Age old diplomatic precedents and protocols demand that a visiting Head of states are offered gifts befitting their world stature and strength of their nation's friendship. The US constitution abhorred such diplomatic gifts so much that a clause in their Constitution actually prohibits public officials from accepting gifts from foreign officials. In modern days, the trend is on full public disclosure rather than declining the gifts outright.
So every time a President/ PM or a King travels abroad, host nations scramble for a befitting gift. During Nehruvian era, India gifted our pedigree Tigers and elephants as state gifts. In course of time these gifts were rendered out dated ( perhaps this could have led to the phrase "white elephant" gifts?). Live animals have fallen out of fashion in Western diplomatic circles too. A rare pedigree breed dog presented to George Bush Jr. had a tough time to pass the country's quarantine standards, before being adopted. ( No it wasn't Bush who adopted the dog).
Then we had President Col Nasser of Egypt who presented a bride as a state gift to Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana (by the way Fathia Nkrumah was a Coptic Christian, so I guess Nasser had no qualms of gifting her).
Lately the Foreign Office of many nations have run out of ideas. US President Obama presented Queen Elizabeth an iPod with popular US tracks and a footage of her previous visits. (phew... I wonder who in the State Department proposed such an idea !!). The Queen had no trouble in reciprocating the same. She usually gives a standard silver framed photograph of herself and her hubby, with her autograph on it. Alas, they still think they are some sort a celebrity couple. Well at least you can excuse them.
Well it is time to revisit this age old diplomatic practice and put an end to these mindless protocols and trivialities.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Going down the drain...
We seldom value things that come free. Air and water are the first examples that comes to mind when I state this axiom. Water, the very essence of life, is being taken for granted by the affluent sections of the society. Is water that cheap, that you dont need to meter it?
After coming to US, I had to get use to bathing in a bathtub. But then I realised that I end up wasting more water , as it goes down the drain, rather than wetting any portion of my body. (also considering the fact the water is of drinking quality, I could not but help claculating the sheer waste). US Department of Energy estimates on average a person in US uses 200-300 liters of water everyday for domestic purposes !!. Man, this nation is one heck of a water gusher.
This led to a more insightful reflection as to why I need water to bathe? I could think of two salient reasons
After coming to US, I had to get use to bathing in a bathtub. But then I realised that I end up wasting more water , as it goes down the drain, rather than wetting any portion of my body. (also considering the fact the water is of drinking quality, I could not but help claculating the sheer waste). US Department of Energy estimates on average a person in US uses 200-300 liters of water everyday for domestic purposes !!. Man, this nation is one heck of a water gusher.
This led to a more insightful reflection as to why I need water to bathe? I could think of two salient reasons
- First being the exfoliating effect of water. (removing dirt and dust from the pores of the skin).
- Second, water being the viscous medium for the soap (including liquid based soaps) to act chemically as well as to ease the dabbing action. (imagine running a dry soap on a dry skin)
So I made a conscious decision on my part to use the age old Indian practice bathing with a water mug. I can easily guess that my water consumption has drastcially cut down. Plus, there is no water spliing outside the tub. (I wish my roomates could follow this simple rule!!!) But having said that its is wrong on my part to expect others to follow my example. Atleast let me practice first, before I start to preach.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Leisure & Productivity
As a country develops the labour productivity tends to increase. This would imply that a country endowed with better capital would be able churn out more goods per hour(or any unit of time) than a country with lesser capital investment. We can clearly the veracity of this hypothesis in our everyday life. The output produced by an average Bangladeshi worker per hour is much lower than the output produced by a German labour. This has nothing to do with the fact the Bangladesi are lazy or Germans are industrious. It only reflects the fact that an average German is better educated and equipped with technology to increase his hourly output.
Labour productivity is not an obscure measure. It can easily be estimated by dividing the GDP of a country by the total labour-hours available. For e.g in US 2008 GDP was 14,350 billion dollars(Source: Federal Reserve). And available total labour hours is 797 million hours. (Source: US BLS )So the average productivity comes around 18 dollars an hour per US worker. So statistically every US worker in 2009 churned out goods worth 18 dollars a work hour.( in current dollars without factoring inflation).
But as productivity rises the demand for lesiure also increases. After all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy right? So the developed country are witnessing the phenomena of high labour cost (it costs a lot more to employ Americans remember) and lesser work hours as well!!
Increasing there are calls for making Friday a part of extended weekend. In my college here in America, people increasing bid me Weekend wishes starting from Thursday afternoons !! In such a scenario we would effectively define a work-week as having only a four continuous working days of eight hours each (considering the fact that in the nineteenth century Industrial age workers toiled for more then twelve hours a day, all week long, this is indeed a remarkable turnaround !!). Increasingly leisure hours would only serve to undermine the competitiveness of an economy.
P.S: India has a long way to go in reaching labour productivity anywhere near OECD countries. In this age of increasing mechanization we still tend to cling on hard manual labour. Our NREGS(National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, similar to the depresssion era WPA in US) is one prime example of this atavistic mentality. Instead of training rural folks to equip them with marketable labour skills, we employ them in manual labur. The worst part the output of their is hardly ever produces tangible assets. Perhaps our public policy doctrine tend to prefer the status quo.
Labour productivity is not an obscure measure. It can easily be estimated by dividing the GDP of a country by the total labour-hours available. For e.g in US 2008 GDP was 14,350 billion dollars(Source: Federal Reserve). And available total labour hours is 797 million hours. (Source: US BLS )So the average productivity comes around 18 dollars an hour per US worker. So statistically every US worker in 2009 churned out goods worth 18 dollars a work hour.( in current dollars without factoring inflation).
But as productivity rises the demand for lesiure also increases. After all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy right? So the developed country are witnessing the phenomena of high labour cost (it costs a lot more to employ Americans remember) and lesser work hours as well!!
Increasing there are calls for making Friday a part of extended weekend. In my college here in America, people increasing bid me Weekend wishes starting from Thursday afternoons !! In such a scenario we would effectively define a work-week as having only a four continuous working days of eight hours each (considering the fact that in the nineteenth century Industrial age workers toiled for more then twelve hours a day, all week long, this is indeed a remarkable turnaround !!). Increasingly leisure hours would only serve to undermine the competitiveness of an economy.
P.S: India has a long way to go in reaching labour productivity anywhere near OECD countries. In this age of increasing mechanization we still tend to cling on hard manual labour. Our NREGS(National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, similar to the depresssion era WPA in US) is one prime example of this atavistic mentality. Instead of training rural folks to equip them with marketable labour skills, we employ them in manual labur. The worst part the output of their is hardly ever produces tangible assets. Perhaps our public policy doctrine tend to prefer the status quo.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Price of everything and Value of Nothing
This was a very good book by Akerman and Heinzerling that I came across recently. It really opened my eyes to subtle nuances of price and value. Most of us judge the price of a good as an indicator of its value. But usually it is not the case.
I believe price, is the label that gets attached to a good to facilitate its sale or market transaction. Price of a good is only speculative. A shop keeper may sell a Persian rug for $5000. But come festive seasons the price may drop down to $4000 to pep up the sale. In this case does the value of the rug(say its aesthetics) diminishes in any manner? certainly it doesn't.
The value of a good is constant. At least it is constant for every individual .Values of goods tend to take considerable time to change. I may value a rug at lower value, and prefer a Walmart Mainstay's instead. After my value for a rug is determined by the function or utility it servers, say covering the bare floor or aesthetics.
Speaking of rugs it reminds of an interesting incident that happened recently. I wanted to purchase a new rug worth about $25 for our home. But my roomies took a vehement opposition to such outrageous luxury purchase. One mutual friend of our home even suggested that I was not sympathetic with my roomies and aspiring for a luxury world while my roomies are tethering in poverty and penury. Perhaps if we divide among all of us, it would only cost $5 each. But then the rug had no value for any of them. Naturally any price would be outrageous to them (as long as it doesn't come free of cost. In such case they wouldn't mind a rug in the living room).
Alas we live in a world wherein we check the price of everything,while dismiss the value of somethings to nothing.
I believe price, is the label that gets attached to a good to facilitate its sale or market transaction. Price of a good is only speculative. A shop keeper may sell a Persian rug for $5000. But come festive seasons the price may drop down to $4000 to pep up the sale. In this case does the value of the rug(say its aesthetics) diminishes in any manner? certainly it doesn't.
The value of a good is constant. At least it is constant for every individual .Values of goods tend to take considerable time to change. I may value a rug at lower value, and prefer a Walmart Mainstay's instead. After my value for a rug is determined by the function or utility it servers, say covering the bare floor or aesthetics.
Speaking of rugs it reminds of an interesting incident that happened recently. I wanted to purchase a new rug worth about $25 for our home. But my roomies took a vehement opposition to such outrageous luxury purchase. One mutual friend of our home even suggested that I was not sympathetic with my roomies and aspiring for a luxury world while my roomies are tethering in poverty and penury. Perhaps if we divide among all of us, it would only cost $5 each. But then the rug had no value for any of them. Naturally any price would be outrageous to them (as long as it doesn't come free of cost. In such case they wouldn't mind a rug in the living room).
Alas we live in a world wherein we check the price of everything,while dismiss the value of somethings to nothing.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Follow the herd..dont stand out
The other day while I was commuting the University bus, the driver threw a question at the passangers. Do you folks wanna switch on the AC? Well a seemingly simple question. Answer would be a firm YES or a NO.
But for nearly seconds (that seemed like an eternity) the question was answered with stoic silence. Then a few rumblings. Finally an owerwelming NO. I never realised human instincts are too complicated to understand.
Most of us have this "tag-along-the-majority" syndrome programmed in our genes. we wait for the crowd and then decide on our course of approach. We simply be refused to be on the part of the minority. we tend to sacrifice our individual views to majoritarian voices.
I definitely wanted the AC switched ON. Had I sticked to my guns and shouted aloud, surely the outcome would have been a different one indeed. Of course other passengers wouldn't mind as well, as they pre-programmed to follow the crowd.
Perhaps this explains why we need leaders in our social and political institutions. Most of us are simple unwilling to follow our heart says. Individuality is the first victim of this mentality. We are all leaders in our own merit. Unless we imbibe this spirit, I am afraid we would only end following the herd.
But for nearly seconds (that seemed like an eternity) the question was answered with stoic silence. Then a few rumblings. Finally an owerwelming NO. I never realised human instincts are too complicated to understand.
Most of us have this "tag-along-the-majority" syndrome programmed in our genes. we wait for the crowd and then decide on our course of approach. We simply be refused to be on the part of the minority. we tend to sacrifice our individual views to majoritarian voices.
I definitely wanted the AC switched ON. Had I sticked to my guns and shouted aloud, surely the outcome would have been a different one indeed. Of course other passengers wouldn't mind as well, as they pre-programmed to follow the crowd.
Perhaps this explains why we need leaders in our social and political institutions. Most of us are simple unwilling to follow our heart says. Individuality is the first victim of this mentality. We are all leaders in our own merit. Unless we imbibe this spirit, I am afraid we would only end following the herd.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Vembusons- the genesis
Usually I avoid my personal stuff in my blog. But the time around I have made an exception. (I have a tendency to make a lot of exceptions though). Rummaging through files at my father's office, I came across these archival business correspondence. Apparently my grandfather's father Vembu Iyer wanted to start the sole franchise for Godrej Boyce Mfg Co in 1943. He had never met a single representative from the company( it was and still is based in Bombay then). His only previous experience with Godrej was the fact that he had bought an almirah in 1938 !! It is interesting see how people proposed business ventures based on a mere purchase of a company good. Eventually my great grandpa did get the franchise and the business is still thankfully running even today. I am what I am because of this business. Vembu may have passed away but his solid legacy still looms large on all his descendants !!!
(just click on the image for an enlarged view to read)
(just click on the image for an enlarged view to read)
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Economics of Engineering Education
Now that it is my vacation, I have a lot of time to kill. So here goes another of my dumb blog. Only that this one is slightly academic or rather economics in nature. It is said that even a parrot could become a economist if only it could say two words: supply & demand !!!The Tamil Nadu Engineering Admissions 2009 has drawn to a close. The number of vacant seats 30,550 !!! unbelievable isn't ? Out of the 1.14 lac seats that was up in the offing only around 83,500 was filled up. If this being the case for Government quota, I am pretty sure most of the management quota in self-financing quota would be unfilled.
So what explains this paradox? There are few case studies wherein supply exceeds the demand. The engineering education is one such among them. (there are also other examples like the civil aviation sector where currently the supply exceeds the air traffic demand, India's refining capacity is also greater than the current crude oil demand, making India a net exporter of refined petroleum products !!). So in all these case we have seen that it supply exceeds the demand it seriously sucks for the suppliers. For the consumers of course it is a bonanza time as cut throat competition ensures that the costs are un-sustainably cheap.
The diagram pictorialy explains this phenomenon. The downward sloping curve is the demand for engineering seats. The upward sloping curve is the number of seats up grab by the both government and private institutions. The instersection of the two is going to give us the cost of the education. (lets assume as annual tuition fees + costs)
One may wonder if both the number of seats available and number filled are a single point in the graph, why bother to draw to a curve? This is because of the concept of Willingness to Pay.
A more affluent student wouldn't mind paying Rs 62,500 per year (max management quota fees) provided he gets the good he wanted (i.e an engineering seat). So students like him would be on the upper reaches of the demand curve. Whereas a student from a poor family would find it difficult even to pay Rs 40,000 (govt quota fees). such students are bound to be in the lower reaches of the curve. (below the intersection in some cases). Likewise colleges could offer more seats than the current dispensation by increasing the strength or the number of courses. But they would be reluctant to do , if the intersection of demand curve is below their current intake capacity. (for the colleges the willingness to supply is the equivalent concept of WTP).
In this crowded market who is going to suffer? Economics tells us it is going to be the supplier i.e. technical institutions. As the number of colleges proliferate the students have more and more choices. In view of the increasing vacancies, the colleges are forced to reduce their fees (as teh demand curve falls down while supply remains constant). (the other day my cousin showed me an SMS ad for an engineering college seat with reduced fees !!! such is the pathetic state of engineering colleges !!!). As the tution fees falls , colleges cannot recoup the cost incurred in imparting the education.
This is where economics and practicalities differ. As the cost of educations falls it is teh students who are going to be affected as the result quality deterioration. So in a way both the colleges and the students are going to suffer if this current trend continues unabated.
AICTE must step up it reguations in this regard. In this competitive world we cannot afford to churn our second rate engineers. I did visit the AICTE guidelines on the starting new techincal institions. Officially all it is takes is a etsablished trust/society, with 25 acres land and 35 lacs Fixed deposit guarantee !!! Unofficially of course it involves greasing several palms in the State government, affiliating university and AICTE members. ( AICTE Chairman is under arrest by CBI on bribery charges ). So even if that is taken into account it takes only about 1 crore plus the land acquisition cost to start an engineering college !!! You can even start the building construction after getting the initial LoA. With relatively non-existent market barriers it is easy for every Tom, Dick and Harry to start a college. After all these individuals must park their black money somewhere, so why not start a college??
Too many cooks spoil the broth. The saying seems apt for TN engineering colleges. (I personally wish they could start some of these colleges in the North-east or Bihar/Jharkand/Orissa etc. where even colleges are non-existent). In 2009-10 academic year 85 new institutions cropped in TN alone !!! Perhaps they are yet to learn the simple lessons of supply v. demand !!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)