Categories
Economics Society

[1166] Of wanna work in the US?

Well, bad news:

On the day after it began receiving applications for H-1B work visas, the US Citizenship and Immigration Service reported yesterday it had already received more than double the number of applications it is permitted by law to grant for 2008. The same limit took two months to reach last year.

While H-1B grants are officially capped at 65,000, USCIS reported receiving over 150,000 applications as of Monday afternoon. [H-1B Visa Limits Hit After Only 1 Day. Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews. April 4 2007]

Hat tip to Jiinjoo.

Categories
Economics

[1158] Of keen Koreans and myopic Malaysians

In Malay, there is a saying that roughly goes “hendak seribu daya, tidak hendak seribu dalih“. It means where there is a will, there is a way. The proverb aptly describes the just recently agreed upon free trade deal between South Korea and the United States of America. The deal is agreed upon despite the fact that both parties missed the first two deadlines twice. As such, while “hendak seribu daya” belongs to the Korean, “tidak hendak seribu dalih” truly belongs to the Malaysian.

As reported by AP earlier:

The United States and South Korea successfully concluded a free trade agreement after almost 10 months of contentious negotiations, a U.S. official said Monday.

The deal, which requires legislative approval in both countries, is the biggest for the United States since the North American Free Trade Agreement signed in 1992 and ratified in 1993. It is the biggest ever for South Korea. [South Korea, U.S. Reach Free Trade Deal. AP via Forbes. April 2 2007.

With the deal, the South Koreans are probably going to move farther up the economic ladder, leaving behind Malaysia which is too scare to face the reality out there in the world. So far behind that we would, as our leaders ever so proudly declare, be first among third world nations.

We, unfortunately, seem to prefer to sit in the dark inside a box, ignoring the wave of changes outside the box. While South Korea will continue to roar, there we are, sleeping with policies crafted nearly half a century ago, thinking such outdated policies are our savior.

Between the world of wonders in one hand and world of stagnation in the other, Malaysia chooses the latter, thinking it is not worth it to be better tomorrow than what we are today. We would rather defend an outdated policy that has failed instead of creating new one that promises greater prosperity.

All is not lost though. Malaysia and the US plan to get back to the negotiation table in mid-April:

WASHINGTON, April 1 (Bernama) — Malaysia and the United States Saturday missed their deadline to submit a bilateral Free Trade Agreement (FTA) to the US Congress that would have secured fast-track approval from Capitol Hill.

US Ambassador to Malaysia Christopher LaFleur said here Friday “although the two countries won’t make the deadline, what’s important is not the timing but the substance of the agreement.”

The goal of the two countries was “to reach a high quality FTA that would benefit both countries,” he said when addressing the Malaysian-American Society at the American University here.

[…]

Meanwhile, US-Malaysia trade talks which stalled in Sabah will be revived in Washington in mid-April. [Malaysia And US Miss FTA Deadline. Bernama. April 2007]

The ambassador is right in every sense. Nevertheless, with the Democrats in control of Congress, it will be harder to get a free trade agreement that comes close to the the spirit of free trade. Further, previously, Malaysia had great advantage over the US negotiators. Time was the leverage and time was on our side.

Alas, that window had come and passed. With the end of the TPA, Malaysia now truly stands alone against a giant, unless we jumpstart the Doha round.

Categories
Economics

[1154] Of in the name of the few, at the expense of many

With one more day to catch the window granted to the US Trade Promotion Authority by the US Congress to fast track trade negotiations, it becomes increasingly clear that both the Malaysian and the US negotiators are going to miss it. As stated earlier, with the Democrats in control of the Congress, it would be hard to carve out a free trade agreement between the two countries without the TPA. The same scenario is applicable to the South Korea-US FTA:

SEOUL, South Korea — As the deadline looms for the potentially historic free-trade talks between the U.S. and South Korea, the biggest obstacles are turning out to involve the same thing as in most trade discussions: food.

The two countries aim to finish a comprehensive trade agreement Friday, the biggest such deal ever for Korea and since 1993 for the U.S., and one that is being closely watched by other countries. They still need to reach major compromises in areas such as automotive trade and investment protections, according to people close to the discussions.

But those aren’t areas that might cause the deal to fall apart, these people say. Instead, it is two commodities that are closer to the hearts of both sides-beef for the U.S. and rice for South Korea. [Food is biggest obstacle in Seoul-U.S. trade talks. WSJ Asia. March 30 2007]

Also, observe how the interest of many is held hostage by the few:

South Korean is afraid that boosting imports of beef and rice will hurt business for its farmers, though it would reduce food prices for a far greater number of its consumers. [Food is biggest obstacle in Seoul-U.S. trade talks. WSJ Asia. March 30 2007]

The same event is being played out in Malaysia, as in many other country, at the expense of many, in the name of the few.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p/s — One last try by the South Korean and the American:

March 31 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. and South Korea agreed to extend talks toward a free-trade agreement by 48 hours, said Kim Jong Hoon, the chief South Korean negotiator for the agreement.

“Both sides formed a consensus that additional negotiations would be helpful and necessary, and therefore the U.S. delegation discussed this closely with its government and the Congress overnight, and decided to extend the talks by 48 hours, to April 2, 1 a.m. Korea time,” Kim said. [U.S., South Korea Extend Their Free-Trade Talks. Bloomberg. March 31 2007.

For Malaysia, the deadline has officially passed, because we as Malaysians are too afraid to grasp for prosperity, in spite of our rich history as trading civilizations.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

pp/s — It is 1 A.M. in Seoul and no news has come out yet. I am assuming that the negotiation has officially failed.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

ppp/s — Wow. These people are serious. The deadline for the negotiation has been extended yet again:

SEOUL, April 2 (Yonhap) — Top-level officials from South Korea and the United States struggled Monday to come up with major compromises in their final stage of negotiations on a proposed free trade agreement (FTA), with the deadline for the talks extended for the second time in two days. [South Korea-U.S. FTA talks go past extended deadline to salvage deal. Yonhap News. April 2 2007]

Damn. I wish that was Malaysia.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

ppp/s — The second deadlines has come to pass but optimism is running high:

SEOUL, April 2 (Yonhap) — Top South Korean and U.S. negotiators worked through the night past a second deadline on Monday to try to forge a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) amid growing indications that a deal was imminent.

A South Korean government official close to the talks said his government was waiting for a rely from the United States after delivering its final proposal for the terms of an agreement.

“The ball is now in the U.S. court,” the official said, asking that he not be identified. [Deal imminent in South Korea-U.S. FTA talks: sources. Yonhap News. April 2 2007]

Categories
Conflict & disaster

[1153] Of a Malaysian worth USD 5 million

The government of the United States of America has put up a bounty of USD5 million on a Malaysian:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States added Zulkifli bin Hir, a Malaysian suspected of bomb attacks in the Philippines, to its most-wanted list on Tuesday and offered a $5 million reward for information leading to his arrest. [U.S. Adds Malaysian Suspect to Most – Wanted List. Reuters. March 27 2007.

Would the Malaysian government just sit and watch?

Anyway, I have a suggestion. Let us start by investigating PAS…

Categories
Economics

[1124] Of moderating the FTA-related drug prices increase

It is March and the deadline to forge a free trade agreement between Malaysia and the United States is looming closer. Here, I want to share a solution that could lay a middle ground between the supporters and the opponents of the FTA as far as drug prices are concerned.

Firstly, it is good to recognize why the prices of drugs could go up if the free trade agreement is signed. The increase is exclusively due to stronger intellectual copyrights law and not due to the principles of free trade. Though a majority of us, including me, does not know the exact detail of the FTA, there is enough information flying out in the public to be sure of that. With stronger copyrights law, cheap generic drugs would not be allowed to be sold as widely as it is available at the moment, in favor of patented drugs. Makers of patented drugs would be able to enjoy higher sales for longer period without the risk of competing with cheaper generic drugs.

While I generally support freer trade, I do sympathize for individuals that would be adversely affected by higher drug prices. Nevertheless, it is imperative for us to respect private property and directly, incentive for innovation. Between the two factors, a dilemma. The dilemma must be solved if the Malaysia-US FTA is to become acceptable to as many Malaysian as possible.

Here is what I propose to solve the dilemma: there is a role for the government. The Malaysian government could buy drugs from pharmaceutical companies and then resell it to the public through public health infrastructure at cost.

I know, I know. Anybody that is familiar with this blog would not expect me to propose a statist solution. Before you bang in the head however, please read on.

The program that I am thinking of might be distantly similar to what is practiced in Australia while stopping short at down right subsidy. The Malaysian government could buy drugs through auction and I am thinking reversed modified Dutch auction.

I am unsure if reversed Dutch auction is a common economic term for the kind of auction I have in mind but a Dutch auction works like this: there are a seller and many buyers. For simplicity and clarity reason, I shall call the seller as the auctioneer while the buyers as bidders. The auctioneer begins the auction by placing a high ask price. The price will be lowered by the auctioneer if there is no buyer. The auctioneer will continue to lower the price until there is a willing buyer. A variation of this auction was practiced during the initial public offering of Google back in 2004.

A reversed modified Dutch auction, as I call it, is a scenario which there are a buyer and many sellers. The buyer is the auctioneer while the sellers are the bidders. In a sense, reversed Dutch auction is the opposite of Dutch auction in the way monopoly is the opposite of monopsony.

Within Malaysian context, the Malaysian government is the auctioneer while various pharmaceutical companies of patented drugs are the bidders. The government starts by placing a low ask price in the free market. If there is no willing seller at such a low price, the government will increase its offer price and will continue to do so until there is a willing seller. The government could continue to do so until all of its demands are met. An example might help illustrate what I am trying to get at. Say the Malaysia government is demanding 1000 tons of drugs. At the same time, there are five sellers which I shall call A, B, C, D E and F.

Company A is able to supply 300 tons at RM1.00 per kg.

Company B is able to supply 300 tons at RM1.50 per kg.

Company C is able to supply 200 tons at RM2.00 per kg.

Company D is able to supply 100 tons at RM2.50 per kg.

Company E is able to supply 100 tons at RM3.00 per kg.

Company F is able to supply 100 tons at RM3.50 per kg.

The first 300 tons will be fulfilled by Company A and the government will pay RM1.00 per kg for drugs. This leaves 700 tons of unfulfilled demand. Realizing that nobody is willing to see any drug at RM1.00 anymore, the government raises it ask price and eventually will hit RM1.50 per kg. At that moment, Company B will step in and supply the government will 300 tons of drugs at such price. This leaves 400 tons of unfulfilled demand. The process will continue until the demand is exhausted. In this particular scenario, the government will pay at RM3.00 per kg at most; the government will not buy from Company F.

While prices could still increase vis-à-vis prices without the FTA, the increase would not be as much as that without this model with the FTA. If the drug prices are not low enough, perhaps the government could add in some sort of subsidy into the equation by selling the drugs bought at a loss. I however would only agree to such arrangement if other subsidies see some sort of quid pro quo reduction. Yes, I am looking at the Malaysian fuel subsidy. Essentially, the fuel subsidy reduction would finance the new drug subsidy, making this system neutral.

Whether or not we subsidize the drugs in the end, I do think this arrangement could solve the dilemma.

One major problem with this model is the possibility of the sellers colluding with each other to jack the price up. Nevertheless, such problem is not unique to or the exclusive weakness of this system. Therefore, I do not think it deserves to be addressed here. A discussion on collusion would take away the focus of this entry.

Another way to approach the problem is by having the government purchases the drugs in huge quantity, get bulk discount and resell the drugs at cost, possibly, exactly like the Australian model. Or, on top of that, with subsidy, with method explained earlier.

I am unsure which method would provide cheaper drugs but the latter certainly have less red tape to worry about.