Categories
Politics & government

[950] Of Lamont lost to Lieberman!

OMG!

Well, folks, the darling of the libby-lib bloggers, Ned Lamont, just conceded, as some of you might have seen. We’re not surprised; he just never managed to successfully broaden his campaign beyond his one-issue battle over the Iraq war with Senator Joe Lieberman, the Democratic incumbent for 18 years who was forced to run as an independent by his primary loss to Mr. Lamont.

I had expected Lamont to win, especially when this midterm election has become the unofficial referendum for war. It’s odd to see a symbol of anti-war to lose out. Furthermore, this is probably a smack in the face for all Democrats in Connecticut.

For those that predicted Lamont to be the next President of the United States, you might want to rethink your prediction.

Regardless, as of 11:39 Malaysian time, the Democrats have captured three seats in the Senate and another five in the House. However, despite Lamont’s loss, everything seems to be going smoothly so far. If everything goes it is right now, the Greens will be coming to power. By proxy!

Despite the fact that I’m happy with the current result, I hope the pressure for protectionism in the US won’t be too great to resist.

Anyway, track the Senate, the House and the Governorship race at the NYT.

p/s – congratulations, Governor Granholm.

Categories
Politics & government Society

[948] Of defining Bangsa Malaysia

What is Bangsa Malaysia exactly?

Is it an assimilation policy to create an united race?

Is it a multicultural policy that celebrates cultural diversity?

Is it simply about the citizenship of Malaysia?

Is it about equality?

Is it about Malay rights?

Is it something else altogether?

Is it about nothing at all?

Somebody. Help me. Please.

A lot of people are giving me contradictory answers and I’m officially confused. For instance, Dr. Rais Yatim said:

IDENTIFYING oneself as Bangsa Malaysia does not mean that one forgets one’s race, culture, heritage and other practices, said Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim.

“Each of us is a Malay, Chinese, Indian or other race first, but at the same time, we belong to Bangsa Malaysia. This is because we share a common destiny, common interest socially, politically and economically,” said the minister for Culture, Arts and Heritage.

But Dr. Mahathir said:

In August, Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad made a plea for “Bangsa Malaysia” – a united Malaysian Nation in which being a Malaysian is the thing, not being Malay, Chinese, Indian, Iban or Kadazan. It means “people being able to identify themselves with the country, speak Bahasa Malaysia and accept the Constitution,” said Mahathir.

Then, Najib Razak said:

JOHOR BARU: The Bangsa Malaysia concept is the state of an individual’s mind and does not infringe on Malay special rights and privileges, said Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

The Deputy Prime Minister said Bangsa Malaysia was a concept and had nothing to do with the Constitution or national policies, but was related to an individual’s state of mind.

“Bangsa Malaysia means we do not evaluate someone by his skin colour, race or religion,” Najib said when closing the Johor Umno Convention at Persada Johor here yesterday.

“It does not question the special rights of the Malays, our quota or anything of that sort.”

Before we start banging on each other head, let’s define the term first, shall we?

I hate shooting bullets at somebody while not knowing why am I shooting the bullets in the first place.

Categories
Activism Politics & government

[947] Of free NYT TimesSelect for a week

Did you love the Op-Ed section of the New York Times? Did you say “shit” when NYT tried to make you pay for its addictive Op-Ed? Are you missing Krugman, Kristof, Brooks, Dowd, et alii?

Well, thank you to Philips, the Op-Ed section is now available for free for the whole week. You can even dig up NYT archives! Well, only partly. Still, how cool is that?

NYT calls it Free Access Week. I call it, w00t week! Read them all while you can!

Heh. NYT is probably trying to influence public opinion as far as the midterm election is concerned.

Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[945] Of Saddam Hussein’s verdict

Former President of Iraq is sentenced to death:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) — Saddam Hussein was convicted and sentenced Sunday to death by hanging for war crimes in the 1982 killings of 148 people in the town of Dujail, as the former leader, trembling, shouted “God is great!”

As he, his half brother and another senior official in his regime were convicted and sentenced to hang, Saddam yelled out, “Long live the people and death to their enemies. Long live the glorious nation, and death to its enemies!”

Though a dictator he was, merciless in his reign, I feel a hint of pity for him. From my point of view, life imprisonment would suffice. A little show of mercy would have been more powerful as an example than a simple act of revenge.

Categories
Economics Environment Politics & government

[939] Of climate change and global warming are market failures

From time to time, somebody will point it out to me that libertarianism and environmentalism have opposing ideas in them. Perhaps.

I however manage to merge the two philosophies together because I understand market failure (as well as externality). The concept of market failure is what many libertarians refuse to accept despite the economics behind it. I’d be damned if I ignore market failure and call myself a graduate of economics. I reached to this conclusion when I first encountered tragedy of the commons as an economics undergraduate.

I’m a classical liberal in the sense that I’ll accept market solutions as superior to government solutions as long as market failures are absent, in most cases.

A few days ago, British economist Nicholas Stern published the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change:

The scientific evidence is now overwhelming: climate change presents very serious global risks, and it demands an urgent global response.

This independent Review was commissioned by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, reporting to both the Chancellor and to the Prime Minister, as a contribution to assessing the evidence and building understanding of the economics of climate change.

The Review first examines the evidence on the economic impacts of climate change itself, and explores the economics of stabilising greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The second half of the Review considers the complex policy challenges involved in managing the transition to a low-carbon economy and in ensuring that societies can adapt to the consequences of climate change that can no longer be avoided.

The Review takes an international perspective. Climate change is global in its causes and consequences, and international collective action will be critical in driving an effective, efficient and equitable response on the scale required. This response will require deeper international co-operation in many areas – most notably in creating price signals and markets for carbon, spurring technology research, development and deployment, and promoting adaptation, particularly for developing countries.

Climate change presents a unique challenge for economics: it is the greatest and widest-ranging market failure ever seen. The economic analysis must therefore be global, deal with long time horizons, have the economics of risk and uncertainty at centre stage, and examine the possibility of major, non-marginal change. To meet these requirements, the Review draws on ideas and techniques from most of the important areas of economics, including many recent advance, including many recent advances.

Climate change and global warming induced by human are forms of market failure and externality, as with many other environmental problems.