Comments on Jane Golley “China’s prospects for diminishing regional disparities”, 31/08/3010, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2010/08/31/chinas-prospects-for-diminishing-regional-disparities/
If Chinese top policy makers are willing to use the most appropriate policies to coordinate the development strategies of the whole country inclusive of the eastern, central and the western regions, it should be possible for China to do much better than "regional inequality between the west and the rest of China is likely to be diminished marginally at best".
For example, they could use some sort of fiscal transfers and link them to encourage the private sector in the eastern region to invest in the other less well off regions to tilt a bit the balance between investing abroad and inland.
There are advantages in investing inland. For example, due to various reasons including cultural, language, systems, transport and market, the barriers or the costs and the risks of investing inland are likely to be much smaller, thus to raise the return to investment. It is also much easier to coordinate the required infrastructure development within a country, especially given the policy priority of the central government.
There are also vast labour supplies including skilled and educated personnel. Certainly it will be easier to train or educate workers if needed.
2010-09-02
Pact - likely a strategic political blunder
Comments on Paul Kelly “Pact puts Labor brand and Gillard leadership on line”, 2/09/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/pact-puts-labor-brand-and-gillard-leadership-on-line/story-e6frg6zo-1225913036640
Picture ourtersy of The Australian online
While this has occurred in the wake of the situation of a hung parliament, in considering Gillard's citizens' assembly idea on climate change policy and the decision to go to the poll so soon after her having Prime Ministership, there are serious questions about her judgement and leadership quality.
This is unlikely to be a good look of her. It lacks a common sense and may be a strategic blunder at the highest order.
She may be a skilful political opportunist, but her strategic ability may not necessarily match her political desire to be and hold on to PM.
Those serious matters remain to be seen. But she has shown a glimpse of those in less than two months.
Picture ourtersy of The Australian online
While this has occurred in the wake of the situation of a hung parliament, in considering Gillard's citizens' assembly idea on climate change policy and the decision to go to the poll so soon after her having Prime Ministership, there are serious questions about her judgement and leadership quality.
This is unlikely to be a good look of her. It lacks a common sense and may be a strategic blunder at the highest order.
She may be a skilful political opportunist, but her strategic ability may not necessarily match her political desire to be and hold on to PM.
Those serious matters remain to be seen. But she has shown a glimpse of those in less than two months.
2010-09-01
The longer as time passes by, the stupid the NBN policy!
Comments on Stephen Bartholomeusz “Industry's better broadband plan”, 1/09/2010, http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/nbn-telstra-optus-alliance-of-affordable-broadband-pd20100901-8V3Y2?OpenDocument&src=sph
It appears increasingly that the NBN has failed business test and become a stupid idea.
The government should simply create an environment for the private sector to build what they think the best is, using targeted incentives to deal with any market failures.
But the government has chosen the $43 billion NBN instead.
PS: extracts from the article:
There is an underlying commonsense to the themes of the Alliance for Affordable Broadband’s arguments for version three of the national broadband network.
The Alliance, a group of senior telco executives that includes AAPT CEO Paul Broad and Pipe Networks’ founder Bevan Slattery, issued an open letter this week arguing the case for a largely wireless-based NBN with high-speed fibre deployed to deliver speeds of up to 1G to schools, hospitals and businesses.
The alliance advocates a mix of broadband technologies and public and private funding rather than the government mandated and taxpayer-funded $43 billion monopoly wholesale network envisaged by the federal government.
In that sense it is closer to the Coalition’s NBN policy than Labor’s, although it revolves around a next-generation 4G national wireless wholesale network that it says could deliver speeds of up to 100 Mbps to 98 per cent of Australians. It says the network could be built for around $3 billion.
It appears increasingly that the NBN has failed business test and become a stupid idea.
The government should simply create an environment for the private sector to build what they think the best is, using targeted incentives to deal with any market failures.
But the government has chosen the $43 billion NBN instead.
PS: extracts from the article:
There is an underlying commonsense to the themes of the Alliance for Affordable Broadband’s arguments for version three of the national broadband network.
The Alliance, a group of senior telco executives that includes AAPT CEO Paul Broad and Pipe Networks’ founder Bevan Slattery, issued an open letter this week arguing the case for a largely wireless-based NBN with high-speed fibre deployed to deliver speeds of up to 1G to schools, hospitals and businesses.
The alliance advocates a mix of broadband technologies and public and private funding rather than the government mandated and taxpayer-funded $43 billion monopoly wholesale network envisaged by the federal government.
In that sense it is closer to the Coalition’s NBN policy than Labor’s, although it revolves around a next-generation 4G national wireless wholesale network that it says could deliver speeds of up to 100 Mbps to 98 per cent of Australians. It says the network could be built for around $3 billion.
Better or worst way to print money?
Comments on Ricardo Caballero “A better way to print money”, 1/09/2010/ http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/treasuries-bernanke-federal-reserve-bonds-fiscal-p-pd20100831-8U4HZ?OpenDocument&src=rot
A rather old and stupid idea, dressed up as a good way!
Why not abolish all taxes and just print money for the Treasury!?
It is laughable by any standard!
Where did it come from? An economics professor from the US?
It cannot be more interesting, or stupid, should I say!
PS: The following is some extract of Caballero's article:
Instead, what we need is a fiscal expansion (e.g. a temporary and large cut of sales taxes) that does not raise public debt in equal amount. This can be done with a “helicopter drop” targeted at the Treasury. That is, a monetary gift from the Fed to the Treasury.
Critics may argue that this is simply voodoo accounting, as it is still the case that the consolidated balance sheet of the government, which includes the Fed, has incurred a liability. But this argument misses the point that the economy is in liquidity-trap range, and once this happens the system becomes willing to absorb unlimited amounts of money. In this context, by changing the composition of the liabilities of the consolidated public sector in the direction of money, the government gets a sort of “free lunch.”
A rather old and stupid idea, dressed up as a good way!
Why not abolish all taxes and just print money for the Treasury!?
It is laughable by any standard!
Where did it come from? An economics professor from the US?
It cannot be more interesting, or stupid, should I say!
PS: The following is some extract of Caballero's article:
Instead, what we need is a fiscal expansion (e.g. a temporary and large cut of sales taxes) that does not raise public debt in equal amount. This can be done with a “helicopter drop” targeted at the Treasury. That is, a monetary gift from the Fed to the Treasury.
Critics may argue that this is simply voodoo accounting, as it is still the case that the consolidated balance sheet of the government, which includes the Fed, has incurred a liability. But this argument misses the point that the economy is in liquidity-trap range, and once this happens the system becomes willing to absorb unlimited amounts of money. In this context, by changing the composition of the liabilities of the consolidated public sector in the direction of money, the government gets a sort of “free lunch.”
Citizen's assembly dumped - what is next?
Comments on Samantha Maiden and James Massola “Gillard replaces citizens assembly in Labor alliance deal with Greens”, 1/09/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/gillard-replaces-citizens-assembly-in-labor-alliance-deal-with-greens/story-fn59niix-1225912717634
The idea of a citizen's assembly was silly from the start and now it has been dumped by Gillard.
How many days did that item of election policy proposal last? Not too many!
The proposal and ditch of it has demonstrated a failure in leadership, in the process of policy formation and development and in judgment.
That does not reflect well on the maker of that policy proposal.
What are the implications for the future policies of the Gillard government, especially now with the alliance with the Greens?
You guess or bet, but I shudder at the thought!
The idea of a citizen's assembly was silly from the start and now it has been dumped by Gillard.
How many days did that item of election policy proposal last? Not too many!
The proposal and ditch of it has demonstrated a failure in leadership, in the process of policy formation and development and in judgment.
That does not reflect well on the maker of that policy proposal.
What are the implications for the future policies of the Gillard government, especially now with the alliance with the Greens?
You guess or bet, but I shudder at the thought!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
