Economics: Standard of Life Vs Quality of Life

I was glanzing through UNDP's Human Development Index which ranks countries according to standard of living. As I went through it, I could not help but notice the obvious phenomenon of how developed countries and industrialized countries naturally have a high ranking while developing countries have a relatively lower ranking. This led to me question not the validity but the value of such an index. In other words how meaningful is this index.

After I realized that I personally have given up living in Canada, a country with a high HDI ranking, after having lived there for six years and had chosen to relocate to Singapore, a country with a lower HDI ranking. It became apparent that the standard of living didnt affect my decision to leave Canada even though it is the main detereminant for immigrants to migrate to Canada. Then there must naturally be another characteristic/s of Singapore that drew me back which is relatively lacking in Canada. Indeed after a few honey moon years in Canada, when reality started to hit me, I personally felt quality of life to be better in Singapore. This then gives rise to the following questions - Does the HDI index reflect only standard of living or quality of living too? Is standard of living a sufficient measure to rank a country?

Indeed Canada without dispute has a higher standard of living than Singapore and therefore as HDI indicates has a higher ranking. But quality of life, as i mentioned earlier is better in Singapore. This truely is not indicated by HDI. In other words, HDI is really not able to capture quality of life in a country nor is it able to reflect the differences in quality of life amongst countries. How one can actually measure quality of life is another issue indeed.

Well what do i mean by quality of life? Let me first define standard of life to be economic factors such as health care, housing, basic amenities, education etc. So what is quality of life? Well it will be social factors such as family, marriage, children, extended family, community, village, town, kinship, etc etc....

Indeed in the developed and industrialized countries these latter factors are more dismal than the developing countries. We often see high divorce rates, low marriage rates, low fertility rates etc within the more developed countries. The very nature of economic growth as prescribed by western economics lead to a state where societies' standard of living increases but quality of life decreases as such economic growth erodes family bonds, communal bonds, kinship, appetite for marriage, child bearing and child rearing activities etc.... This because as a utility maximizing individual continues indefinitely to maximize individual utility, he/she looses the incentive to consider or maximize familial or marital utility or community utility or social utility.

Should economists choose to exclue quality of life and simply look at standard of life, they may not be able to adequately explain phenomenons such as migration by those westerners to the east seeking culture. Likewise economists will not be able to adequately explain the resistance by those easteners, who can afford to but choose not to migrate to the West.

Just as how Singapore's quality of life is better than Canada, Malaysia which has a lower HDI ranking has a better quality of life than Singapore and so on. In turn other countries that have a lower HDI ranking relative to Malaysia, have a higher quality of life.

Nevertheless we cannot conclude that any strict inverse relationship between quality of life and standard of life exists but a general relationship can be observed. Indeed what can be concluded is a positive relationship between economic development and standard of living and a negative relationship between economic development and quality of life.

Political: Enough of US evidence!

Once again US has made a fool of itself with its "evidence". The senate's claims and evidences against British politician Galloway were so lame and prima facie, yet the senate can boldly and arrogantly embark on a foolish campaign to use those invalid evidences to accuse Galloway.

What is so interesting is that US has one of the biggest research culture in the field of law in the world, its legal fraternity is well knowned, its code of laws are widely written and legislated....
Yet the blunders that US can do when it produces evidences clearly shows its hidden and ulterior motives which do not aim to upholding justice.

There is tons of credible evidence to prosecute
Bush - on bringing US to war on inaccurate and invalid evidence
Collin Powell - to bring forward inaccurate evidence to justify invasion of Iraq
Dick Cheney- to be an accomplice to both Bush and Collin Powell
Donald Rumsfeld- to sanction for excessive force to be used on Iraqi prisoners of war
- to ignore abuses of Abu Ghraib when it first surfaced to him
- to be supporting the false evidence produced on Iraq
- to supply weapons to Saddam Hussein in the 1980s
Henry Kissinger - to give Suharto the go ahead the day before the invasion of East Timor, to provide weapons and other support to Suharto necessary for invasion of East Timor

There are numerous other tons of charges against US government officials that can be produced also. Well there are enough evidence to support charges of how much arms US sold to Saddam in the 1980s. Yet the US senate has carefully singled out an European. Till the day US continue to find the devil within its belly, outside, it will never be able to stop its aggression and butchery.

Review:Kingdom of Heavens

I was actually taken in when I read in the local state's times reporter's critique that the movie Kingdom of Heavens was made with a very neutral stance. Hollywood Impartial?

I have yet to watch a single Hollywood movie that tries to include the East that can be free from orientalistic notions. Indeed Kingdom of Heavens was just another Hollywood's pathetic attempt to account historical events.

I can understand the blunders on the complex issues. But when a hollywood director for instance sits and ponders how a character like Salahudeen should speak English, why does he simplistically assume it should be no different from the Arabs speaking English in Al-Jazeerah or BBC? The most interesting thing is that Salahudeen is not even an Arab. So why does he have such an accent?

Salahudeen and his army also are dressed in attire that you probably will recognize very similar to that of the Arab armies in Hollywood movies. But the attire of Salahudeen and his army were Ottoman styled. If the director had spent a little more time to research he could have found these truths through historical drawings etc. It really intrigues me to see how, when making such a big budget movie and especially on on historical events can fail to see these which are critical to re-create on the set the scenes then .

Coming to the more critical issues. Salahudeen is one of the biggest personalities of Islamic History. He is often never called as Salahudeen per se but instead as Salahudeen the Magnificent, Salahudeen the Reformer etc... This is because his ability to be a successful social and political reformer, great commander of army, effective head of state etc... His conquests of lands was just one part of his glory. His ability to rule them brilliantly, create economic, social and political developments within them were his other equally significant areas of glory.

Salahudeen is indeed portrayed less than himself in the movie. But what is so awkward is Salahudeen is no small personality within history to make him smaller than life. He is not Lawrence of Arabia. He holds the ranks of great conquerors like Napolean, Alexander, Genghis Khan, Babur etc except that he unlike many other conquerors, was absolutely humane and just.

At the end of the movie I realized something. As much as hollywood can tell history its own way just as many historians do, history is history. Its gone but lives. Since its gone, one cannot change it using any means. It lives despite anyone's efforts to silence it or re-shape it. So perhaps it may make sense for hollywood and biased historians to spare their efforts because if we learn the wrong history, we will repeat the mistakes history made and without doubt history will repeat.

Social: What is a loss?

Recently the Russel Crowe of Indian cinema, Kamal Hasan, was giving an interview to Vasantham Central. He generally makes two movies per year where one is commercial and the other is art/independent. He invests a lot for the latter and more than often it fails commercially. He simply however never gives up. He believes in making good and different ones and so he keeps spending a lot for which no commerical producer wants to invest.

Everyone always asks the same question to him. How can you bear all the huge money loss you have been incurring almost each year?

He gave an excellent answer as to what is loss....

He was explaining that loss is something that which you cannot gain back. In terms of money, if you loose it today, you can gain it back tomorrow if you work hard and smart enough... He further explained that even friendship and kinship when lost can be gained back with a sorry. However he asserted that, what that which you loose today and CANNOT gain back tomorrow, which will then amount to loss, will include life, youth etc....

Growing up in Singapore, I was always so fearful of failing my exams cos i thought and was told (by educational system) it was the end of everything. But as i matured i realized i can afford to fail and pass the following year. Though i didnt fail the exams in primary or secondary or jc, I regret stressing myself excessively before the exams.

Likewise when i decided to take year out to try something different, there were criticisms of how i will loose out. What i went to try didnt succeed as I wanted to, but hey i am able to return to what i was doing before. What i am loosing out is money, which I can make back if i try harder and smarter. Every loss and success comes from Al-Mighty. We just need to try...

Social: Imagine having only 20 minutes to live

It was upsetting to see Mrs Wee weep at the funeral wake of her husband. Its understandable how distraught and heart broken she must be, since she and Mr Wee had been together for about 7 decades in marriage. Multiply those 7 years with 365 days, multiply that with 24 hours, muliply that with 60 minutes...... Its a looong time... but when the time come, we all have to leave...

I saw Mrs Nathan consoling Mrs Wee. Given the reality of Mr Nathan's ripe old age, Mrs Nathan will be in Mrs Wee's position one day soon. But hey, given the reality we all will perish one day, we will be in Mrs Wee's position one day sooner or later.

So to think about it, the eventual end to everthing we do is death. Given that reality, should we at each time we feel angry, want to avenge, frustrated, depressed we just need to ask, should we have only 20 minutes to live should we hold our negative feelings or dispose them. Likewise should we only dispose our negative feelings if we have 20 minutes to live or right now itself?

Indeed life is so incredibly short and fragile that there is no need or purpose for selfishness, agrandisement, arrogance, greed, kiasuism, rush, speed, money, materials, revenge, etc etc.. Whats needed in our time here is what we need if we only have 20 minutes left - mercy, patience, love for all, good conduct, joy!

So perhaps if this world lives as if we have only 20 minutes to live, then we can save our wars, damage to animals, destruction to environment and killing of other humans.

Political: Revival of Islam: A threat to fear?

An interesting article I came across in Arthur newspaper

Revival of Islam: A threat to fear?
Thameemul Ansari
The revival of Islam in recent times has been associated only with the growth of extremism by popular media, politicians and certain academics. That has fueled a growing sense of fear against that revival which has been exacerbated by the tragic events of September 11.
Though the growth of extremism itself is not a trivial issue, ironically the growth of extremism constitutes only a small part of the revival of Islam simply because it constitutes an unimaginably tiny proportion of the world Muslim population. But the larger revival of Islam is not mentioned nor brought to the awareness of the public unlike the trivial aspect of that revival. Indeed the actual revival of Islam is of the other extreme; that is, it’s the rejuvenation of the way of life of Islam, which is peaceful, tolerant and constructive amongst not only Muslims but also non-Muslims.
In fact those responsible for the perpetuation of the fear of the revival of Islam through its association with the growth of extremism are themselves not actually fearful of that trivial aspect of the revival but the other as it poses a much bigger threat to them. Before we look at this, let us look at the decline of Islam that preceded the revival.
The decline of Islam began with the age of colonization and was exacerbated when the colonies became independent. The changes colonial rulers brought about to their colonies created an alien economic, commercial, political and social system which totally countered the principles of the Islamic society. For instance, the practice of divide-and-rule by the British colonialists eroded the fundamental principle of unity and tolerance while the creation of classes through colour, nobility, income etcetera eroded the principle of equality. ‘Riba’ or interest was established, which is forbidden in Islam for it is an economic incentive of money, hence benefitting only those with money and impoverishing the poor.
The decline of Islam was exacerbated when the colonial powers gave independence to the colonies after the Second World War. Colonies that had not had the liberty to govern their societies could now do so but they had lost the knowledge of the Islamic structure and system of society which existed before colonization. Nor had they gained any knowledge of running a society from their colonial masters as they were not given the liberty to run their own societies. There were no Caliphates around either for them to emulate. In their dilemma, they decided to emulate the structure and system of society of their colonial powers which had been through tremendous construction and development throughout the colonial era. Few Islamic societies had even the liberty to make this choice as, in several instances, the leader of the independent government that replaced the colonialists was not elected by the people but appointed by former rulers; they were more keen to westernize as they believed it was the only way to modernize.
It was at this point the decline of Islam was totally exacerbated until, today, no Islamic society or country exists. Though countries today claim that they are Islamic, Islamic scholars have unanimously voiced that none qualify. Through the decades since independence the tendency has been to modernize through westernization, and then modernize through capitalism creating a dangerous mix of traditional, ethnic, western, eastern, Islamic principles. That explains how practices that are totally un-Islamic such as oppression of women and "democratic" governments with dictators came about.
Today as the ills of capitalism start to further injure the former Islamic societies that are already shackled with a self-destructive oppressive path as mentioned above, science and money have been able to solve and answer many questions and problems of life for a Muslim. But the basic questions and problems remain unanswered. As they venture in search of an answer, they are increasingly discovering there are no better solutions for problems within their "modern" societies than to revert back to the holy Quran and the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad.
Islam is reviving as Muslim and non-Muslim women learn how Islam, contrary to popular belief, in fact does not subjugate them but rather guides them in how to juggle the roles of life with their equal opposite sex. Muslim women are increasingly standing up to demand the rights that Islam gives but their societies deny. With people grossly divided by power and money in today’s world, Muslims discover how Islam can correct the oppression through a just system of commerce, trade and law and Zakat (the third pillar of Islam). With racism still prevailing and with the current imaginary divide between the west and east being promoted at greater depths, with societies crumbling under ethnicity, tribalism, Islam offers a solution of egalitarianism despite color, sex, race or religion.
However there are two groups within this revival. One, the minority, seeks to achieve their ends by any means. The other is mindful that means matter just as much as the ends and both have to be achieved in the name of Islam- peace.
Indeed the latter group who is seeking to achieve peace in their lives and societies pose a threat to the sustainers of capitalism as they threaten capitalism itself. Capitalists and nationalists know that fighting an open war against this group will gather little support as this group is based on non-violence and tolerance. Hence as they set the stage for the show of the extremist minority, they rope in the peaceful majority with association for they know the eyes of the audience choose to believe only what it sees as long as the minds refuse to admit the folly of the eyes. Revival of Islam is not a threat to fear, and resisting or curbing it will only exacerbate the growth of extremism. As we have seen not too long ago, extremism cannot be allowed to grow.

Political: UK Muslims United Against Oppression March

A Muslim is a brother to a Muslim, he neither forsakes
him nor abandons him..." (Bukhari and Muslim)

Muslims united against oppression March this Saturday
Time and Place : 10:30 am
Assemble at Marble Arch, London W1 March
From : Marble Arch to Paddington Green Police Station

Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain will be supporting the biggest Muslim unity anti-terror march Britain has witnessed Belmarsh detainees unlawfully held for 3 years 660 held in "no man's land" in Guantanamo

Using torture against Muslims abroad Liberation struggles in Iraq, Kashmir, Palestine, Chechnya labelled as terrorism
Over 700 arrests and 3 convictions in UK & over 3000 arrests in USA Draconian Anti Terror laws, Control Orders & House Arrest
Extradition to the USA at request of NeoCon administration
Intimidation by stop and search Families wrecked by wrongful arrests & trial by media T
his march is non-partisan and non-sectarian.

Various organisations have come together to undertake the largest Muslim Anti Terror Civil Rights March on a Muslim unity platform.

It is essential that the Muslim community sends a clear message against the 'climate of fear' that has been created by these draconian laws and disproportionate arrests targeted at a community which has made a significant contribution to this society.

Condolences: President Wee

One of the famous words of late President Wee that I like most is " we came here with nothing.... and we will leave with nothing ..."

This is such a fundamental reality of life that we fail to grasp. If one conducts a post-mortem of his life, we can see how he came with nothing and he is leaving with nothing. The nothing here implies tangible objects and people. What he leaves with are his relationships, fond memories, love of his people, achievements, great conduct!

Over the next few days we can hear and see all kinds of touching condolence messages and sympathy pouring out for our late President. But that will all amount to being just hypocratic and cosmetic, unless if we strive to emulate his manners and conduct. How can we throw flowers at the king and at the same time step on them?

Should there be one word to describe him... it will be - Accomplished...

Social: Being Equal and Being Identical

I read with great dismay about how a condominium management and residents opted to have non-Indian security guards. What really disgusts me is that how openly they can actually demonstrate their prejudice. Perhaps its just a spillover of the racism bottled within the Singapore society.

I am a minority by race, language and religion in this country and till today almost everyday I feel I am like a nigger in a white man's society being subject to all kinds of prejudice. But when i take a closer look I find that the racism that envelopes this Singaporean society is not just about ethnicity whereby the majority ethnic groups discriminate the minority ethnic groups. Instead I have come across numerous friends who are Chinese but Pernakan in heritage or mixed in parentage or English speaking etc and hence they face prejudice and discrimination for being that slightly different.

I believe I can sum up the racism in Singapore to be that where one is discriminated when he/she is not fitting the "mould" or "norm". This is partly thanks to the great effort that is being to put to ensure everyone is identical. This in turn stems from the flawed belief that if we, a multiracial society, can be identical in outlook and nature then we can live in harmony and avert racial problems. Even identical twins are not exactly identical because they differ in character, tastes, etc etc. Hence it is not possible for two humans to be identical. Instead humans are a diverse creation. They differ in numerous ways. However they are equal. Where one person is advantaged over another person in something, he/she will be disadvantaged over the other person in another thing. This is the reality of creation of Mankind.

Though the Singapore society's ends to achieve racial harmony is valid and respectable, its means by making sure everyone is identical is fundamentally and logically flawed.

Instead the appropriate means to adopt is making everyone equal. As mentioned before the very characteristic of Mankind being diverse makes it impossible for us to be uniform or identical. But since we are created equal, we can very well continue to pursue that equality. Critics will naively argue we cannot be equal or we are not equal. This is because they naively understand what equality means. When economists talk about income equality in society, neo-classicals and conservatives will cynically dismiss it without understanding what the economists imply. They dont imply that each individual end up having $X. Instead they imply that the income inequalities be marginal and insignificant.

Likewise when I say we should pursue equality instead of making everyone identical, I imply that we need to work to make inequalities marginal and insignificant. Liberal, Neo-Con, Neo-Classical and Right Wing Conservatives in our society will however continue to pursue making everyone in our mulit cultural multi racial, religiously diverse Singapore identical and indeed that is a self fulfilling prophecy. Indeed diversity is an asset to a society and not a liability. A society that is uniform in nature hardly develops a strong growth path. Worse still, a society like Singapore that has strong sense of diversity cannot really hope to see these strong traits of diversity disappear through superficial sense of uniformization in attire, physical outlook etc.

It has been about 180 years since the Chinese, Indians and Eurasians migrated to this then Malay country. After 180 years of having lived together as one nation, if Singapore is still unable to embrace its diversity, then most definitely it has not grown out of its colonial era where the British intentionally promoted ethnic division. Today our real and risk-less asset that Singapore has is its diverse people. Even its huge financial asset is risky. Therefore it is only prudent to invest in the people by striving for equality and give up trying to make everyone identical.