see if this place supports mobile blogging. If this is so then Laos is
just as tech savvy as anywhere else.
--
Sent from my mobile device
27 May 2010
My 1st attempt posting a blog entry on the move
Im now in a car on the way back home (Im not driving). Im trying to
see if this place supports mobile blogging. If this is so then Laos is
just as tech savvy as anywhere else.
see if this place supports mobile blogging. If this is so then Laos is
just as tech savvy as anywhere else.
23 May 2010
Integrity is a matter of choice
In life, there are a lot of things that we do not have control or the right to choose. We cant choose where we should be born or the type of parents we have or the siblings that we grow up with. But I believe that we do have a choice when it comes to building our own character and be a person of integrity. We do have a choice if we want to be an honest person or a dishonest one. We do have a choice if we want to be a corruptible person or a man of integrity. But sad to say I have seen too many people who have made these bad choices. I wont go and relate to you some of my experiences at the Bureau. I could probably be spending hours writing on some of the interesting characters that my officers and I had come to deal with.
Take playing golf for instance, the game that I have begun to love. When you hit a ball out of bound, the rule says you must incur a penalty and return to where you last hit the ball. When you finished playing that particular hole you must write down your true score. Golf is a game where you are your own judge with a whole host of ethics and rules that you need to follow. In fact it's been said that golf is a gentleman's game because to be a gentleman there is a list of etiquette you must follow - honesty and integrity are on top of this list. Writing down your own score would certainly be a moment that would test your own character. You would have a choice of returning a true score or you could submit a lowered score. But many a time where I see true characters being shown in the golf courses. I would see players where they would improve the lie of their ball when the rules say they shouldn't as you must play the ball as it lies or declare it unplayable or I would see one who would declare someone's else ball as his when he knew his ball was lost. I had met a few who despite hitting so many strokes on a particular hole and declared a rather impressive score when they knew the score was much worse than that. These kind of people would do anything to win, even to cheat. Were these people born to cheat? I am very sure not. To cheat or to be honest is a matter of choice. There is nothing wrong to be fiercely competitive and to possess that killer instinct but to be a cheat or to bend rules so that you can have an unfair advantage over another is something quite different.
Our everyday life is no different. Often we are called to make choices. So it is really up to us. We can choose to be honest or we can choose to be like the golfing cheat. But one thing is for sure, if a golfer is known to be a cheat he will carry that reputation with him because that is the character that he wanted to show to other fellow golfers. It is our character that people see of us when you make choices. They can see you as a man of integrity or they can see you as a big cheat. It really is up to you on how you build your character and how you want people to see of you.
Take playing golf for instance, the game that I have begun to love. When you hit a ball out of bound, the rule says you must incur a penalty and return to where you last hit the ball. When you finished playing that particular hole you must write down your true score. Golf is a game where you are your own judge with a whole host of ethics and rules that you need to follow. In fact it's been said that golf is a gentleman's game because to be a gentleman there is a list of etiquette you must follow - honesty and integrity are on top of this list. Writing down your own score would certainly be a moment that would test your own character. You would have a choice of returning a true score or you could submit a lowered score. But many a time where I see true characters being shown in the golf courses. I would see players where they would improve the lie of their ball when the rules say they shouldn't as you must play the ball as it lies or declare it unplayable or I would see one who would declare someone's else ball as his when he knew his ball was lost. I had met a few who despite hitting so many strokes on a particular hole and declared a rather impressive score when they knew the score was much worse than that. These kind of people would do anything to win, even to cheat. Were these people born to cheat? I am very sure not. To cheat or to be honest is a matter of choice. There is nothing wrong to be fiercely competitive and to possess that killer instinct but to be a cheat or to bend rules so that you can have an unfair advantage over another is something quite different.
Our everyday life is no different. Often we are called to make choices. So it is really up to us. We can choose to be honest or we can choose to be like the golfing cheat. But one thing is for sure, if a golfer is known to be a cheat he will carry that reputation with him because that is the character that he wanted to show to other fellow golfers. It is our character that people see of us when you make choices. They can see you as a man of integrity or they can see you as a big cheat. It really is up to you on how you build your character and how you want people to see of you.
20 May 2010
A revisit of history : one reason why I admire LKY
This article was first published in 1967 in the Harvard Crimson, the daily student newspaper of the Harvard University.
Lee Kuan Yew
Profile
By JOEL R. KRAMER,
Published: Monday, October 23, 1967
Lee Kuan Yew, prime minister of the city-state of Singapore, is a mayor who talks as though he may one day be a world statesman.
The 44-year-old prime minister is an imposing figure who gives the impression that he is both competent and sure of himself. He speaks with a mild British accent, but, before a Harvard audience, he frequently used American idioms and seemed to have read everything published in the United States--from daily newspapers to the texts of Presidential speeches.
Lee's Singapore is the fifth largest port city in the world. Though plagued by severe unemployment and racial problems, it still has the highest standard of living in Southeast Asia. The tiny country with a predominantly Chinese population is walled in by four Muslim nations. And co Lee must try to maintain Singapore's delicate relations with Malaysia, increase Singapore's trade with both Eastern and Western powers, and prevent a new wave of Communist uprisings in neighboring Southeast Asian nations.
His concern for the fate of Southeast Asia, fortified by his spectacular economic successes and his ambitious style, make Lee a potential international strongman. The prime minister has traveled around the world talking about the Vietnam war and other Southeast Asian affairs. "I've got a very deep interest," he explains, "in my own survival."
Lee reportedly told a Harvard audience Friday that he has no right to tell America or Americans what to do. But he also said that the United States could have sharply limited its Vietnam operation in 1954, 1956, or even 1961, but now it is too late. On those occasions, he thought, the United States could have "drawn a line west of Mekong and said it will defend no more than that."
Now, the prime minister believes, the United States owes it to the Thais in particular and Southeast Asia in general to maintain a "military shield" behind which South Vietnam can build industrially.
Lee thinks there's some point to buying time with a shield because he believes in the great-man theory of history. And the great man is none other than Lee Kuan Yew, who thinks that because of his own competence and shrewdness Singapore has succeeded where South Vietnam has failed. "If you can find the group of men who could do it," Lee said in Dunster, "Saigon can do what Singapore did." In fact, the prime minister boasted, "If one looked at Saigon and Singapore in 1954, one would have said Singapore was the goner, not Saigon."
Because he believes one great man makes the difference, Lee blames the Eisenhower administration for America's present dilemma, because Eisenhower "permitted Diem to systematically eliminate all alternatives to him." South Vietnam no longer had a pool of talent from which a hero-ruler might emerge. "You can't go talent-scouting for leaders like in a telephone directory," Lee points out; "the British didn't create me."
The British may not have created Lee, but they did provide him with a Cambridge education and later bolstered him when his political machine began to sputter. Lee was the head of the ruling People's Action Party, and in 1962, British officials decided his power was eroding so quickly that his three-year old nation left alone would soon become another Cuba. The British decided that the best way to preserve Lee's power over Communist obstructionists was to unite Singapore and Malaysia, an ideal for which Lee had been striving for a decade. With British support, such a federation was effected in 1963. It was unstable from the outset and dissolved two years later, but observers believe that Lee has emerged a stronger Asian figure as a result of the temporary coalition.
Lee's strength probably has derived, in part, from his shrewdness. At Dunster House, he was the complete politician--deftly dodging embarrassing questions about the absence of political opposition in Singapore, humbly reiterating that it is not his place to order Americans around, and mentioning his accomplishments in Singapore just often enough to establish his credentials. The prime minister spoke into what looked like a microphone but was actually an attachment to his private tape recorder, "so I can check back and make sure I wasn't misquoted," he explained.
There is no doubt that Lee has done much for Singapore. The tiny island republic has a per capita income of $500 per year, the highest in the area. From 1961 to 1965, Lee spent $315 million on economic development, focusing on power plants, water facilities, roads and other precursors of industrial growth. Singapore has negotiated trade agreements with the Soviet Union, Hungary, Bulgaria, Great Britain, the United States, and several other nations.
Lee still must tackle an acute unemployment problem. It is estimated that 20,000 more jobless youths emerge from the schools in Singapore each year, and there seems to be no immediate solution in sight.
Perhaps a more important problem, and one Lee refused to discuss in Dunster House, is the lack of political opposition in his country. There is no opposition to speak of at present, except an underground Communist movement. In three of the past four by-elections, all the candidates in Lee's party ran unopposed. Lee said last year that he would like to see a "good, lively, opposition" but he doesn't seem to act with that idea in mind. Newspapers are strictly licensed, and leading Communists who happen to bob above the surface are frequently jailed.
These internal problems, however, are dwarfed by the Vietnam war, which brought Lee to see President Johnson. Lee is not the kind of man who would admit that his future rests entirely in America's hands. On the contrary, he told his Harvard audience, "If you leave, we'll soldier on. We'll try. I'm only telling you the awful consequence which withdrawal would mean." One gets the feeling that Lee believes those "awful consequences" would not mean his downfall. It would take more than the blunders of a misguided super-power to accomplish that.
Lee Kuan Yew
Profile
By JOEL R. KRAMER,
Published: Monday, October 23, 1967
Lee Kuan Yew, prime minister of the city-state of Singapore, is a mayor who talks as though he may one day be a world statesman.
The 44-year-old prime minister is an imposing figure who gives the impression that he is both competent and sure of himself. He speaks with a mild British accent, but, before a Harvard audience, he frequently used American idioms and seemed to have read everything published in the United States--from daily newspapers to the texts of Presidential speeches.
Lee's Singapore is the fifth largest port city in the world. Though plagued by severe unemployment and racial problems, it still has the highest standard of living in Southeast Asia. The tiny country with a predominantly Chinese population is walled in by four Muslim nations. And co Lee must try to maintain Singapore's delicate relations with Malaysia, increase Singapore's trade with both Eastern and Western powers, and prevent a new wave of Communist uprisings in neighboring Southeast Asian nations.
His concern for the fate of Southeast Asia, fortified by his spectacular economic successes and his ambitious style, make Lee a potential international strongman. The prime minister has traveled around the world talking about the Vietnam war and other Southeast Asian affairs. "I've got a very deep interest," he explains, "in my own survival."
Lee reportedly told a Harvard audience Friday that he has no right to tell America or Americans what to do. But he also said that the United States could have sharply limited its Vietnam operation in 1954, 1956, or even 1961, but now it is too late. On those occasions, he thought, the United States could have "drawn a line west of Mekong and said it will defend no more than that."
Now, the prime minister believes, the United States owes it to the Thais in particular and Southeast Asia in general to maintain a "military shield" behind which South Vietnam can build industrially.
Lee thinks there's some point to buying time with a shield because he believes in the great-man theory of history. And the great man is none other than Lee Kuan Yew, who thinks that because of his own competence and shrewdness Singapore has succeeded where South Vietnam has failed. "If you can find the group of men who could do it," Lee said in Dunster, "Saigon can do what Singapore did." In fact, the prime minister boasted, "If one looked at Saigon and Singapore in 1954, one would have said Singapore was the goner, not Saigon."
Because he believes one great man makes the difference, Lee blames the Eisenhower administration for America's present dilemma, because Eisenhower "permitted Diem to systematically eliminate all alternatives to him." South Vietnam no longer had a pool of talent from which a hero-ruler might emerge. "You can't go talent-scouting for leaders like in a telephone directory," Lee points out; "the British didn't create me."
The British may not have created Lee, but they did provide him with a Cambridge education and later bolstered him when his political machine began to sputter. Lee was the head of the ruling People's Action Party, and in 1962, British officials decided his power was eroding so quickly that his three-year old nation left alone would soon become another Cuba. The British decided that the best way to preserve Lee's power over Communist obstructionists was to unite Singapore and Malaysia, an ideal for which Lee had been striving for a decade. With British support, such a federation was effected in 1963. It was unstable from the outset and dissolved two years later, but observers believe that Lee has emerged a stronger Asian figure as a result of the temporary coalition.
Lee's strength probably has derived, in part, from his shrewdness. At Dunster House, he was the complete politician--deftly dodging embarrassing questions about the absence of political opposition in Singapore, humbly reiterating that it is not his place to order Americans around, and mentioning his accomplishments in Singapore just often enough to establish his credentials. The prime minister spoke into what looked like a microphone but was actually an attachment to his private tape recorder, "so I can check back and make sure I wasn't misquoted," he explained.
There is no doubt that Lee has done much for Singapore. The tiny island republic has a per capita income of $500 per year, the highest in the area. From 1961 to 1965, Lee spent $315 million on economic development, focusing on power plants, water facilities, roads and other precursors of industrial growth. Singapore has negotiated trade agreements with the Soviet Union, Hungary, Bulgaria, Great Britain, the United States, and several other nations.
Lee still must tackle an acute unemployment problem. It is estimated that 20,000 more jobless youths emerge from the schools in Singapore each year, and there seems to be no immediate solution in sight.
Perhaps a more important problem, and one Lee refused to discuss in Dunster House, is the lack of political opposition in his country. There is no opposition to speak of at present, except an underground Communist movement. In three of the past four by-elections, all the candidates in Lee's party ran unopposed. Lee said last year that he would like to see a "good, lively, opposition" but he doesn't seem to act with that idea in mind. Newspapers are strictly licensed, and leading Communists who happen to bob above the surface are frequently jailed.
These internal problems, however, are dwarfed by the Vietnam war, which brought Lee to see President Johnson. Lee is not the kind of man who would admit that his future rests entirely in America's hands. On the contrary, he told his Harvard audience, "If you leave, we'll soldier on. We'll try. I'm only telling you the awful consequence which withdrawal would mean." One gets the feeling that Lee believes those "awful consequences" would not mean his downfall. It would take more than the blunders of a misguided super-power to accomplish that.
10 May 2010
I am so sick of Durian!
I have been very very sick for the last 2 days and I am blaming it on my over durian bingeing- Of those of you who have no idea of what this thorny king of fruits of SE Asia is, you can simply wiki it to find out or checkout my previous posts. I bought two packets of already nicely packed durians last friday down at the fruit stall as they are already now in season. They were of Monthong variety and I was pretty sure they came across the border as I am yet to see a durian tree being grown here (though I am told in the south of Laos there are plenty of durian trees grown) This wasnt the first time I had durian here but this was the first time I got really sick. My wife did tell me that I shouldnt eat too much of it as they can be quiet “heaty”. I simply ignored her as in my world, nothing comes in the way between me and my love for durian. I told her that this was my only guilty vice so she should let me indulge in it. But there I was regretting the whole thing as I vomited profusely the next day. I fell so sick I actually couldn't get myself out of the bed nevermind having anything solid to eat as I just simply threw out soon after I took anything down my throat. This is one of those times I have to let down my ego and say sorry to my wife.
05 May 2010
10 Commandments of Goofiest Fiscal Policies
As the media frenzy of Greece's debt crisis slowly unfolds, all eyes are now looking at how Germany and France will come out of this in ensuring that the Euro will remain a stable currency. There is an obvious fear of a contagion effect affecting the rest of the smaller ecomomies that make up PIIGS which to my mind is quite an acronym to give for Portugal, Ireland, Iceland and Spain. Whilst the figures of the rescue package announced are mind boggling, I have been having a hard time trying to understand why there are angers on both sides of the fence- okay I am just kidding! I can understand why the ordinary Germans are angry. After all their country will have to come out with the biggest share in the bailout and I am sure the money will come out from the taxpayers. This was reminiscent of the amount they spent unifying the two Germans. But that was different. German reunification was somewhat a national issue- to reunify of what was a single sovereign country. The current bailout was nothing of that sort. The two countries are vastly different in terms of politics, identities and are wide apart in terms of economic wealth. They maybe under a union but we all know that politically and economically countries that form the Union are still wide apart. I mean just ask the Brits on why they will never join the Euro Zone. I dont think they are ready to subsidize the poorer members when they have their own economic problems and budget deficit to sort out. I just wish David Cameron a very good luck on how he and his new coalition Government will manage to shrink UK's massive deficits.
That brings me to this issue which is closer to home. We have been brought up in a subsidized culture and If we could have the option, everything in this world should be free. But how many of us do realize this? - in the real world this can never be the case. somehow, someone has to pay for something that we get for free which in our case the Government. But Governments have to earn some money to pay for all these services and obviously tax will form the major bulk to fill up the Government’s coffers. For us, its a good thing we have oil and infact for every dollar that the Government earns 80 cents is actually coming from oil and gas. How many people do realise this? how many people realise that such resource-based income is not sustainable?
Just to give you and idea, for one, oil is not an infinite resource, they do and can run out. for second, what makes us think, with fear of climate change and rush for alternative energy and so on, oil will remain a valuable commodity? I mean just think about it- the world stopped using steam engine not because we ran out of water but we found a better and more efficient energy which was oil. Wont oil suffer the same fate once the world finds a better alternative?
Sometimes thinking the worst case scenario will make us understand the consequences easier. Herewith, I thought why dont we sit down for a moment and think of what would be the worst possible macro economic and financial policies that any Government could adopt to destroy their own countries.
1. Thou shall spend money that thou do not have.
Governments are just like you and me. If you want to go bust you can just simply spend, spend and spend. Now unless you are as big as the USA which can print money almost at will, with a huge economy to back you up and a fiat money that has a life in itself (PetroDollar, Chinese Dollar, Euro Dollar), you can forget of being extravagant without facing the consequences. Greece is a perfect example of this situation.
They need to have an income to support its public sector spending that can include paying the salaries of the public servants, the capital infrastructure spending as well as the many subsidies given. Income can come from the tax in our case the oil tax as well as profits and dividends from our investments at home and abroad. If we spend more than we earn we may have to find other sources of the income. We can either increase the tax or in the case of Greece they actually increase their public sector borrowing from the private banks through the sale of their bonds which are now rated as junk. If your government bonds are backed with some valuable security that will work out just fine. But once you have a bad record of not paying the agreed dividend as promised, you can be sure no creditor will ever buy your bonds.
2.Thou shall have a bloated civil service.
Lets face it- The public sector does not create wealth. It spends it for social programs and public sector infrastructure projects like building roads and hospitals etc. Of course you do need this program to push for your social agenda. after all, thats is why Governments exist. But if you do need to spend on this, be sure you have the money to pay for it. A better option could have been attracting private sector participation as well as foreign direct investments. 3Ps or Public Finance Initiatives or some of the ingenious business models are perfect models that can be exploited.
3. Thou shall have a deficit that hit beyond 10% of GDP
Isn't this obvious? If you earn $1 but you spend $1.40, that spells trouble. Ask Greece.
4. Thou shall have more subsidies and more subsidies
To be continued......
That brings me to this issue which is closer to home. We have been brought up in a subsidized culture and If we could have the option, everything in this world should be free. But how many of us do realize this? - in the real world this can never be the case. somehow, someone has to pay for something that we get for free which in our case the Government. But Governments have to earn some money to pay for all these services and obviously tax will form the major bulk to fill up the Government’s coffers. For us, its a good thing we have oil and infact for every dollar that the Government earns 80 cents is actually coming from oil and gas. How many people do realise this? how many people realise that such resource-based income is not sustainable?
Just to give you and idea, for one, oil is not an infinite resource, they do and can run out. for second, what makes us think, with fear of climate change and rush for alternative energy and so on, oil will remain a valuable commodity? I mean just think about it- the world stopped using steam engine not because we ran out of water but we found a better and more efficient energy which was oil. Wont oil suffer the same fate once the world finds a better alternative?
Sometimes thinking the worst case scenario will make us understand the consequences easier. Herewith, I thought why dont we sit down for a moment and think of what would be the worst possible macro economic and financial policies that any Government could adopt to destroy their own countries.
1. Thou shall spend money that thou do not have.
Governments are just like you and me. If you want to go bust you can just simply spend, spend and spend. Now unless you are as big as the USA which can print money almost at will, with a huge economy to back you up and a fiat money that has a life in itself (PetroDollar, Chinese Dollar, Euro Dollar), you can forget of being extravagant without facing the consequences. Greece is a perfect example of this situation.
They need to have an income to support its public sector spending that can include paying the salaries of the public servants, the capital infrastructure spending as well as the many subsidies given. Income can come from the tax in our case the oil tax as well as profits and dividends from our investments at home and abroad. If we spend more than we earn we may have to find other sources of the income. We can either increase the tax or in the case of Greece they actually increase their public sector borrowing from the private banks through the sale of their bonds which are now rated as junk. If your government bonds are backed with some valuable security that will work out just fine. But once you have a bad record of not paying the agreed dividend as promised, you can be sure no creditor will ever buy your bonds.
2.Thou shall have a bloated civil service.
Lets face it- The public sector does not create wealth. It spends it for social programs and public sector infrastructure projects like building roads and hospitals etc. Of course you do need this program to push for your social agenda. after all, thats is why Governments exist. But if you do need to spend on this, be sure you have the money to pay for it. A better option could have been attracting private sector participation as well as foreign direct investments. 3Ps or Public Finance Initiatives or some of the ingenious business models are perfect models that can be exploited.
3. Thou shall have a deficit that hit beyond 10% of GDP
Isn't this obvious? If you earn $1 but you spend $1.40, that spells trouble. Ask Greece.
4. Thou shall have more subsidies and more subsidies
To be continued......
27 April 2010
Hutang Sekeliling Pinggang (Debt all around your waist)
Looking at the current debt crisis facing Greece, I cant help but see that there really isn't much difference between nations and its peoples - When things go wrong, we like to lay faults on others but most often than not we are not completely faultless ourselves. Blaming others is always the most convenient excuse to avoid self examination. Blame the credit rating agencies for giving a bad image to your debt service records, blame the banks for imposing high interest rates, blame the regulators for putting up stringent borrowing regulations or rather blame the shops and the car dealers for offering attractive discounts and sales. we stop short of blaming ourselves for our own profligacy.
In Greece, the blame game has just started. Its citizens are now going out to the streets blaming the Government for the new austerity measures affecting just about everyone. Politicians are blaming the speculators and the credit rating agencies whilst its Government is now looking at the Currency Union and the IMF for a bailout. Of course Germany being the strongest and the richest member in the Union is expected to contribute to the bailout the biggest. Obviously, for the ordinary Germans they are not happy and balked at the idea of helping a very extravagant friend down south. Their Government would probably have little choice but offer a rescue package- this is part of the rules of the game. when you are in a currency union, you no longer have the independent right to manipulate your own currency. before this, Greece could probably be able to devalue its drachma or print as much. but now they couldn't. The Euro is a centralised currency and a member simply gives up that monetary sovereignty for a regional monetary union. You will have to follow certain rules. Of course as a condition of the billions of dollars bailout, Greece is now forced to adopt some austerity measures. In the good old days Greece could spend, spend and spend. It actually borrowed so much from the private banks to support its public sector spending. When the country ran into a huge deficit, -beyond the 3% cap to the GDP- imposed by the Euro Zone, Greece ability to pay its public debt became suspect and their Government bonds downgraded to become junks. Comparatively speaking the Greek’s public sector work less with better pay than the Germans. They have far better social safety nets than the wealthier compatriots up north. Their labour laws are far more pro socialist cum populist fervour than anywhere else in Europe which really is punishing individual entrepreneurship. Infact Greece ranks amongst the lowest in the Economic Freedom Index. In plain term, If you are lazy you are better off in Greece than in Germany because of its generous welfare system. But now things have changed, the richer countries in the Euro Zone are now picking up the tab for Greece’s profligacy. The big question in most Germans' mind now must be- why should we pay for the Greek's extravagance?
So the next time you are taking your credit card out for a spin, THINK of Greece before you get your card swiped. Unless you have a deep pocket or a wealthy friend to bail you out and once the debt becomes a real burden, you don’t really have anyone else to blame but yourself..remember that.
In Greece, the blame game has just started. Its citizens are now going out to the streets blaming the Government for the new austerity measures affecting just about everyone. Politicians are blaming the speculators and the credit rating agencies whilst its Government is now looking at the Currency Union and the IMF for a bailout. Of course Germany being the strongest and the richest member in the Union is expected to contribute to the bailout the biggest. Obviously, for the ordinary Germans they are not happy and balked at the idea of helping a very extravagant friend down south. Their Government would probably have little choice but offer a rescue package- this is part of the rules of the game. when you are in a currency union, you no longer have the independent right to manipulate your own currency. before this, Greece could probably be able to devalue its drachma or print as much. but now they couldn't. The Euro is a centralised currency and a member simply gives up that monetary sovereignty for a regional monetary union. You will have to follow certain rules. Of course as a condition of the billions of dollars bailout, Greece is now forced to adopt some austerity measures. In the good old days Greece could spend, spend and spend. It actually borrowed so much from the private banks to support its public sector spending. When the country ran into a huge deficit, -beyond the 3% cap to the GDP- imposed by the Euro Zone, Greece ability to pay its public debt became suspect and their Government bonds downgraded to become junks. Comparatively speaking the Greek’s public sector work less with better pay than the Germans. They have far better social safety nets than the wealthier compatriots up north. Their labour laws are far more pro socialist cum populist fervour than anywhere else in Europe which really is punishing individual entrepreneurship. Infact Greece ranks amongst the lowest in the Economic Freedom Index. In plain term, If you are lazy you are better off in Greece than in Germany because of its generous welfare system. But now things have changed, the richer countries in the Euro Zone are now picking up the tab for Greece’s profligacy. The big question in most Germans' mind now must be- why should we pay for the Greek's extravagance?
So the next time you are taking your credit card out for a spin, THINK of Greece before you get your card swiped. Unless you have a deep pocket or a wealthy friend to bail you out and once the debt becomes a real burden, you don’t really have anyone else to blame but yourself..remember that.
14 April 2010
Sabaidee Pii Mai
Sibaidee Pii Mai (which means Happy Lao New Year) everyone. This is our first time celebrating Pii Mai..Much like the Songkran Festival in Thailand, just about every where in Vientiane we are seeing water fights..kids and adults alike armed to the teeth with water guns, buckets and water hoses and simply douse and shoot any passers-by they see. Traditionally they will just pour water just behind your shoulder as a way of cleansing yourself and wishing you good luck. However, things have changed especially with the young people. They sure are enjoying themselves on these annual public holidays that normally coincide with the Lao New Year. I see tourists or Falangs (Farangs in Thailand) joining the fun too. I suppose since April is the hottest month here, the people dont really mind getting soaked with water as the temperature can really go up to its 40s.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)