Categories
Economics

[2622] A large open economy is pretty close to a closed economy

The United States Federal Reserve has come under criticism for its third round of quantitative easing – or QE3 – from many countries, especially emerging ones, who are concerned it will lead to the creation of asset bubbles that will cause problems within their economies.

What will be the effect of this QE3 on Singapore’s economy and how is it likely to affect its people in general?

In QE3, the buying of mortgage-backed securities by the Fed will increase the money supply in the US economy and, given the Fed’s policy of low interest rates, the additional money is intended to spur spending by individuals.

The idea is that this increased spending will improve the housing market as well as other industries, which are then likely to employ more workers, thus reducing unemployment. Unfortunately, this scenario is likely to happen only when an economy is a closed one – that is, there are restrictions on trade and capital flow across countries. [Sundaram Janakiramanan. QE3 and the S’pore economy. Today. November 1 2012]

But, but, but… is it not that a large open economy that the US is is pretty much close to a closed economy, professor?

Categories
Conflict & disaster Humor Poetry Politics & government

[2621] Sandy, Sandy, go away

Sandy, Sandy everywhere,
Sandy messes with your hair,
Sandy says she’s coming,
Sandy sends everyone flying.

Sandy crashes into the shore,
straight into Jersey Shore,
Sandy’s a storm that’s horrible,
crossing a show that’s terrible.

But what’s the price,
of an October Surprise,
when everybody expects,
what everybody expects?

Categories
Education Science & technology

[2620] Do not erect barriers to learning science and math

I am partial to an education system which has the English language as its medium of instruction. That is because I am most comfortable where English is the primary and the common language. While the Malay language is my mother tongue, I mostly use English to run both my private and professional life.

For a person with my background, it is reasonable for a stranger to expect me to be supportive of the policy (PPSMI) to teach science and mathematics in English. While I do sympathize with the policy, I oppose it.

I do not think anyone can doubt the importance of learning science and math. From the liberal education perspective, there are not too many other subjects that can liberate the mind the way science and math do. In terms of practicality, it offers a wide range of rewarding career choices.

To be good at both, one has to comprehend various scientific and mathematical concepts. The foundational lessons especially are crucial in allowing students to understand other more complex ideas. In both subjects, each concept is built upon an earlier concept. Failure to comprehend basic lessons will cause the student to struggle later. In a system where a student largely progresses based on his or her age, this can bring about a devastating snowball effect.

Learning those lessons can be harder than it is when both subjects are taught in a language that students struggle to master in the first place. That presents a two-layer barrier to mastering those basic scientific and mathematical concepts.

The language barrier adds to the frustration which can kill schoolchildren’s interest in science and math before the interest has a chance to bloom.

For many children from middle and upper-class families, English comprehension skills are not likely to be a problem. That is not true for the rest.

Consider a proxy to the mastery of the English language. Typically, families with higher incomes can be expected to have children who are better at English than those belonging to lower-income families. Here are the numbers. Based on the 10th Malaysia Plan, nearly 53% of households earned a monthly income of less than RM3,000 in 2009; about 66% earned less than RM4,000 a month; close to 76% earned less than RM5,000 a month.

The figures have probably improved since 2009. After all, 2009 was a recession year and we have recovered from that recession. Nevertheless, it is likely that a significant number of households still do not earn too much. This is a structural economic issue and such issues do not just change significantly in three years.

Notwithstanding the technical concerns about the evolution of household income over the past three years, that possibly means that more than half the children in Malaysia may have trouble with English. If PPSMI is to be continued in its blanket fashion as it was enforced earlier, that may lead to the making of a lost generation in terms of science and math education. As for the level of English, I am unsure if ­science and math classes are the place to learn English grammar, vocabulary and comprehension skills.

While I oppose PPSMI, that does not mean I think English is unimportant. I live in corporate Malaysia and in corporate Malaysia, English is the national language and not Malay. I know English is important. The inability to speak and write in English will come at a very great cost for fresh graduates and labor market veterans alike. I do believe that the teaching of English should be emphasized in all schools and at the early stages. The barrier to learning English should be reduced.

What PPSMI does to many students instead is that one, it does not reduce barriers in learning English — one does not learn grammar, vocabulary and comprehension skills in science and math classes — and two, it erects barriers to learning science and math for underprivileged children.

The point is that the teaching of English should not come at the expense of learning science and math.

At the very least, do not force students with a weak grasp of English to study science and math in English. Instead, let them improve their English in and outside of classes and let them learn science and math in the medium they understand best.

For students who already have a good command of English, let them study science, math and perhaps other subjects as well in English.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved
First published in The Sun on October 29 2012.

Categories
Economics Science & technology

[2619] Why are critical values always at 1%, 5% and 10%?

I was running some regressions at work just now and I realized my overdependence on computers had made me forgotten how to calculate certain statistics manually. Modern regression softwares automatically calculate various statistics less than a second and I hardly think of what happens in that virtual blackbox.

But just now, I was following up on a technical economic debate which revolved around some statistics where the report reported its t-stats but not its probability. I was curious about its probability and so, I had to translate the t-stats into probability manually by reading the t-stats distribution table. I struggled at first. I found myself embarrassed at my inability to read the table after 6 years worth of education in economics, and another 3 or 4 years in econometrics. But I managed. I guess, it is like riding a bicycle. Once you learned it, you know it. It may take some stimulus to remember if you have not been riding, but you can really do it.

One thought came to my mind after I was done with that.

I know there is a criticism about whether the critical values—the 10%, the 5%, etc—means anything. Indeed, the critical values are rules arbitarily made up out of convenience. It is highly possible that if the calculated value breaks a particular critical value, a hypothesis can still be true despite rejection. It is all a matter of probability and probability does not work so discretely as the typical critical value rejection rule suggests. If there is a 99% possibility of a hypothesis is untrue, that 1% can still pan out to be true however unlikely. (Let us not get into the Error I and II debate)

Too many people like yes and no answer. The rejection-rule gives them that, rightly or wrongly.

But I am thinking, why, throughout the economics and econometrics world, are the critical values always the same numbers? It either 1%, 5% or 10% (I have seen 25% but… ehem). Why not 4.7%, or 7.1%?

I think I found an answer to that after looking at the t-stats table for the first time in at least 2 years.

Powerful and cheap computers were only available in the last decade of the 20th century. Because of this, many students in the olden days relied on tables for their rejection rules. Tables being tables on pieces of papers, space was at a premium. So, publishers of tables could only print sexy numbers and obviously not too many numbers over the natural number space, never mind real numbers. Either you use the tables, or calculate the critical values yourself, which is a pain.

So, that convention sticks after awhile. From early econometricians to students of econometrics, the same tables get used over and over again. It becomes a tradition.

Maybe?

Categories
Sports

[2618] Ajax went above expectation

Frankly, when I found out that Ajax would be grouped with Real Madrid (again!), Manchester City and Borrusia Dortmund in the group stage of the Champions Leauge, my heart sank. Does Ajax have any chance against these giants? Borrusia Dortmund maybe but Real and City?

The first two results were grim. In the first match, Ajax was unlucky to lose to Dortmund 0-1. Given the tough matches ahead, this was a must win and Ajax wasted it. It appeared, Ajax might even miss the Europa Cup. In the next match,  Real pummeled Ajax 4 to 1. In the third match, which was held earlier today, I had expected City to roll over Ajax.

And no, instead, Ajax streamrolled over City.

I woke up for sleep for a moment after going to bed early. Weary eyes, I picked up my phone and checked the score: Nasri made it one up for City. I went back to bed, expected the worst.

At dawn, weary eyes still, forced to get up by the noisy alarm, I picked the phone again and what I read delighted me.

Not a bad way to start the day.

The unfortunate thing is that things are getting tight because Dortmund beat Real unexpectedly. While that means the qualification spots are wide open, I prefer if Real had won. While that would probably realistic sealed the first spot for Real, leaving only the second spot open, it would be easier to have the second spot wide opened than all spots opened. Reason is simple: the points difference between the second and the third ranked teams in Group D would be smaller in the only-second-spot-is-opened scenario than the scenario of all-spots-are-opened.

Right now, there is a 3-point difference between second-placed Real and third-place Ajax. If Real had won, there would have been only a 1-point difference between Dortmund and Ajax.

Anyway, while I do want to see Ajax qualify into the next round of the Champions League (it has been too long), I think the realistic expectation is to go through the Europa Cup. To do this, Ajax will have to beat City (the next match will be in Manchester, which will be tough. Fighting away from home is also tough; I probably do not mind a draw) and beat Dortmund. Do all that to maintain the third spot.

I am convinced that Ajax can beat Dortmund in Amsterdam later in November.