Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Bloomberg On Penang

This was in Bloomberg a few months back, worth reading if you missed it.


Lim Guan Eng turned Malaysia’s second-smallest state into the nation’s biggest economic success after he bumped into two National Instruments Corp. (NATI) executives at the local airport in 2008.
Elected in March that year as Penang’s first chief minister from an opposition party in 36 years, Lim was struggling with the prospect of federal funding cuts. He convinced the managers to set up a research and production center in the state, and within two years the former British trading post was Malaysia’s top destination for foreign manufacturing investment.
“The deal was struck very quickly,” said Eugene Cheong, a director at the local unit of the Austin, Texas-based maker of industrial testing and automation equipment.
Lim’s speed in closing deals with companies from National Instruments to Robert Bosch GmbH is helping Penang achieve what every Malaysian prime minister sought since Mahathir Mohamad started his Multimedia Super Corridor technology zone in the 1990s near Kuala Lumpur: a transition from low-cost assembly to a research and development base for industries such as solar cells and life sciences.
With a general election due by early 2013, Penang’s progress highlights the challenges facing the rest of Malaysia and theNational Front government as ChinaIndonesia and Vietnamoffer investors bigger workforces while Singapore lures talent with lower taxes and easier immigration. Lim, 50, the country’s only ethnic-Chinese state leader, embodies the contrast between Penang’s business transparency and the four- decade old policies of the ruling party that favor Malays, which theWorld Bank says undermine competitiveness.

‘Been Sleeping’

“We’ve been sleeping,” said Ooi Kee Beng, Penang-born author of “Era of Transition: Malaysia after Mahathir” and a senior fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore. “Penang now has a chance to show that if you have good governance, and if you put fairness and justice as your main qualities, free of race considerations, that is actually the way to go for Malaysia.”
In the first seven months of 2011, Penang won 3.6 billion ringgit ($1.2 billion) of approved foreign manufacturing investment, ahead of the 3.4 billion ringgit that went to Selangor, the state that surrounds the capital Kuala Lumpur, a government reportshowed last month.
It’s not the first time the state has set the pace for technology investment in Malaysia. Penang, a base for the spread of British influence in the 18th century, was the center of a manufacturing push in Malaysia’s shift from rubber and tin production in the 1970s, attracting companies including Intel Corp. (INTC) and Robert Bosch to assemble chips and build car radios.

Political Alternative

Penang’s economic resurgence may bolster the opposition alliance’s claim it can be an alternative to the National Front, which has run the country since independence from British rule in 1957. A national election may be called with 60 days’ notice at the discretion of Prime Minister Najib Razak.
“A lot of this has to do with the dynamism of the chief minister,” said Ong Kian Ming, a political analyst at UCSI University in Kuala Lumpur and columnist for the Edge newspaper.
Lim has managed to keep Penang attractive for international companies even as Najib focuses federal support on regions such as Johor and Sarawak, where his ruling coalition has among its biggest parliamentary-seat majorities.
Under Najib’s Economic Transformation Program, his government is promoting about 65.8 billion ringgit of private- sector-led projects for southern Johor state, compared with at least 375 million ringgit for Penang, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The comparison excludes projects covering multiple states or those without a clear single location, which amounted to 34.3 billion ringgit nationwide.

Federal Support

“Investment decisions are made on the basis of need not politics,” said Tengku Sariffuddin Tengku Ahmad, a spokesman for the prime minister. “Over the last year we have invested more than 1 billion ringgit of federal funding in Penang and will continue to support their economic progress in whatever way we can,” he said in an e-mail.
Malaysia’s efforts to woo investments in recent years may have been hampered by its policy of giving preferential treatment to ethnic Malays and some indigenous groups, collectively known as Bumiputera, in government jobs, contracts, education and cheaper housing, said Ooi.
When the economy was booming along with its neighbors before the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis, the effects of the policy were less apparent, he said. When growth slowed, the race-based program became a greater damper, according to Ooi. While the nation outperformed rivals in the early and mid 1990s, it has struggled to maintain that edge since the regional crisis.

Malay Contracts

Under federal rules, government construction contracts valued below 200,000 ringgit must be given to indigenous or Malay contractors. In addition, a main goal of the affirmative action programs was to raise the Bumiputera share of corporate stock ownership to at least 30 percent.
Najib said Sept. 27 that the programs, introduced in the early 1970s to reduce poverty and narrow income disparities between different ethnic groups, are becoming more merit-based.
In an interview in his 28th floor office, where the walls are lined with paintings and sketches of Penang, some from the 19th century, Lim said the relationship between state and central government wouldn’t hold Penang back.
“We may have political differences but we are cordial and professional,” he said as he sipped ginseng tea made by his wife. “If Penang fails, Malaysia fails.”

Ambiguous Practices

To prevent corruption, Penang requires open bidding on contracts of more than 200,000 ringgit and has awarded about 125 million ringgit of jobs through competitive tenders, according to Lim.Transparency International said in a 2009 report that Penang, an island and coastal enclave linked by a 13.5-kilometer (8.4-mile) bridge, was Malaysia’s first state to implement open tenders for government contracts.
While Lim said his government awards contracts based on merit within the national guidelines, the federal government states that it has no obligation to accept the lowest offer or to give any reason for rejecting a bid. Under Malaysian federal rules, agencies are only required to invite quotations from at least five bidders for works contracts.
“In domestic tenders, preferences are provided for Bumiputera suppliers and other domestic suppliers,” the U.S. Department of State said in a March report on Malaysia’s investment climate. Implementations of the affirmative action policy “vary greatly; some practices are explicit and contained in law or regulation while others are informal, leaving much ambiguity for potential investors,” it said.

Trained Accountant

The Malaysian government says it is also pushing for greater transparency, including introducing a whistleblower protection act to fight corruption and a planned competition law next year.
“Open tender is a virtue, it’s a policy that is being pushed through federally too,” Idris Jala, a minister in the Prime Minister’s Department and chief executive officer of the government’s Performance Management and Delivery Unit, said in Singapore yesterday. “For a country to grow, to become high income, we must have competitiveness.”
Lim, who holds a Bachelor of Economics from Australia’s Monash University, says his training as an accountant helps him spot any discrepancies in state finances.
Property developers such as Ivory Properties Group Bhd. (IVORY) will benefit from the inflow of workers and expatriates to support Penang’s industries, while local electronics companies Eng Teknologi Holdings Bhd. and Globetronics Technology Bhd. (GTB) may gain from orders to supply foreign manufacturers, said Choo Swee Kee, who manages about 700 million ringgit as chief investment officer of TA Investment Management Bhd. in Kuala Lumpur.

Property Shares

Eastern & Oriental Bhd. (EAST), which is reclaiming up to 980 acres of land to build luxury homes in what it says is the island’s largest seafront development, has seen its shares soar 25 percent this year. The main FTSE Bursa Malaysia KLCI Index slid 4.5 percent during the same period.
“We have been a believer of Penang’s potential for a long time,” said Eric Chan, deputy managing director of E&O, which also owns the 126-year-old Eastern & Oriental Hotel in the island’s historic Georgetown. “China is no longer cheap and some global companies are looking to move their operations to alternative locations like Penang.”
Lim says ethnic Malays also benefit from the state’s economic growth. In the Malaysian state with the highest proportion of ethnic Chinese, at 42 percent, Malay contractors have won most of the jobs awarded by his government through the open tenders, Lim said. The Malay community doesn’t need racial quotas to succeed, he said.

Brain Drain

“We have proven that this is the way forward,” Lim said in an interview in July on Penang Hill, at an event promoting the state’s efforts to woo talent. “Malaysia has a historical opportunity for change.”
Malaysia’s racial policies spurred a brain drain of largely Chinese and Indian minorities, and limited foreign investment, Philip Schellekens, a senior economist at the World Bank, said in April. In its latest Malaysia Economic Monitor report that month, the Washington-based lender said the migration of talent out of Malaysia undermines the country’s aspiration to become a high-income nation.
“Discontent with Malaysia’s inclusiveness policies is a key factor,” the World Bank said. “Productivity and inclusiveness lie at the heart of Malaysia’s transformation programs. Implementing these forcefully will go a long way towards turning the brain drain into a gain.”

Growth Impediment

The U.S. Department of State said that Malaysia’s “complex network of preferences” to promote the acquisition of economic assets by ethnic Malays and other indigenous groups is a “significant impediment” to economic growth. The country’s affirmative-action policy is unique among Southeast Asian neighbors including Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia and the Philippines.
“It clearly slows things as many competent people leave Malaysia because of it,” said Jim Rogers, the chairman of Rogers Holdings who moved to neighboring Singapore from New Yorkin 2007. Malaysia should “abolish the policy and open the economy and society to all” to boost its competitiveness among international investors, he said in an e-mail. Proposed changes to the policy are making the country more attractive, he said.
Malaysia’s economy expanded at an average pace of 9.2 percent from 1990 through 1997, compared with the 7.1 percent for newly industrialized Asian nations as a group, International Monetary Fund data show. By contrast, Malaysia’s 5.1 percent average growth since 1999 is little more than the group’s 4.8 percent overall mean performance, according to the IMF.

Beating Singapore

Mahathir’s Multimedia Super Corridor, centered around an area in Selangor state that was carved out of oil palm plantations, offered tax breaks and relaxed rules on hiring foreigners to entice software engineers.
While Penang lured research, development and production, the MSC’s more notable successes were getting information- technology support and service centers for companies including Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA) and Deutsche Post AG’s DHL division. The government later broadened the incentives to include companies that weren’t physically located in the main MSC area.
To win the investment in Penang from National Instruments, Lim had to overcome rivals from Singapore and the Philippines to Vietnam and China.

Tax Breaks

Stuttgart, Germany-based Robert Bosch will spend 520 million euros ($720 million) on a factory in Penang that will be one of its largest, employing 2,000 workers to make photovoltaic solar modules. Agilent Technologies Inc. told local media in March it was adding a life-sciences facility that undertakes research and development. Both companies have operated in Penang for about four decades, starting in the 1970s, when foreign investors used the state’s cheap labor to make low-end electronics parts.
The state can’t offer tax breaks for investors or sell bonds, both controlled by the federal government, so it plans to use revenue from local land levies to build more roads and a third bridge linking the island to its mainland territories, according to Lim, who is also secretary-general of the opposition Democratic Action Party.
Penang, bigger only than Perlis of Malaysia’s 13 states, is used to an underdog status. Foundedby Captain Francis Light in 1786 after the East India Co. took over the island from the Kedah Sultanate, Britain set it up as a trading post to break Dutch Malacca’s monopoly of the spice trade.

Paddy Fields

Intel spent $1.6 million in 1972 to set up the company’s first offshore chip assembly plant in the state amid paddy fields, employing 100 batik-clad workers. Now, it also designs semiconductor devices in the state.
Penang had 16 percent of the country’s approved foreign manufacturing investment from 2006 to March this year, government data show. The state, a tourist destination with beach resorts and a colonial-era town designated as a United Nations World Heritage site, made up 8.1 percent of Malaysia’s gross domestic product in 2009, based on constant prices.
“The change in government meant that you have reenergized this place,” said Chris Ong, who owns boutique hotels converted from heritage buildings in Penang. “The old state government was here for far too long.”
To contact the reporter on this story: Chong Pooi Koon in Kuala Lumpur atpchong17@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Barry Porter in Kuala Lumpur atbporter10@bloomberg.net; Stephanie Phang in Singapore at sphang@bloomberg.net

Is the Rate Differential Between Young Male and Female Drivers Still Justified?


According to a study published this week in the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, cited by U.S. News & World Report, in 1996, an underage male driver (aged 16-20) with a blood alcohol concentration of .1 percent was four times as likely as a similarly impaired underage female to get into a fatal car accident.

By 2007, that gap had closed.

Eduardo Romano, one of the study's co-authors, speculates that the rise in fatal accidents among female drivers may be related to Independent Women (Part I)'s new found taste for danger, in the form of night driving.

"I think it's a reflection that women have become more independent out in the world. In the past, men always drove on dates, now more women are driving themselves. They're driving more often at night," he says. "Night is always a much more risky time to drive."

According to a AAA report released last week, newly licensed teen girls are also twice as likely as boys to use an electronic device while driving. They are more likely to eat, drink, and adjust non-essential controls like the radio or air conditioner. Boys are more likely to turn around and interact with people outside the vehicle. Girls are more likely to groom themselves while driving.


Journal of Studies of Alcohol and Drugs study is here

AAA report: Distracted Driving Among Newly Licensed Teen Drivers is here

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

The Hunger Games, Yes and No

To many in the Western world, The Hunger Games will be a massive hit and its going to be a trilogy as the author has 3 books out on the subject. As usual, given the horrendous dysfunctional utopian theme, moral issues abound with the books and the movie. For pure entertainment, its very good 9/10. Those who cannot take gore, brutality, senseless killings (who does), ... will find it a turn off. For ethical reasons: its disturbing to say the least.
The Hunger Games - the-hunger-games wallpaper


To me, movies tell stories and make us think, and entertain at the same time. The Hunger Games accomplishes all. The fact is this kind of scenario where the powers to be keep pulling strings to "manufacture" empathy, restore political balance, gain power over the people ... are all evident in various facets of life. You take that scenario and mesh it with the reality TV craze over the past 10 years, you get The Hunger Games. Reality TV intrudes private space, people generally like to watch "others suffer and/or pull through hardships". Reality TV dumbs us all down to the lowest common denominator. I think some were really well planned, such as Survivor and even The Amazing Race, but much of the rest tries too hard and voyeuristic viewing is too cruel and deplorable. Producers "jiggle" with participants emotions, manufacture situations to create conflicts, sensationalise situations all for the viewing public.


What is The Hunger Games? Its a potent mix of The Truman Show, Reality TV, Rambo and copied extensively from the great Japanese movie Battle Royale. Its Big Brother Orwellian gone bad. We needed to go there to know what could happen if we let certain values get out of hand. Too much credit is given to the author, not enough for the blatant plagiarism of Battle Royale.


In Battle Royale, massive unemployment has caused enormous anger stemming from the younger generation. The government passed a Bill to "control" that and to make sure their youth do not get "weak" Every year one junior high class will be selected at random to participate in Battle Royale in a secluded island with only one person allowed to come out alive. They have to kill because all of them have a special necklace cuff which can be activated to blow up if they do not do so. The event is broadcasted like Reality TV.


The Hunger Games, saw many states warring over a long time. After the war, they were classified into Districts 1-12 depending on the line of work/industry they do. Every year one male and one female teenager will be selected to participate in the games, One lone victor emerges, the participants are called Tributes ( to commemorate the war struggle and maintain peace ... go figure).


Its a nasty side of human nature as putting a group in a boxed environment with specific rules, will cause most to work towards that objective. Survival of the fittest, the will to live will almost always win out the morality and ethical aspects. The Hunger Games is good entertainment, bring your teen kids along, not your under 12s though, and make sure you discuss through the issues in the movie. Too many parents are too protective nowadays. If you live in clean streets all the time, you do not understand how people live in poverty. If The Hunger Games is a 9/10, Battle Royale is 11/10.


Sydney Morning herald op piece: The arrival of The Hunger Games on the big screen has sent thrills around the world. Already a publishing blockbuster, Suzanne Collins's sensational trilogy is cleaning up at the box office as well. The first instalment is an enthralling film that keeps audiences spellbound throughout. Or so I hear, for I won't be going. I read all three books in my professional capacity as a reviewer and experienced first-hand their hypnotic quality. But while they may provide gripping entertainment, they carry some worrying ethical messages.

Collins conceived the idea while channel surfing between reality TV shows and news coverage of a war zone. Many are convinced that the trilogy presents a violent, unjust and horrifically dystopian future world as a poignant critique of reality television, totalitarian government and screen violence as entertainment.


But could Collins's skill in turning this critique into pulse-racing entertainment ultimately leave her young audience less sensitive to violence? More importantly, by constantly putting her good protagonists into worst-case scenarios where they must make decisions that under normal circumstances would be wrong, is she gently pressuring her young audience into stretching moral boundaries? I believe so. Here are five reasons why.

Firstly, Collins distorts the meaning of heroic rebellion. The lead character, Katniss Everdeen, clearly has more courage than most people on the planet. In addition, she seems to have no choice but to go along with the Games and try to survive. If she refuses, not only will she die, but her family and friends will also suffer.

But is it real rebellion to allow herself to be trained up for a killer-survivor episode? Could one say no? Other heroes have shown it is possible. Passive resistance was the ''weapon'' of choice for Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr and anti-Nazi activists Sophie Scholl and her brother. And may we mention Christian martyrs? In all these cases, even where their protests led to sudden death, their story didn't end. Katniss is courageous, but her ''rebellion'' is a compromise.
"Author Suzanne Collins distorts the meaning of heroic rebellion".
"Author Suzanne Collins distorts the meaning of heroic rebellion". Photo: Getty Images
Secondly, survival justifies killing in this story. By participating in the Games, even the heroes allow themselves to be infected with its kill-or-be-killed ethos. Katniss reluctantly begins by dropping an insect nest on someone's head so they swell up and die ''naturally'', then destroys others' food so they will starve. Later, she has no problem shooting a citizen who blocks her path.

Thirdly, characters are desensitised to sexual exploitation. The reality television framework makes body appearance important: each contestant has a stylist who must first assess them without clothes (Katniss ''bravely'' resists the urge to cover herself), and then a full body wax makes them camera-ready. This is probably normal for reality TV, but don't tell me it's brave.

A fake relationship between Katniss and the male lead, Peeta, is also played up to win sponsorship. So physical affection is given for food, or later because she's ''so desperately lonely [she] can't stand it''. This selfish mockery is all the love that is shown in The Hunger Games.

Fourthly, feelings replace right and wrong. For Katniss, the pattern is repeated over and over: a catastrophic situation is followed by her passionate but often unethical reaction, then a soul-searching analysis of her feelings to deal with her guilt, followed by defiant justification that she had no choice, or that she was confused, which is the fault of those who created the catastrophe. Thus she becomes the victim-hero: they made her do it.

Finally, there is the seductive sensationalism of the storytelling. It is like watching a graphic news story that turns horrific events into entertainment. The screaming, the blood, the broken bodies - and when all this is no longer enough, the slow and graphic death of some poor, innocent character we've come to like. How can this series be a critique of using injury and death for entertainment when it does the same itself?

My argument is not against violence, moral ambivalence or outright wrongdoing in teen literature, but against justifying them and casting them in a heroic light.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/why-ive-lost-my-hunger-for-violent-unethical-games-20120402-1w8pl.html#ixzz1r2KtMTwz


Sunday, April 1, 2012

STFU Man City

Famous football teams benefit from favourable refereeing decisions when playing at home, it has been claimed this week. Is that true?
That was the complaint after Fulham were denied a penalty against Manchester United in a Premier League 1-0 defeat at Old Trafford, Manchester, last Monday.
The Fulham manager Martin Jol said afterwards that referees needed to be "brave" to give a visiting team a penalty at Old Trafford.
And two days later, Manchester City executive Patrick Vieira gave voice to a widely held belief when he said: "When United play at home, they may get some advantage that some other teams do not get."
The assumption among some fans has long been that big refereeing decisions tend to favour the big clubs when they play in front of their large and fervent home crowd.
"If you go to Spain it's the same, if you go to Italy, it's the same," said Vieira, who played for Arsenal for many years.
Emphasising that he hadn't seen the incident in the Fulham game and wasn't criticising Manchester Utd, he added: "It's something the teams who are used to winning get all the time, so we need to win games so we may have this kind of advantage in the future."
So is there any evidence that referees are more likely to make penalty decisions that favour big teams playing at home?


Among the current English Premier League teams which have played 50 or more home games since 2006, the statistics supplied by the sports data specialists Opta show that, on average, Manchester United have conceded one penalty every 12 home games.
This is more than Fulham, who have conceded roughly one penalty every 14 games at home.
So it is actually more common for a visiting team to get a penalty at Old Trafford than Craven Cottage.
Fulham are in fact among seven current Premier League clubs who have since 2006 conceded fewer penalties at home than Man Utd.

Premier League, 2006 - present

TeamNumber of home games per penalty conceded
SOURCE: OPTA
Chelsea
18.3
Aston Villa
18.2
Liverpool
15.7
Fulham
13.8
Tottenham Hotspur
13.8
Bolton
13.8
Everton
13.8
Man Utd
12.2
Stoke
12.0
Man City
11.0
Newcastle
10.1
Arsenal
10
Sunderland
8.3
West Brom
7.6
Wigan
6.9
Wolves
6.6
Blackburn
6.1
It's true that the team in the Premier League that has conceded the most penalties on average (one penalty every six matches) is one of the smaller clubs, Blackburn Rovers.
And also the team that has conceded the fewest (one penalty only every 18 games) is Chelsea, one of the top dogs. They have also won a penalty on average once every five games.
But there could be a far simpler explanation than referee bias, says a sports correspondent with a keen eye on the statistics, Bill Edgar of the Times newspaper.
"Given that Chelsea have been among the most successful clubs over that period, you would have expected them to have given away the fewest penalties simply because the opposition are generally weaker and therefore will spend less time in Chelsea's penalty area, so there will be less opportunity for them to win penalties," he says.
If the big clubs aren't necessarily conceding fewer penalties because of the referee, do they maybe have penalties awarded in their favour?
Manchester United have been awarded a penalty every 4.4 games, on average. This makes them the second-placed team in terms of the number of penalties won.
The first? Patrick Vieira's Manchester City. They were awarded a penalty every 3.93 games they played on average.
The two Manchester teams are the top two this season, battling it out for the Premier League trophy.
The team that ranks lowest in terms of the number of penalties won is Wolverhampton Wanderers who were awarded a penalty only every 13 matches on average.


"Then collect a panel of football experts and let them watch them. You would have the players' identities removed and the teams' identities removed and compare [the panel's] consensus with the decision the referees made.
"And if there was a considerable difference, then that would point to a bias among referees."
This kind of anonymised approach is possible in some fields. Orchestras famously introduced blind auditions where musicians played behind screens. When they did, the number of women hired rose sharply.
But it would be somewhat trickier to conduct blind experiments involving referees.
Mind you, some football fans will tell you the ref's blind anyway.

Thought For The Day

p/s i could be talking about politics ... maybe

Share

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites