Entrepreneurs in Indonesia are quite creative these days. There's this new vegetarian resto which name their dishes like Nasi Padang Brigitte Bardot, Nasi Hai Nam Confucius, Nasi Campur Henry Ford etc.
What has Brigitte Bardot, Confucius and Henry Ford got to do with the food. But restos all around the world do that. I once had a Jane Fonda salad in a resto in LA.
This is an all vegetarian resto, not unlike the ones in Hongkong, Malaysia and Singapore where they serve "prawns", "ham", "beef" and others prepared from vegetables. The texture of those foods may be similar but they don't taste the same as the meaty versions. Pretty good for an Indonesian resto but a far cry from the way the Hongkongers have their vegetarian dishes. That Indonesian resto has "fried duck" on their menu but the "fried duck" does not have the crispy texture of the equivalent in Hongkong, Malaysia or Singapore.
Besides that, other than the tonne of MSG one immediately picks up, the taste is really blend, which probably accounts for the fact that a large plateful of chili sauce is provided. Indonesians like chili sauce. They add that to their bakmi noodles, sharks fin soups, fried rice, instant noodles and anything they eat.
I've taken Indonesian friends out for meals in London, Shanghai, Hongkong, Bangkok, Singapore and other countries and the first thing they'd ask a waiter will be for chili sauce. And they are quite particular about the chili sauce, not the usual spicy taste one looks for in a chili sauce.
While in Shanghai and also in Bangkok, we were given chili sauce which burnt my tongue and tasted so unique that I still dream of them, my Indonesian friends were unhappy. They wanted their "own" chili sauce of a certain Indonesian brand. I've tasted that chili sauce and its blend is not only artificial, but also hardly taste of chili at all.
After numerous encounters, my conclusion centered on one: my Indonesian friends had a sense of insecurity even when it comes to meals and have to try to surround themselves with an environment (beginning with condiments) that they're used to in order to be at ease.
I must say that this is not "endemic" amongst Indonesians. There have been many who were more at ease at international restos than I was; but the contrary is definitely evident. And I'm not talking about "kampung" kids who lived all their lives amidst padi fields -- most of them have had the opportunity to go through four or five years in college in Indonesia.
A friend once told me: you can take a man out of the country but you can't take the country out of the man.
Wednesday, 8 August 2007
Friday, 20 July 2007
Independence days in August
Three countries in ASEAN are celebrating their Independence this month: Singapore on 9th, Indonesia on 17th and Malaysia on 31st. I wonder what their leaders and their people will ask themselves on their Independence days?
By far, Singapore seems to be the one doing best, considering their stable political situation and a booming economy. The government seems to be more open and intent on making Singapore a "truly" global city rich in culture and the arts as well as entertainment and nightlife. But culture and arts aren't attributes one can cultivate over a few years, nor even a decade. Wonder whether the next generation of leaders in their government will have the same resolve as the current in this aspect.
Malaysia? Well the quarreling between the ex and current prime ministers seems to have subsided somewhat. But they have deep racial issues which have to be resolved if they want to catch up with the rest of the world. Or perhaps they don't? Seems like the Malaysian government and some of the deprived people of the Malay race (never forget this forms their electorate) are content with what Malaysia is now and where they stand in the world.
Indonesia is the BIG brother of ASEAN. Having gone through their share of instability and political woes, they've yet to admit officially that terrorism is rampant in their country and that they harbor some of the most radical "brain washers" of terrorism. And the quarreling and jostling for power (for obvious reasons to get enrichment through corruption) within the weak coalition government continue unabated.
So, should they feel that they're better off having their own flags rather than those of their colonizers?
Definitely I would say. Better to have their own people governing them than someone sitting in their cushy offices in some European capital city dictating their faiths. But gaining independence is one thing, administering it is another. There's really no quick fix for any one country as problems are unique to each. But the tendency for some of these people to reject what is happening in affluent civilizations in the West on the pretext that their people are different certainly won't help.
Life is a learning process. So is civilization. But why would people not want to learn from the mistakes that other countries went through and tailor fit those solutions to the characteristics of their own people and country? Perhaps they think they're doing that already, I'm sure. But one can do that over a century or one can short-circuit that to the minimum time possible. To me, it's a case of how tolerable is continuing poverty and literacy.
The poor and impoverished cannot afford to put themselves and their children through education, and hence are unable to tap into normal channels of independent news on affairs around the world. They are more narrow minded and become more and more so as their governments continually treat them like illiterates and feed them with information and propaganda meant for illiterates. When election time comes, the people running for government will have to take measures which appeal to this "illiterate" electorate and forget and forgo what the county really needs. It's really a vicious circle for the longer they take to lift them out of poverty and literacy, the longer it'll take them to steer their country out of the third world abyss.
To my friends in Malaysia, I would tell them to forget about how much more the Chinese and Indians are making compared to some of the poorer Malays for now; liberalize the economy and let businesses compete openly on a level playing field, attract as much foreign investments as possible before they all head to China and India; swallow their national pride for a moment and rope in a foreign strategic partner (or partners) for their loss making Proton car company, and possibly Malaysian airlines as well.
To friends in Indonesia, they should forget about wasting public resources on high profile "weak" legal cases such as those of the Suharto family which will surely be thrown out by the courts; instead, go for currently active corrupts who haven't had the chance to destroy incriminating records yet and move fast on them so as to set good examples to the rest. Get their unions to come to terms with the competitive labor market in Asia and spend more time on increasing productivity rather than holding demonstrations and protests in busy Jakarta streets. Get rid of business-unfriendly laws and regulations and bring as much foreign investments into Indonesia as possible, especially on much needed infrastructure projects. Forget about current woes and natural disasters. Don't ask what God has done to men, but what men has done to men!
To friends in Singapore who perhaps needs the least advice, I'd say start getting used to the fact that the world is hungry for information and people are going to write and talk about you -- so open up to unrestricted free speech. You won't achieve anything by suing every publication which comments negatively about one or two issues in your country. Don't scare away foreign investors by taking over-zealous measures, FOR the minute you decided to let in the billions of dollars for mega casino resorts, you should have known that property and other prices will rise in your land scarce country. Next year is the debut of the Formula-1 race there and the whole world will be watching. Do not make a fool of your country and yourselves.
Happy Independence Days friends...
By far, Singapore seems to be the one doing best, considering their stable political situation and a booming economy. The government seems to be more open and intent on making Singapore a "truly" global city rich in culture and the arts as well as entertainment and nightlife. But culture and arts aren't attributes one can cultivate over a few years, nor even a decade. Wonder whether the next generation of leaders in their government will have the same resolve as the current in this aspect.
Malaysia? Well the quarreling between the ex and current prime ministers seems to have subsided somewhat. But they have deep racial issues which have to be resolved if they want to catch up with the rest of the world. Or perhaps they don't? Seems like the Malaysian government and some of the deprived people of the Malay race (never forget this forms their electorate) are content with what Malaysia is now and where they stand in the world.
Indonesia is the BIG brother of ASEAN. Having gone through their share of instability and political woes, they've yet to admit officially that terrorism is rampant in their country and that they harbor some of the most radical "brain washers" of terrorism. And the quarreling and jostling for power (for obvious reasons to get enrichment through corruption) within the weak coalition government continue unabated.
So, should they feel that they're better off having their own flags rather than those of their colonizers?
Definitely I would say. Better to have their own people governing them than someone sitting in their cushy offices in some European capital city dictating their faiths. But gaining independence is one thing, administering it is another. There's really no quick fix for any one country as problems are unique to each. But the tendency for some of these people to reject what is happening in affluent civilizations in the West on the pretext that their people are different certainly won't help.
Life is a learning process. So is civilization. But why would people not want to learn from the mistakes that other countries went through and tailor fit those solutions to the characteristics of their own people and country? Perhaps they think they're doing that already, I'm sure. But one can do that over a century or one can short-circuit that to the minimum time possible. To me, it's a case of how tolerable is continuing poverty and literacy.
The poor and impoverished cannot afford to put themselves and their children through education, and hence are unable to tap into normal channels of independent news on affairs around the world. They are more narrow minded and become more and more so as their governments continually treat them like illiterates and feed them with information and propaganda meant for illiterates. When election time comes, the people running for government will have to take measures which appeal to this "illiterate" electorate and forget and forgo what the county really needs. It's really a vicious circle for the longer they take to lift them out of poverty and literacy, the longer it'll take them to steer their country out of the third world abyss.
To my friends in Malaysia, I would tell them to forget about how much more the Chinese and Indians are making compared to some of the poorer Malays for now; liberalize the economy and let businesses compete openly on a level playing field, attract as much foreign investments as possible before they all head to China and India; swallow their national pride for a moment and rope in a foreign strategic partner (or partners) for their loss making Proton car company, and possibly Malaysian airlines as well.
To friends in Indonesia, they should forget about wasting public resources on high profile "weak" legal cases such as those of the Suharto family which will surely be thrown out by the courts; instead, go for currently active corrupts who haven't had the chance to destroy incriminating records yet and move fast on them so as to set good examples to the rest. Get their unions to come to terms with the competitive labor market in Asia and spend more time on increasing productivity rather than holding demonstrations and protests in busy Jakarta streets. Get rid of business-unfriendly laws and regulations and bring as much foreign investments into Indonesia as possible, especially on much needed infrastructure projects. Forget about current woes and natural disasters. Don't ask what God has done to men, but what men has done to men!
To friends in Singapore who perhaps needs the least advice, I'd say start getting used to the fact that the world is hungry for information and people are going to write and talk about you -- so open up to unrestricted free speech. You won't achieve anything by suing every publication which comments negatively about one or two issues in your country. Don't scare away foreign investors by taking over-zealous measures, FOR the minute you decided to let in the billions of dollars for mega casino resorts, you should have known that property and other prices will rise in your land scarce country. Next year is the debut of the Formula-1 race there and the whole world will be watching. Do not make a fool of your country and yourselves.
Happy Independence Days friends...
Sunday, 1 July 2007
Hongkong - 10 years after
It's been 10 years since Hongkong returned to Chinese "communist" rule. From free wheeling capitalism under the British to a much more repressive regime.
Other than the outspoken activists, the Hongkong friends I've spoken to all feel that they've been "looked after" better than when they were under the British as a colony. Of course! China's economy is the hottest around the world now. The most populated country on this planet; and with plenty of money too. Once, one of my Hongkong friends said that if everyone in China jumps at the same time, the resonance will create an earthquake so huge it will even rock America. He could be right.
Whatever happens in China resonates around the world -- be it the stock markets, or the tainted food they export. Not forgetting what we went through with SARS a few years back. I really don't believe there hadn't been any "covers up" when the disease first broke in China. Poor Hongkong, and Canada which bore the brunt of the SARS outbreak. Economies in other parts of South East Asia were affected too, notably Singapore which had close social contacts with Hongkong and China. It was quite fortunate then that Indonesia wasn't affected "officially", for if they had been, it would have turned into a pandemic in no time considering the backwardness of the health care system there. They're not so lucky this time around with bird flu.
China won't and cannot afford to let Hongkong sink. With thoughts of reunification with Taiwan, that would have been the death knell and prone to international condemnation. And that would have served the Taiwanese well in seeking admission to the United Nations.
Without China, Hongkong's economy would not have recovered so quickly after the SARS crisis; similarly for the rest of Asia and the World. The Canadians have to be envious for Canadians are Canadians, NOT US citizens; whereas Hongkongers are Chinese, like their counterparts up north, fellow "descendants of the dragon". Canada can only count on their southern neighbors for spillover effect, whereas the Hongkongers can rely on boosters orchestrated by Beijing.
Reminds me a bit like the typhoon shelters they have in Hongkong. When the wind rises, stay behind the shelter. But China as an economic hinterland has served Hongkong better than the typhoon shelters in that typhoon shelters only provide shelter when the storm arrives, whereas China is in a position to do that plus providing indirect assistance when the storm has passed. How can Hongkong do without China? And why would Hongkongers not embrace this reunification with the mainland?
What about the Brits? They have their own problems in Europe. Anyhow, Hongkong was supposed to be a sort of cash, commodities and securities cow anyway, historically. Money and commodities out of Hongkong trade are meant for the benefit of the British Empire. And Hongkong's geographic location serves as an asset in Britain's quest to play a part in global security.
What can we learn from this relationship between Hongkong and China? Plenty! As long as we keep our minds open and forget all the norms experienced by the Western world and found in text books, for there has not been the equivalent of China and Hongkong in past history recorded by Western historians. It will also serve to remind smaller countries next to BIG hinterlands of the possibilities and varying degrees of assistance she can expect to tap from the bigger brother next to her. And these smaller countries must realize that they are not Hongkong in assessing their positions. Example: smaller countries like Luxembourg in Europe must understand that although they are European, they are not German or French.
Well I can only wish my Hongkongers and my friends there all the best in this newfound relationship. Democracy is great, but democracy must serve and look after its people. Too much talk of democracy without tangible benefits will leave too many poor people disgruntled and lead to unwanted instability.
Other than the outspoken activists, the Hongkong friends I've spoken to all feel that they've been "looked after" better than when they were under the British as a colony. Of course! China's economy is the hottest around the world now. The most populated country on this planet; and with plenty of money too. Once, one of my Hongkong friends said that if everyone in China jumps at the same time, the resonance will create an earthquake so huge it will even rock America. He could be right.
Whatever happens in China resonates around the world -- be it the stock markets, or the tainted food they export. Not forgetting what we went through with SARS a few years back. I really don't believe there hadn't been any "covers up" when the disease first broke in China. Poor Hongkong, and Canada which bore the brunt of the SARS outbreak. Economies in other parts of South East Asia were affected too, notably Singapore which had close social contacts with Hongkong and China. It was quite fortunate then that Indonesia wasn't affected "officially", for if they had been, it would have turned into a pandemic in no time considering the backwardness of the health care system there. They're not so lucky this time around with bird flu.
China won't and cannot afford to let Hongkong sink. With thoughts of reunification with Taiwan, that would have been the death knell and prone to international condemnation. And that would have served the Taiwanese well in seeking admission to the United Nations.
Without China, Hongkong's economy would not have recovered so quickly after the SARS crisis; similarly for the rest of Asia and the World. The Canadians have to be envious for Canadians are Canadians, NOT US citizens; whereas Hongkongers are Chinese, like their counterparts up north, fellow "descendants of the dragon". Canada can only count on their southern neighbors for spillover effect, whereas the Hongkongers can rely on boosters orchestrated by Beijing.
Reminds me a bit like the typhoon shelters they have in Hongkong. When the wind rises, stay behind the shelter. But China as an economic hinterland has served Hongkong better than the typhoon shelters in that typhoon shelters only provide shelter when the storm arrives, whereas China is in a position to do that plus providing indirect assistance when the storm has passed. How can Hongkong do without China? And why would Hongkongers not embrace this reunification with the mainland?
What about the Brits? They have their own problems in Europe. Anyhow, Hongkong was supposed to be a sort of cash, commodities and securities cow anyway, historically. Money and commodities out of Hongkong trade are meant for the benefit of the British Empire. And Hongkong's geographic location serves as an asset in Britain's quest to play a part in global security.
What can we learn from this relationship between Hongkong and China? Plenty! As long as we keep our minds open and forget all the norms experienced by the Western world and found in text books, for there has not been the equivalent of China and Hongkong in past history recorded by Western historians. It will also serve to remind smaller countries next to BIG hinterlands of the possibilities and varying degrees of assistance she can expect to tap from the bigger brother next to her. And these smaller countries must realize that they are not Hongkong in assessing their positions. Example: smaller countries like Luxembourg in Europe must understand that although they are European, they are not German or French.
Well I can only wish my Hongkongers and my friends there all the best in this newfound relationship. Democracy is great, but democracy must serve and look after its people. Too much talk of democracy without tangible benefits will leave too many poor people disgruntled and lead to unwanted instability.
Saturday, 30 June 2007
Protectionsim - does it work?
Sometimes its so refreshing to travel. Had the chance to spend a few days in Kuala Lumpur.
Malaysia is still Malaysia. They've got a good economy going for them, but this thing about protection of Malays seems a bit antiquated. That European envoy who commented on the ills of this system got plenty of coverage in the Malaysian media and plenty of attention from Malaysians, including ministers and their cohorts. And they all rejected his comment. But will the protectionist policy work though? And who are they protecting the Malays against? Apparently Malaysian Chinese, who are also their own Malaysian citizens.
They keep saying that they need Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) to help them with their growth targets so as to sustain economic well being and employment levels in their countries (such as Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam & the other Asian economies). However they keep citing percentage growth rather than what the FDIs are doing to help their economies. A certain minister would say they managed to increase FDI by "x" percentage points over that of last year or over the figure 5 years ago. But do they realize that if there had not been such antiquated protectionist policies, FDI figures could have, and would probably have reached, a different level?
As long as they look politically good, as long as they can report an increment in FDI, they're happy. They never look at what others are attracting in terms of FDI. Have you ever heard the Malaysian trade minister saying that FDI growth in Malaysia is a "net" gain over those of the other Asian countries? That would really have qualifies as an achievement, right? Not percentage growth with our "eyes wide shut"? What's the point of boasting about the growth in FDI in your country when the others in Asia are enjoying growth in real terms, terms which accord them the opportunity to not only grow their economies but also to restructure them so they are better geared towards the era of globalisation and to better handle the threats of emerging economic behemoths like India and China?
This isn't only about Malaysia. The Indonesians, and possibly the Thais, are the same. Just because they had an extra one or two billion in FDI, they're happy and able to report to their respective parliaments and people that they've done great jobs in attracting foreign investments ( and hence deserve to be re-elected). The technocrats in those governments are Harvard trained, or trained in a foreign tertiary institution of equivalent stature. Surely they must have their mathematical models designed for "non protectionist" parameters to predict investments and growth in the ideal scenario.
This all boils down to politics I guess; but the immaturity of their growing middle class cannot be absolved of blame as well. This "new found" middle class is easily manipulated; and in the case of Indonesia and possibly Thailand as well, they can be easily coerced or bribed into speaking on behalf of their politicians' ends rather than what is REALLY good for their country and for their people. Sad isn't it, considering they have so many people below the poverty line who are not likely to be able to get out of the poverty trap in their lifetimes, or maybe even the lifetimes of their children?
Perhaps they'll have to stick to lontong sayur for the rest of their lives, which isn't bad for nutrition. Most of the impoverished cannot even afford lontong sayur. They need money to buy rice to make lontong and have to till their lands for the vegetables (sayur), assuming their lands have not been appropriated by corrupt officials to build golf courses or shopping malls.
But why do they elect governments after governments who have no wish to tend to their interests? They don't, actually. For a few US Dollars, these poor and impoverished people are prepared to sell their votes to the highest bidder, thereby letting them decide their fates, as well as theirs of their children.
Money politics, they say. So do they have any hope at all?
Malaysia is still Malaysia. They've got a good economy going for them, but this thing about protection of Malays seems a bit antiquated. That European envoy who commented on the ills of this system got plenty of coverage in the Malaysian media and plenty of attention from Malaysians, including ministers and their cohorts. And they all rejected his comment. But will the protectionist policy work though? And who are they protecting the Malays against? Apparently Malaysian Chinese, who are also their own Malaysian citizens.
They keep saying that they need Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) to help them with their growth targets so as to sustain economic well being and employment levels in their countries (such as Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam & the other Asian economies). However they keep citing percentage growth rather than what the FDIs are doing to help their economies. A certain minister would say they managed to increase FDI by "x" percentage points over that of last year or over the figure 5 years ago. But do they realize that if there had not been such antiquated protectionist policies, FDI figures could have, and would probably have reached, a different level?
As long as they look politically good, as long as they can report an increment in FDI, they're happy. They never look at what others are attracting in terms of FDI. Have you ever heard the Malaysian trade minister saying that FDI growth in Malaysia is a "net" gain over those of the other Asian countries? That would really have qualifies as an achievement, right? Not percentage growth with our "eyes wide shut"? What's the point of boasting about the growth in FDI in your country when the others in Asia are enjoying growth in real terms, terms which accord them the opportunity to not only grow their economies but also to restructure them so they are better geared towards the era of globalisation and to better handle the threats of emerging economic behemoths like India and China?
This isn't only about Malaysia. The Indonesians, and possibly the Thais, are the same. Just because they had an extra one or two billion in FDI, they're happy and able to report to their respective parliaments and people that they've done great jobs in attracting foreign investments ( and hence deserve to be re-elected). The technocrats in those governments are Harvard trained, or trained in a foreign tertiary institution of equivalent stature. Surely they must have their mathematical models designed for "non protectionist" parameters to predict investments and growth in the ideal scenario.
This all boils down to politics I guess; but the immaturity of their growing middle class cannot be absolved of blame as well. This "new found" middle class is easily manipulated; and in the case of Indonesia and possibly Thailand as well, they can be easily coerced or bribed into speaking on behalf of their politicians' ends rather than what is REALLY good for their country and for their people. Sad isn't it, considering they have so many people below the poverty line who are not likely to be able to get out of the poverty trap in their lifetimes, or maybe even the lifetimes of their children?
Perhaps they'll have to stick to lontong sayur for the rest of their lives, which isn't bad for nutrition. Most of the impoverished cannot even afford lontong sayur. They need money to buy rice to make lontong and have to till their lands for the vegetables (sayur), assuming their lands have not been appropriated by corrupt officials to build golf courses or shopping malls.
But why do they elect governments after governments who have no wish to tend to their interests? They don't, actually. For a few US Dollars, these poor and impoverished people are prepared to sell their votes to the highest bidder, thereby letting them decide their fates, as well as theirs of their children.
Money politics, they say. So do they have any hope at all?
Tuesday, 19 June 2007
Where's the Chinese bubble & when will it burst
"Sir" Dr. Marc Faber is probably right - I think he deserves the "SIR" that I've added. Despite what was said by Messrs. Alan Greenspan, Li Ka Shing and other eminent economists and politicians, the Chinese bubble appears to be here to stay.
Considering that the savings rate in China is still much higher than what they've put into the stock markets (if I remember "Sir" Marc correctly, it's in the 70 to 80 percent region), it isn't surprising that "Sir" Marc's opinion differs from that of Messrs Greenspan,, Li and the others. Mr. Li, the richest man in Hongkong said on TV that PEs of 50 to 60 times cannot conceivably be unsustainable in China. But does the conventional rules of economics apply to the new-China we're seeing today? We'll have to wait and see.
Great thinkers, the likes of Adam Smith and Milton Keynes, studied trends and theorized the rules of macro and micro economics. But how could they have foreseen that the critical masses of one billion plus people in China and India can radically change the ground rules of 20th Century economic theories? It's not unlike the chain reaction in an atom or hydrogen bomb, I thought!
Remember what happened when stock markets went through continual downside corrections when oil prices shot up after escalating conflicts in the Middle East in the past, and most recently 2006? Then there's this latest round of oil price increases caused by Iran's seemingly uncompromising stance (so far at least) in their pursuit of nuclear "advancement" which hardly dented the global stock markets.
The world is going through changes, and global economies are constantly in a state of flux. Should we adapt to this changing world and start questioning economic theories of the years or decades gone by? Or do we hang on to these theories to lead us to the light at the end of the tunnel?
There are plenty of learned people on earth who constantly analyze and hypothesize through the use of sophisticated mathematical models and equations. I'm quite sure they are doing a great job, and earning lots of money along the way. But how many of these are open minded enough to realign their mindsets the way "Sir" Dr. Marc Faber did?
Don't get me wrong. I'm not a die hard fan of "Sir" Marc. But, I do honestly feel that he makes sense a lot of times I get to see and hear him comment. No disrespect to Messrs Greenspan and Li, whom I'm also a BIG fan of, mainly because of their achievements, stature and influence on this globalized economy which we're all a part of.
"So keep rocking "Sir" Marc", I would say to the man if I get to meet him face to face one day.
Considering that the savings rate in China is still much higher than what they've put into the stock markets (if I remember "Sir" Marc correctly, it's in the 70 to 80 percent region), it isn't surprising that "Sir" Marc's opinion differs from that of Messrs Greenspan,, Li and the others. Mr. Li, the richest man in Hongkong said on TV that PEs of 50 to 60 times cannot conceivably be unsustainable in China. But does the conventional rules of economics apply to the new-China we're seeing today? We'll have to wait and see.
Great thinkers, the likes of Adam Smith and Milton Keynes, studied trends and theorized the rules of macro and micro economics. But how could they have foreseen that the critical masses of one billion plus people in China and India can radically change the ground rules of 20th Century economic theories? It's not unlike the chain reaction in an atom or hydrogen bomb, I thought!
Remember what happened when stock markets went through continual downside corrections when oil prices shot up after escalating conflicts in the Middle East in the past, and most recently 2006? Then there's this latest round of oil price increases caused by Iran's seemingly uncompromising stance (so far at least) in their pursuit of nuclear "advancement" which hardly dented the global stock markets.
The world is going through changes, and global economies are constantly in a state of flux. Should we adapt to this changing world and start questioning economic theories of the years or decades gone by? Or do we hang on to these theories to lead us to the light at the end of the tunnel?
There are plenty of learned people on earth who constantly analyze and hypothesize through the use of sophisticated mathematical models and equations. I'm quite sure they are doing a great job, and earning lots of money along the way. But how many of these are open minded enough to realign their mindsets the way "Sir" Dr. Marc Faber did?
Don't get me wrong. I'm not a die hard fan of "Sir" Marc. But, I do honestly feel that he makes sense a lot of times I get to see and hear him comment. No disrespect to Messrs Greenspan and Li, whom I'm also a BIG fan of, mainly because of their achievements, stature and influence on this globalized economy which we're all a part of.
"So keep rocking "Sir" Marc", I would say to the man if I get to meet him face to face one day.
Saturday, 2 June 2007
Thai politics - need a compass?
The Thai constitutional court has ruled at last. And the TRT party has lost, as expected. So where are the Thais headed?
Somewhat like Japan where the cushy bureaucrats and politicians would rather retain the status quo. Look at what happened to that young entrepreneur who tried to capitalize on the internet boom in Japan? He came up with something unconventional, and perhaps more in tune with current economic environment; yet the "old timers" can't seem to accept this young radical chap in changing, or perhaps reforming, the business landscape. Soon, it turned political, and a "sort of" witch hunt ensued. Obviously he was prosecuted.
Look at Thaksin, minus the alleged corrupt practises. He and his TRT party is the only one to have won a parliamentary majority in a land so used to coalition governments and coup d'etats. What he did to the poor northern peasants doesn't seem to ring the same bells with the "old boys" in Bangkok.
And then this sage about Singapore's Temasek Holdings who bought over Thaksin's telecommunications company, which also included control of a satellite. Suddenly the nation is gripped with nationalism and are being led to believe that Singapore can actually tap into their satellite communications detrimental to the security of Thailand. Common!
Like what the Indonesian Defense Minister said when he was lobbying his parliament to rectify the defense treaty signed between Singapore and Indonesia. Why should Indonesia feel threatened? It was reported in the press that he said words to the effect that Singapore has no offensive aspirations; and if Singapore were bombed, the island will sink. Which is true.
Singapore only has 4 million odd people while Indonesia has 200 million plus. Even if Sun Tzu were alive, he would have recommended that Singapore avoid direct confrontation and seek diplomatic means of resolving matters. Or if Singapore can, seek alliance with an immediate power who might counter balance the inferior numbers of Singapore viz-a-viz Indonesia. Or perhaps protect Singapore from further intimidation by her bigger neighbors. But who can this power be?
The USA is too far away and has her plates full with Iraq, North Korea and Iran. Australia isn't in a position to be that power for it need its neighbor Indonesia to ensure stability and to cooperate in anti-terrorism efforts. China? Well not for the next 30 years anyway for China is busy with its economic agenda and has to manage the deep economic divide between her rural poor and the urban rich. Furthermore, she also has to worry about the growing pro-independence drift in Taiwan.
Indonesia has become emboldened by Thailand's moves against Temasek Singapore. Suddenly, their own telcos like Indosat and Telkomsel are being accused of price fixing just because Temasek and its subsidiaries own the two companies. Is this the true spirit of a free market, or nationalist feelings at play, or is it part of a grander scheme orchestrated by some big Russian telco in cohort with corrupt Indonesian officials as reported in the Straits Times of Singapore and the Jakarta Post of Indonesia? Who knows.
One can never be certain in Asia. So many factors are in play. A young democracy in Indonesia, a junta in Thailand trying to appease their people and the international community, communist Vietnam trying to ride the wave and benefit from the allure of capitalism, a reforming Malaysia whose "somewhat militant" former premier handpicked a more reform minded premier to succeed him. Then there's China and India. The economic powerhouses of the new millennium!
But we mustn't forget the power the old kingdoms wield! Look at Iran. The slightest hint of nuclear armament is enough to throw the whole world into disarray. The USA, Japan, China, India and almost all economies in the world are dependent on oil to keep their economies growing. The more they need oil, the more petrodollars the Middle East will earn.
Perhaps a sort of holocaust will help to re-balance the whole equation. Perhaps. But the costs will be too heavy to mankind than mankind can handle.
Somewhat like Japan where the cushy bureaucrats and politicians would rather retain the status quo. Look at what happened to that young entrepreneur who tried to capitalize on the internet boom in Japan? He came up with something unconventional, and perhaps more in tune with current economic environment; yet the "old timers" can't seem to accept this young radical chap in changing, or perhaps reforming, the business landscape. Soon, it turned political, and a "sort of" witch hunt ensued. Obviously he was prosecuted.
Look at Thaksin, minus the alleged corrupt practises. He and his TRT party is the only one to have won a parliamentary majority in a land so used to coalition governments and coup d'etats. What he did to the poor northern peasants doesn't seem to ring the same bells with the "old boys" in Bangkok.
And then this sage about Singapore's Temasek Holdings who bought over Thaksin's telecommunications company, which also included control of a satellite. Suddenly the nation is gripped with nationalism and are being led to believe that Singapore can actually tap into their satellite communications detrimental to the security of Thailand. Common!
Like what the Indonesian Defense Minister said when he was lobbying his parliament to rectify the defense treaty signed between Singapore and Indonesia. Why should Indonesia feel threatened? It was reported in the press that he said words to the effect that Singapore has no offensive aspirations; and if Singapore were bombed, the island will sink. Which is true.
Singapore only has 4 million odd people while Indonesia has 200 million plus. Even if Sun Tzu were alive, he would have recommended that Singapore avoid direct confrontation and seek diplomatic means of resolving matters. Or if Singapore can, seek alliance with an immediate power who might counter balance the inferior numbers of Singapore viz-a-viz Indonesia. Or perhaps protect Singapore from further intimidation by her bigger neighbors. But who can this power be?
The USA is too far away and has her plates full with Iraq, North Korea and Iran. Australia isn't in a position to be that power for it need its neighbor Indonesia to ensure stability and to cooperate in anti-terrorism efforts. China? Well not for the next 30 years anyway for China is busy with its economic agenda and has to manage the deep economic divide between her rural poor and the urban rich. Furthermore, she also has to worry about the growing pro-independence drift in Taiwan.
Indonesia has become emboldened by Thailand's moves against Temasek Singapore. Suddenly, their own telcos like Indosat and Telkomsel are being accused of price fixing just because Temasek and its subsidiaries own the two companies. Is this the true spirit of a free market, or nationalist feelings at play, or is it part of a grander scheme orchestrated by some big Russian telco in cohort with corrupt Indonesian officials as reported in the Straits Times of Singapore and the Jakarta Post of Indonesia? Who knows.
One can never be certain in Asia. So many factors are in play. A young democracy in Indonesia, a junta in Thailand trying to appease their people and the international community, communist Vietnam trying to ride the wave and benefit from the allure of capitalism, a reforming Malaysia whose "somewhat militant" former premier handpicked a more reform minded premier to succeed him. Then there's China and India. The economic powerhouses of the new millennium!
But we mustn't forget the power the old kingdoms wield! Look at Iran. The slightest hint of nuclear armament is enough to throw the whole world into disarray. The USA, Japan, China, India and almost all economies in the world are dependent on oil to keep their economies growing. The more they need oil, the more petrodollars the Middle East will earn.
Perhaps a sort of holocaust will help to re-balance the whole equation. Perhaps. But the costs will be too heavy to mankind than mankind can handle.
Sunday, 27 May 2007
Xiao Long Bao made with hairy crab
Some friends took me to this restaurant in a 5 star hotel in Jakarta which serves all sorts of northern Chinese delicacies with hairy crab meat and roe in it, including the infamous xiao long bao. This restaurant hails from Shanghai, so including hairy crab as part of the ingredients is understandable.
My friend said that this restaurant has to be halal (no pork) in order to cater to rich Indonesians in south Jakarta. Since they cannot use pork which is the normal ingredient in xiao long bao and other delicacies, using hairy crab with chicken is a novel approach. Besides they get to charge much higher prices than ones made of beef - each xiao long bao made from hairy crab costs about USD1 more than one made from beef.
There's no end to one's imagination. They've come up with beef bacon for breakfast and your club sandwiches in Muslim countries like Indonesia; or turkey ham which I thought was a far cry from the normal ham. The Chinese have their vegetarian versions of cha siew and roasted goose made from truly vegetarian ingredients such as beancurd, treated of course to give that tender taste associated with the original cha siew, and crispy like the skin of and roasted goose. We humans are very entrepreneurial. Is it to survive or is it to profit? Depends on how you look at it really.
In Indonesia, the nasi padang restaurants are normally no frills. All the food is prepared in the morning and left in glass display cabinets (like the ones you buy pens and watches) and one is charged by the amount one eats from the plates. So if they serve you a plate of curry chicken with 3 pieces and you eat only one of those 3 pieces, the "untouched" chicken is returned and not charged. May sound strange, and possibly unhygienic, to some of you but they've been doing that for ages so everyone here is used to it. The food is always cold, from being left in cabinets since they were cooked.
But in Singapore, Hongkong and some parts of Malaysia, specialized nasi padang restaurants exist which serve their food hot and the dishes are normally cooked as you order them - no returning of untouched food like Indonesia. Some places in Singapore display their food in cabinets similar to Indonesia's, but will heat the food up before serving them for two reasons: Singaporeans don't normally like cold food unless its a dessert, and reheating them for a few minutes do fit closer with hygiene norms there. Alternatively, some may display the food in glass cabinets but keep them warm with constant heating.
Once I had a "personalized" steamboat in a small restaurant in Beijing which was quite impressive. It is common to have personalized steamboat like shabu-shabu in Japanese restaurants as the Japanese are more hygiene conscious than the Chinese. But having that in Beijing was a pleasant surprise. So much was written about risks of catching hepatitis and other communicable diseases from sharing "common" food which is the normal way to eat Chinese food, I can't turn down an invitation to have traditional Chinese steam boat with my own personal pot.
See there's no end to evolution in this world. We can enjoy anything we like in the context of current developments and concerns, be they for hygienic or other reasons, as long as one leaves one's mind open.
My friend said that this restaurant has to be halal (no pork) in order to cater to rich Indonesians in south Jakarta. Since they cannot use pork which is the normal ingredient in xiao long bao and other delicacies, using hairy crab with chicken is a novel approach. Besides they get to charge much higher prices than ones made of beef - each xiao long bao made from hairy crab costs about USD1 more than one made from beef.
There's no end to one's imagination. They've come up with beef bacon for breakfast and your club sandwiches in Muslim countries like Indonesia; or turkey ham which I thought was a far cry from the normal ham. The Chinese have their vegetarian versions of cha siew and roasted goose made from truly vegetarian ingredients such as beancurd, treated of course to give that tender taste associated with the original cha siew, and crispy like the skin of and roasted goose. We humans are very entrepreneurial. Is it to survive or is it to profit? Depends on how you look at it really.
In Indonesia, the nasi padang restaurants are normally no frills. All the food is prepared in the morning and left in glass display cabinets (like the ones you buy pens and watches) and one is charged by the amount one eats from the plates. So if they serve you a plate of curry chicken with 3 pieces and you eat only one of those 3 pieces, the "untouched" chicken is returned and not charged. May sound strange, and possibly unhygienic, to some of you but they've been doing that for ages so everyone here is used to it. The food is always cold, from being left in cabinets since they were cooked.
But in Singapore, Hongkong and some parts of Malaysia, specialized nasi padang restaurants exist which serve their food hot and the dishes are normally cooked as you order them - no returning of untouched food like Indonesia. Some places in Singapore display their food in cabinets similar to Indonesia's, but will heat the food up before serving them for two reasons: Singaporeans don't normally like cold food unless its a dessert, and reheating them for a few minutes do fit closer with hygiene norms there. Alternatively, some may display the food in glass cabinets but keep them warm with constant heating.
Once I had a "personalized" steamboat in a small restaurant in Beijing which was quite impressive. It is common to have personalized steamboat like shabu-shabu in Japanese restaurants as the Japanese are more hygiene conscious than the Chinese. But having that in Beijing was a pleasant surprise. So much was written about risks of catching hepatitis and other communicable diseases from sharing "common" food which is the normal way to eat Chinese food, I can't turn down an invitation to have traditional Chinese steam boat with my own personal pot.
See there's no end to evolution in this world. We can enjoy anything we like in the context of current developments and concerns, be they for hygienic or other reasons, as long as one leaves one's mind open.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)