would never have done on my old phone because all the Apps sucked.

Android Marketplace

The Android Marketplace is great, and really easy to find and install new apps. iPhone users will probably find this passe, but coming from Windows Mobile it is app heaven.

File Synchronisation

One thing I don't like about Android is that it doesn't provide a facility to synchronise a folder with the computer. There are a number of apps you can download to do this via the cloud, but I really rather sync some things directly such as all my Keepass passwords.

Broadband Tethering

The other thing I expect of a 3G phone is the ability to connect my laptop to the internet when I don't have wi-fi. This is a native function in Windows Mobile but not so in Android, and I have yet to find a decent App that does it well.

Well, these are my initial impressions, but I will certainly build and update this list as I explore the phone and the multitude of apps further.

market stocktake III

It's been almost exactly a year since the last time I tried to clearly articulate my investment strategy. It's interesting to look back at the last one, since I timed the market bottom almost perfectly and all my picks did very well. Unfortunately I exited way too early, so while I recouped most of my losses from the crash of 2007/2008, I probably could have made much more if I had greater confidence.

I guess the bottom line is, I'm still a bear. And while I've ridden some of the subsequent rallies, I'm still waiting for the final correction. But first let's take a quick glance at the opinions out there.

The Pragmatic Capitalist has a very nice summary of 2010 investment outlooks from a variety of sources. Among Investment Banks, most are predicting a slightly positive year, probably in the 10% range. The notable exceptions are Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse. Among the Hedge Funds and Investment Gurus, the sentiment is far more negative. Probably the most extreme prediction is by Elliot Wave Theorist Robert Prechter, who is now saying that we will see a crash that will bring the market to an even lower point than we have seen so far.

I've been building up short positions since January, and over the roller coaster of the last month have been reducing long holdings. While a crash seemed quite possible a week ago, the last 5 days have seen the Dow and S&P recover more than half their losses for the month. But the volume is less convincing with higher volume on the declines than the rallies, so next week should be interesting. There remain a few black swans on the horizon: sovereign debt, consumer credit, (if I could name all of them they wouldn't be black swans) and unemployment and consumer spending are still far from comforting. But if we make a new high it's probably time to go back into waiting mode.

So what I have now is a portfolio of mutual funds and stocks in the hands of my financial manages (who are both still bulish). I am hedging the downside with short options, having sold almost all my own long positions. And by gut feel, this is how I should fare based on the following market outcomes for 2010:

• +20% or better: Profits on my long holdings should exceed short losses for a moderate profit
• Between -10% to +10%: Will probably have a slight loss due to the options expiring out of the money
• -20% or worse: Should make a pretty bundle due to the very high leverage on my short options

Well this should be an interesting year to test my understanding and application of some new financial instruments, maybe in another year's time I can look back and have another good laugh.