Welcome to Dr Lincoln's blog

Welcome for visiting my blog. Hope you enjoy the visit and always welcome back again. Have a nice day!


Rio+20 can it achieve anything?

Comments on Ruben Zondervan "

Rio+20: Take science seriously and change the process", 21/06/2012, https://theconversation.edu.au/rio-20-take-science-seriously-and-change-the-process-7804

While Rio+20 may have a much wider agenda in terms of sustainable development, the inability of the international community to reach an agreement of actions and policy framework on emissions, arguably the most pressing and important environment issue facing all human beings, suggests the large gathering is unlikely to achieve meaningful outcomes for the environment.
For emission and climate change issues, it is the rich and powerful countries that have been the obstacles to progress, out of their self interests because they have far greater per capita emissions than most other countries.
Until the international community can achieve a fair and workable agreement on emissions control there is no reason and justice for rich countries to press poorer countries to be responsible to the environment in their development and make sacrifices in getting a better world environment.

A new framework for La Trobe?

Comments on Stephen Matchett "

If La Trobe was a car …", 21/06/2012, http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/thecommonroom/index.php/theaustralian/comments/if_la_trobe_was_a_car/

I think Australian universities and La Trobe included should establish a model that values both research and teaching quality and reward excellence in both fields. The model clearly needs a set of clear criteria and explicit assessment framework.
It seems that the pay conditions and reward system needs some innovation and creative thinking is required. Maybe a pay system  should be established that has a minimum pay for each level and them a large part of loading and reward payment that is linked to teaching and research loading and outcomes.
Such a system would provide both stability for academia and reward for excellence.
Should a person perform poorly for a period of 3-5 years or more, then that person should consider whether academia is a suitable profession or not.

Living and working longer for happiness

Comments on Hiroshi Yoshikawa "

Japan’s aging population and public deficits", http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2012/06/21/japans-aging-population-and-public-deficits/

Given that the VAT in Japan is only 5%, there is plenty room to raise revenue from an increase in VAT.
While raising tax may improve government budgetary positions, it does not necessarily increase output of the economy.
So other ways should be considered to increase the economy at little or no costs to the budget.
Maybe a scheme of volunteers should be established for older people who are able and willing to be involved in voluntary work with government agencies or private firms and organisations.
People are now living longer and healthier, as a result, many older people may still be able to work to contribute to the economy or society.
By getting involved in some sort of productive activities, many older people may be even living happier.
Of course, such a scheme should and must be voluntary.


An income loan for younger people?

Comments on Tony Makin "Beware politics of envy when considering ways to equalise incomes", 19/06/2012, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/beware-politics-of-envy-when-considering-ways-to-equalise-incomes/story-e6frgd0x-1226399149922
Assume Makin's argument that income redistribution to younger people is inter-generational unfair, maybe there should be income loans that can be repaid in the future when their income exceeds a set level, similar to the HECS in nature, to younger people in need.

My comments on The Economist

My comments on articles in The Economist website may be accessible via the following link:

张维迎 - 真味迎

评“张维迎:通胀不可避免 人民币升值躲过初一躲不了十五”,fnsr 27/02/2010, http://www.pinggu.org/bbs/thread-722143-1-1.html


张讲:“如果人民币升值之后,我想中国的企业家就会更多地来注意开发国内市场。 我反复强调国内市场的开发不是一个宏观问题,是一个微观问题,如果我们把开发国内市场的希望寄托在货币政策上那是有问题的,但是我们必须承认宏观的政策,特别是汇率政策对于企业家开拓国内市场我觉得是非常非常重要的”。这不自相矛盾?那到底是还是不是宏观问题呢?


Do we really need a new climate change paradigm?

Comments on Mutsuyoshi Nishimura "In search of a new climate change paradigm" June 15th, 2012, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2012/06/15/in-search-of-a-new-climate-change-paradigm-2/
Nishimura asks the following question: “what kind of carbon market is needed?”
The answer is quite simple, yet the world at large seems unable to get it.
If it is true that “there is a strong consensus that imposing a price on CO2 emissions is the most cost-effective way to motivate all players to use less fossil fuels and move to low-carbon or non-carbon economic systems”, as Nishimura states, then isn’t a global price for carbon emissions and an equal per capita distribution of the revenue from pricing revenue simply enough to do the job?
Isn’t what is taught in economics to deal with pollution issues?
Most economists in the developed world including many of its national leaders and politicians should understand this, but few of them advocate this simple, efficient and effective method/policy. Why?
The answer is also simple, but I leave that to the readers.
Comments on Hironori Fushita "Putin, Russia’s eastward pivot and prospects for Japan", http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2012/06/15/26925/
I think regional cooperation should be the right approach to best developing Siberia and Far East.
New and creative thinking is needed.
Maybe some special economic development zones could be established where foreign firms and nationals be allowed to reside, work and do business there, but subject a special land tax in addition to other Russian taxes (excluding their other normal land taxes).
Those regions are vast in land size with scarce population.
A win-win situation/outcome could be created for Russia and other regional countries.

My blog is back again - lessons of the GFC for economics

It's been a while that I have not included my comments in my blog due to certain inconvenience at work. And  it is time to resume doing it.

Comments on Kemal Derviş and Homi Kharas "New challenges for the global economy, new uncertainties for the G20", 17/06/2012, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2012/06/17/new-challenges-for-the-global-economy-new-uncertainties-for-the-g20/
The GFC and possibly a potential second GFC seems to indicate more fundamental causes at play, that is, the tendency of markets particularly assets markets fails to work properly and to reflect correct values in the face of the surge of developing economies and its effects on world financial especially money markets.
The rapid growth in average productivity in fast growing developing economies generates excess savings/credits. This causes some sorts of bubbles in the asset markets by having more fund and credits to push up stock market and housing market.
People with apparently increased values in their assets may consume more than their life time real income level.
Bubbles mis-allocate national resources to bubbling sectors cause them to boom to meet the demand.
So, it seems that the GFC is caused by the fundamental failures of markets working along when governments fail to realise national and international regulation and cooperation are needed to correct those market failures.
This may be a lesson in economics when something is new and significant appears that the market is unable to cope.