Categories
Economics Society

[2632] The worthlessness and the vestige of gold

In the olden days when four-legged beasts were the best mode of land transportation, gold was money. Everyday transactions involved gold and other precious metals as the medium of exchange then, just as paper money now dominates transactions in the modern economy. Gold had a very special position in human culture then due to its fundamental functions. It is still special today, but only because of vestigial reasons.

During the European Age of Exploration, Portuguese and Spanish explorers crossed the seas under the guises of God, Gold and Glory. The truth is that it was never really about god and religion. It was about the gold more than anything else. When Hernán Cortés and Francisco Pizarro first set for the heart of Aztec and Inca separately, they were dreaming of the glittering yellow metal for themselves.

As other European powers rose to take their place in history, the search for gold became less explicit. The new explorers, traders and later colonialists did not go out in search of El Dorado but it was still about amassing wealth through commerce. It was less explicitly about gold but yet, wealth was very much denominated in gold still.

Sometime during the industrial era, gold and other precious metals lost their function as the medium of exchange. They were no longer circulated as widely as they were during pre-industrial period. It was all papers and coins by the time motorcars, trains and steamboats were crisscrossing the world. By the 20th century, the dominance of papers was almost absolute.

Nevertheless, all money was still backed by gold and other precious metals.  Papers and coins struck out of cheaper materials were merely claims to those precious metals. All issuers promised to convert those papers and coins to gold upon demand. So, gold may have lost its role as a medium of exchange during industrial times but it was still the ultimate arbiter of the value of money.

That last real function of gold ended in the 1970s. The United States government ended the direct convertibility of the US dollar to gold as a reaction to an economic crisis. Soon after, the world followed in ditching the convertibility and thus, gold stopped being special.

Many continued to believe that money, even in Malaysia, is backed by gold but the truth is that all economies in the world today run on fiat currency. That is, money today has value only because its issuers say so and the market believes the words of the issuers.

To put it in clearer terms, gold has no importance to modern central banking.

Of value instead to the modern central banking system — and the wider economic system — as far as money is concerned is trust. Indeed, at the heart of capitalism, is trust but not gold. Capitalism can survive without gold—it is running affirmatively better without gold—but it cannot survive without trust.

So, gold has no fundamental economic function to play anymore in our modern world. Gold is neither a medium of exchange nor does it back any money. Because of this, gold really does not deserve the reputation it enjoys now.

The reputation of gold lives on only because of humanity’s vestigial attitude towards gold.

The phenomenon is much like in the case of Pavlov’s dog. The dog learned that a ringing bell meant food. The dog then began salivating at the sound of the ringing bell instead of at the food per se. It did so even when food was not present. At the end of the day, the dog had been conditioned to salivate to something else entirely. In some ways, the dog had been tricked.

In the same way the dog had been conditioned, humanity has been conditioned to think favorably of gold. Gold has seeped into our consciousness regardless of the fact that gold now has no fundamental economic function anymore. So persistent in fact the favorable predisposition towards gold that too many laypersons still believe that money today is backed by gold, despite the abolition of such a system more than four decades ago.

The momentum of history is huge and it takes time for humanity as a whole to adapt to the new reality of fiat currency.

The failure to adapt can exert cost especially on the gullible. The case of Genneva is one example where individuals were cheated out of their vestigial sentiment for gold.

Believing that gold had a special place in the modern world, they too eagerly bought the metal from Genneva while not realizing that they were being manipulated. It is only too bad that reality had to set in and the scam had to end. Actions by the authority in both Malaysia and Singapore only hastened the inevitable collapse of Genneva, just as any large-scale scam eventually will under of its own weight.

Of course, financial scams come in so many other ways and gold is not an exclusive tool for scams. Old-styled Ponzi scheme relies on just money, plain old greed and some doses of gullibility. Still, the obsession with gold is unhealthy. The sooner we all realize that there is nothing special about gold anymore, better we all will be.

After the learning is complete then perhaps we may start to put our money into something more productive than the vestige of gold.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved
First published in Selangor Times on November 23 2012.

Categories
Economics Politics & government

[2623] The death of politics of development

I was Sarawak for two weeks in early 2011. It was election time and the campaigning period was well underway.

From my observation, I think I can conclude that the politics of development is very much alive in Sarawak. It is not hard to understand why.

While the standard of living in Kuching, the state capital, was respectable, a number of communities just outside of the city limits still did not have access to the local electricity grid. They wanted electricity. On the road to Bau, the residents complained how dark it was at night along the road. They wanted streetlights. The journey to Sri Aman meanwhile felt like a mild rollercoaster ride. Users wanted a smoother and wider road.

The politics of development there is very much about physical infrastructure. It is about promises and execution of development. Incumbents make lavish promises for more and better infrastructures. Challengers harp on unfulfilled promises.

While there were other concerns lingering in the mind of Sarawakian voters I am sure (indeed, it would be a remiss if I did not mention that the Chief Minister of Sarawak, a popular brand of lightning rod among urban voters), the way the campaigns were sometimes framed was as if the primary concern was development. It was a matter of whether the electorates should reward the incumbents for a job well done, or punish them for not bringing in sufficient development.

To be sure, the politics of development is relevant not only to Sarawak, but also to other places throughout the country. Else, the authority would not have paved the roads just before a critical election.

In other places where road connections are respectable, with clean water supply and electricity taken for granted, the same brand of politics is less appealing to the electorates.

Voters in these places—likely urbanites—have expectations too sophisticated than anything the politics of development can cater to. Educated urbanites are no longer mostly concerned about physical infrastructure. They will shrug it off and they will probably return to say that mere development is no longer enough. There are other concerns.

That comes close to what economist Amartya Sen has articulated in one of his books, Freedom as Development. He argued that development should be understood in its widest sense. Economic development is not merely about paved road, tall buildings and everything that is concrete but it is also about the soft aspect of individual freedom. It is about individual empowerment. Institutions should be created and improved so that individual freedom is guaranteed.

With such freedom, individuals can take upon themselves to promote their own welfare. After all, the end of development is enhancement of individual welfare.

So, freedom is one of the necessary means of development and the focus on physical development alone is not enough.

And if one subscribes to something similar to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs where individuals prioritize economic well-being and other basic needs over political rights, then perhaps, for many Malaysians, the basic needs for brick and mortar development have been fulfilled. Any more of that kind of development returns less satisfaction than it did before. Now, the same Malaysians may want to fulfill other needs down the list that they have ignored previously.

So, faced with the widened definition of development, the old way of doing things becomes inadequate.

There are at least two major cases illustrating how the traditional development argument alone is insufficient and sometimes rejected altogether because it clashes so nakedly against other concerns. One will bring us to Pahang, where Lynas is building a rare earth processing plant. The other will bring us to Johor, where Petronas is investing in a massive petrochemical complex.

The proponents of the projects have highlighted the projects’ merits: foreign investment, jobs creation, technology transfer, tax revenue, etc. In a society that hungers for more old development, the projects would have gained popular support.

Yet the projects face popular opposition for a variety of reasons, the most notable perhaps being environmental and health concerns. In the past, not too many would oppose such development. Many needed it. Today, the acceptance of development comes with conditions. The conditionality is a sign of the end of the old politics of development.

The politics of development itself suffers from fatalism. Its appeals will end because development, whether the narrow definition or the more holistic one, is not an end by itself. It is a mean to an end. What is the appeal of the promises of more development, when we are nearing the very end that any development aimed for? What is the appeal, when we are at the end? We already have it.

The politics of development only lasts as long as development has not reached its stated end. The death of development politics is the natural ending for any successful development.

Only failure prolongs the life of old-style development politics.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved
First published in Selangor Times on October 26 2012.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved
nb — I am disatifised with this particular essay. I initially had wanted to make the connection about how politicians who have engaged or engaging on the politics of development can no longer expect gratitute from voters because of the death of the politics of development. I also wanted to highlight that there are pockets where politics of development still work but I was running out of time and space to expand on the idea. I also suffered from writer’s block. Those are the reasons why the final part of the essay seems rushed. Verbosity is the death of me.

Categories
Economics

[2598] Growth yes, but not by all means

The traditional understanding of economic growth has its fair share of criticism.  It has been criticized as being overly materialistic and overly focused on production with disregard for its side effects. Those with esoteric worldviews would accuse such progress as spiritually empty and unfulfilling.

While it is true that such understanding of growth does not take into account our human experience comprehensively—and possibly nothing can—it is very important nonetheless.

Try living in a period when the gross domestic product and its typical variants that measure the mainstream idea of economic growth register a contraction. All the fancy criticism will take a backseat as very real economic pain hits far too many persons.

It is in that sense that the traditional idea of economic growth matters. There is something profoundly substantive about it; when economy does not growth, you will feel it, whatever your reservations about the mainstream understanding of the economy.

Yet, this piece is not a defense of the status quo, even as I do sit in the status quo camp.

Rather I write this to criticize those who pursue growth for growth’s sake. The way a society grows matters even within the current status quo framework. As a result, there is such a thing as mindless growth and mindless growth is one that focuses fully on how fast the GDP grows and not how it grows.

The clearest example happened on the days after the official GDP figures for the second quarter of 2012 were announced in the middle of August.

The Malaysian economy grew by 5.4% from a year ago in real terms. The growth rate beat market projection and forced the gloomiest of private economists to upgrade their economic projection for the whole year.

While external factors continued to exert strong negative influence on growth, the domestic economy grew strongly still. The primary reason why the domestic economy grew was due to extraordinarily strong private consumption.

It is hard to explain fully why consumption in the private economy—primarily spending of households as well as private firms—grew as strongly as it did. Troubles abroad should affect domestic sentiment despite the excitement surrounding various projects related to the Economic Transformation Program embarked by the government. But it did not affect sentiment too badly.

One explanation for the strong private consumption growth was the cash transfer program (Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia or BR1M) which was introduced by the federal government. The cash transfer increased household wealth for some periods. The increased wealth effect in turn encouraged households to spend more. In a big way if I might add.

The commentariat has shared its piece of mind on the matter. Some has praised the cash transfer for boosting economic growth in Malaysia. The business section of the Straits Times in Singapore is one of which have sung praises to the cash transfer for the GDP growth that it had brought.

Unfortunately, this kind of growth is not the best of all growth possible. Such cash transfer is always merely temporary and growth arising from such temporary measures is not sustainable.

While cash transfer does have its merits within wider context—for instance, cash transfer is more efficient and less wasteful that subsidy in improving individual welfare from microeconomic point of view—growth arising from cash transfer should be received with a measured nod, and not by throwing in a party. One should acknowledge the growth the cash transfer program brought but one must also understand that without it, growth would have been less fantastic.

The counterfactual is important because it describes the more sustainable growth going forward.

Consumption growth arising from freebies from the government is not nearly as good as consumption arising from returns from productive investment or simply real growth in income won from effort. Growth from the latter is the sustainable growth and it is sustainable growth that will determine the long-run or future state of the economy, but a one-off freebie.

To put it differently, one wants growth from productive enterprise and not from an effort at redistribution.

Redistribution of wealth—whatever its merits income or wealth egalitarian perspective—cannot really be created by merely redistributing wealth. At risk of committing a tautology, one has to create wealth to create wealth in the big, long-run picture.

In contrast, to put it simply, cash transfer is only an act of borrowing from the future to consume today.

This is one aspect which growth for growth’s own sake is wrong. To repeat the message, how the economy grows matters.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved
First published in Selangor Times on September 21 2012.

Categories
Economics Society Travels

[2595] Good things happen to good people

If one looks at various socioeconomic statistics, it is easy to conclude how far behind Malaysia Cambodia is.

Yet superficially, if one landed in Siem Reap in north Cambodia, one would find it hard to differentiate rural Cambodia from rural Malaysia, apart from Khmer writing on the billboards and posters as well as the spoken language. The homes appeared Malay and the people themselves looked Malay. There were a number of times when a Cambodian spoke to me in Khmer, only to giggle finding out that I did not speak their tongue.

The substantive difference became clearer only once I was in the town of Siem Reap. Most parts of the town were dusty to present a Wild, Wild West impression. There was clear under investment in infrastructure. The statement on infrastructure was true elsewhere as well. There were not too many cars. Whatever seen on the road would be driven by westerners, or belonged to the government or some aid organizations. The locals would either ride a bicycle or a motorcycle generally instead.

The tuk-tuk and the likes formed the backbone of public transport. A Cambodian tuk-tuk is essentially a small cabin attached to a motorcycle.

In Siem Reap, Battambang and Phnom Penh, every single available tuk-tuk driver would hail me and ask if I needed a ride. Sometimes, it appeared almost everybody on the road honked at me to ask plainly, ”tuk-tuk?”

A college friend of mine whom I was traveling with me told me that her brother visited Cambodia a few years earlier. She joked that he was traumatized by the tuk-tuks. She went on to buy a tuk-tuk-themed T-shirt for him as a cruel souvenir.

The persistence was noteworthy and it did not end with the tuk-tuks.

As both of us explored the Angkor temple ruins littered throughout the land, children would approach us and beg us to buy something from them. It could be a bottle of cold water, a flute, a book, a piece of cloth, anything. They would beg in the softest of voices that would melt the heart of an untrained traveler. There was a hint of desperation in their voices. And they were persistent.

After a while I became desensitized to the incessant pleas, as many other travelers eventually did. My friend made the desensitization easier. She said we could not possibly help them all by purchasing everything from everybody.

What struck me the most, and informed me the most about the state of Cambodian society beyond the cold statistics, was our guide.

We employed a Cambodian guide, who led us into various ruins. He explained to us in detail the history, the story behind amazing Angkor’s bas-reliefs and shared tidbits about temples for a moment worth of amusement. We thoroughly enjoyed his company.

By the end of the day, we wanted to go to where we wanted to go and he had to go to where he had to go. We parted ways. We paid and thanked him for a splendid day.

He thanked us for the payment, as it is customary to do so. What was unusual was that he exhibited further unnecessary gratitude. He explicitly thanked us for providing him with employment.

It was quite clear that he not only wanted a job. He also needed it.

What I am about to do is an attempt at generalization. There are always perils at doing so but after observing the Cambodian society as a foreigner, I do think Cambodia has a bright future.

It is true that it is poor now, with children working on the streets when they are supposed to be in school.

Yet, I do not believe those rough edges are enough to negate my optimism. I am optimistic because Cambodians in general appeared to have that hunger to move forward and leave the past behind.

Life in the capital Phnom Penh is the symbol of that hunger. The city is not as modern as Kuala Lumpur and it will be many years before the two are at parity.

Nevertheless, Phnom Penh is developing even as it maintains its old colonial charm. One can immediately feel the go-go spirit in the capital as one skyscraper or two slowly inches toward the sky, as the tuk-tuks laze across the city. The newly found Cambodian openness will further aid progress.

For years, Cambodia was held back by inward-looking world views. Judging by what I saw in Cambodia, from the rural north to the urban south, that self-damaging age has come to pass almost fully.

A new Cambodian era introduces its own issues.

Cambodians complain of corruption and suspicious political maneuvering. But as the society matures as it is inevitable with continuous economic progress that was impossible 30 or 40 years ago, chances are these issues will be arrested along the way to a more tolerable level.

I do hope Cambodia progresses to emerge out of its ancient Khmer predecessor’s shadow.

As I was haggling with a merchant at a market in Phnom Penh for an item, an American saw me and smiled. He approached me and said: ”They’ll take every penny from you. But they are good people.”

Good things are supposed to happen to good people.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved
First published in Selangor Times on September 7 2012.

Categories
Fiction Personal

[2457] A necessary lie

He remembers all too clearly what happened six months ago on the other side of the world as he stands among strangers under a statue of St Michel, waiting for an old dear friend to emerge from the Metro.

”Don’t bite your nails.”

”You’re starting to sound like my mother,” she replied to him sarcastically as both of them sat by the table, feeling a little bit nervous by each other’s presence. This was six months ago.

”Okay, but you should listen to your mother,” he said.

She gave a curt but a cute ”pfft”. Her reply made him smile, but he regretted saying what he said almost immediately. He didn’t want to annoy her unnecessarily, although such teasing was exactly the thing that brought them together in the first place. Life is so full of paradoxes.

”Why do you like to bite your fingernails, anyway?” He was genuinely curious.

”Well, that’s how I clip my nails.”

He wasn’t quite sure if she was either joking or being serious. The cultural gap between them was wide enough that one makes an assumption on one’s own peril. But he risked it anyway. He wanted to hear her voice. He wanted to see the expression on her face.

”Really? You expect me to believe that?” he incredulously asked.

She smiled, perhaps realizing the outrageousness of her statement. But it was true. She bit her nails to keep them tidy. Almost.

”Okay. Sometimes.”

”I don’t believe it. Give me your hands.” He grabbed both of her hands and inspected her fingernails, which were surprisingly neat.

”Wow” was all he could muster.

”I told you so,” she said almost mockingly as her smile became wider. She loved being right.

He didn’t quite think much of it at first. He had innocently taken her hands, but it soon struck him that they were holding hands for the first time. And in this cold weather, her hands were soothingly warm. They felt so comfortably soft. Holding them felt like a sinful sensual pleasure.

He felt guilty. He liked her but he also respected her. He didn’t want to turn her into a sensual object, a being that existed just to present this private moment to him.

Most importantly, he didn’t know how she felt towards him despite having gone out with her and having simple fun together several times already. Movies, dinners, kayaking, theatres, funfairs. He knew he liked her, but a relationship such as this must always be mutual. He was still unsure, but he couldn’t ask her. One cannot be too explicit with these things.

He didn’t want to be presumptuous about whatever happening between them. It could be that they enjoyed each other’s company as friends and nothing more. If that was the case, then he didn’t want to ruin it. He could live with being close friends, but he couldn’t imagine losing her completely.

He decided to loosen his grip, even if reluctantly. The conflicting emotions were tearing him apart. No longer smiling, she must have realized whatever he felt. His hands were slipping away slowly but surely.

But she wouldn’t let that happen. She quickly took his hands and held them tightly. And she smiled at him, hoping to assure him of something.

”Merci, mademoiselle.”

He sighs forlornly in the cold Paris, ruing how time has changed. He wants to meet her for one more time, but something tells him that that isn’t the best of all ideas. Another friend of his was convinced that it is the worst of all ideas.

”It’s the end. You’ll suffer more if you meet her again,” the friend said.

”I know, but I just want to see her again for one last time,” he stubbornly replied. ”I need to see her again, just for one more time.”

”You’re a sucker for pain, you know that. You going there will only hurt both of you. You need to move on and get over her.”

Whatever it is, it is too late to back out now. There she is, walking straight towards him, smiling and looking beautiful, as she has always been.

He smiles back, partly relieved to see her again, partly devastated that he won’t be able to hold her hands again.

”Hi…” she says rather nervously, wearing a smile to hide, perhaps, the past. ”How have you been?”

In his mind, he wants to say I miss you so much. He doesn’t. Instead: ”I’m feeling great, and I’m excited to be here for the first time.”

A necessary lie, perhaps.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved
First published in Selangor Times on November 4 2011.