ONE WEEK HAS PASSED

It is almost one week already. I am still thinking about things that I should not think about. Anyhow, I believe that I should still do my part. Hope that something will change in the future.

IS COMMUNISM ECONOMY SOMETHING BAD?

This is just an academic discussion with no intention to provoke anybody. The question discussed in comparative politics class, is democracy’s capitalism better than communism’s socialism economy or closed market? Generally, in a democratic nation like Malaysia, we will have the connotation that capitalism is a kind of economy that can boast the nation economy while a closed market system will bring the nation’s development to nowhere. The question is, is it true? Statistic has proven that those first world nations are the one who practise capitalism system while those who practise socialism economy states such as North Korea, Myanmar, Cuba, Laos etc (except for China, it is a special case that need another discussion) are less developed. Communism or military regimes in those nations are rigid and not willing to open up their market for free flow. Why? When open market happens, it definitely will bring the nations to a higher level. A simple logic without referring to complicated theories is that, when two parties cooperate, they will get benefits from each other as each of them will have their different personal strength (this premise might have lots of contention, but for the moment in a simple explanation, it works). At the same time, when each of them depends too much on the other, dependency will happen. This means that those are depended on the other will be at the losing end. The advantage party will start to exploit the weaker side. In politics, it usually will be absorbing of democracy model into a non-democratic state. The weaker nation has no choice other than to oblige. That is why a lot of autocratic nations refuse to open up their market. One of my classmates said that even though Vietnam is a non-democratic nation, but their development level is very high. The growth might even far better than Malaysia. However, when we look at the nation democracy level in terms of freedom, human rights etc, they are improving. Their leaders are not that rigid anymore compared to decades back. Ignore the discussion whether it is good or not. The point is their leaders have to liberalise their ruling styles as well. Isn’t it means that open up market means that willingness to liberalise their political circuits as well?

Back to China’s scenario, the reason why China is able to open up their market is because of their ability to control their market. Worst case, they can practise back their closed market ideology without having to suffer much. Furthermore, they do not open up their market totally. There are still a lot of restrictions. The communism leaders will make sure that their political ideology is not badly affected (unless they want something from the West such as Olympic Games, then they will improve their human right track records slightly). Undeniably, China’s economy does improve tremendously after they started to open their market.

In a nutshell, I would say that capitalism system is a high risk high return model. Anyhow, the return chances are generally more than the lost. That is why when a nation liberalise their market, generally their economy will shoot up. However, when an economic crises happens, the one that liberalise their market the most are the one that suffered the most. South Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan are examples of it due to high amount of foreign investment. China’s economy is not that badly affected in 97/98 crisis comparatively since the market is domestic-orientated. I am of the opinion that capitalism system will bring a nation economy to a higher ground, but at the same time the nation will have to be bonded by more capitalism conventional regulations plus a high risk of economy collapse if the world economy gets into trouble.

(Those data are from my memory without double-checking the accuracy. Do welcome to correct me if I am wrong).

不必再烦恼选哪一间了

终于不用再想了。选了也没用。还是比较实际一点。乖乖的一个人在房间做论文吧。

CHINESE NEW YEAR

YEAH……. Tomorrow is Chinese New Year, but got so many assignments to be completed. Haiz….. Hope that can finish on time. Really need to bring books

FUNNY SECURITY GUARD IN NATIONAL ARCHIEVE

Long time didn’t blog already. A bit busy recently. Running here and there to get my application of extra credit hours to be approved so that I can graduate within 1 year, doing my assignments, paying back my working owe to my boss, applying multiple scholarships and jobs, fulfilling my promises of hanging out etc. But today, a very “interesting security guard” encourage me to blog about this. She told me not to use my handphone in research hall. Not even to sms. Can’t even put it in silent mode. Her reason is, the signboard say so. Letting us to bring in our handphone is already considered as lenient. So, we cannot use it. HAHAHAHA……. She thought the hall is Parliament is it? Even in Parliament, MPs and high-rank officers are allowed to bring in handphone. If not, how to communicate with others. How am I going to communicate with my boss whether she needs the materials I found or not. Not sure whether it is coincidence or not related incidence, a foreigner went out to the front desk and talk (The intonation is polite, so is either he is asking for something or he is just the same as me, complaining in a polite and soft manner). Not sure what they are talking about. But what I can hear from him (the foreigner) is “I use it to online”. And I did see him using his handphone (I heard from the front desk that it is an i-pod) quite often while he is in the hall. Plus he did not bring any laptop. So I suspect he is using it to surf the net. If that is the case, is it means that he cannot use his i-pod as well. VERY VERY FUNNY. The rationale for government offices banning usage of handphone is to avoid distracting others, not to ban it totally. I can understand that calling is prohibited. But should sms, using handphone to surf net, check details or even look at the time be banned to? Very funny guard. Anyhow, I did make a formal query to the head of department asking whether sms using silent mode without distracting others is allowed. Let’s wait for his reply.

PLAYING TRUANT

It is true that playing truant is something wrong, but the question is, are we really want to skip classes for fun? I do skip classes when I was in my secondary school. It is not that I did it for fun. Rather than going to school and cannot understand anything, why not we stay at home and study ourselves. Isn’t it better?

BACK TO UKM AGAIN

Coming back to UKM again after a tired but wonderful Royals Debate in UTHM. Back to UKM means back to classes, assignments, works etc… Going to fight with Mr. Stress again

TIRED WEEK

Nice trip but superb tired. Still have to start working immediately after coming back. Got thesis to do some more. Haiz…..

SARAWAK STATE ELECTION

Sarawak state election is definitely around the corner. The latest date for it to dissolve its State Assembly is by July 2011. For those who have not yet register, please do so as soon as possible as you will name a few months before your name can be gazetted. Personally for me, General Election will not be as early as the same as Sarawak State election, but in politics, nothing is impossible. It is “the art of possible”. Do register yourself as a voter when you reach 21 years old.

HOW TO ATTRACT TALENTS BACK TO MALAYSIA

It is wrong to say that Malaysia does not have excellent specialists. It is wrong to say that Malaysians are not talented. All these wrong perspectives are due to the reluctance of these creams of the cake to come back to Malaysia and serve the nation. In order to materialize our inspiration of Vision 2020, the government must stop this brain-drain. The question is how to attract them back? To solve this maze, we must foremost find out the reasons for them to serve other nations.

Obviously, most talented people find the salary and welfare benefits accorded to them by overseas institution are far more attractive. For this, the government needs to compete with other nations by providing them at least a satisfactory salary and welfare benefits if it is not more than what others can offer. As Aristotle portrayed, humans are interest-orientated. However, Malaysia has also had something that other nations do not have, which is identity roots. I believe as long as the salary is acceptable to their levels of talents, they will incline to come back to their motherlands. This might increase government’s expenditure, but it is worth. Imagine if anyone of them achieve an international recognition such as Nobel Prize under the name of Malaysia, it would be priceless then or at least they can help to push Malaysia’s development to a higher level.

Secondly, it is due to the future prospect of these talents. They might want to stay elsewhere due to the inability of the government to provide them a promising future such as in the field of medicine and technology. Government should use this opportunity by providing them their future prospect such as setting up research institution or centres needed by them. This is not a one-way benefit. Malaysia as a whole can get help from these Malaysia experts and lead those important and critical field but unpopular because of lacking of expertise. Thus, their talents would not be wasted.

However, prevention is still better than cure. It will be good if our education system can implant patriotism in their mindset. In a nutshell, making them to stay is better than attracting them back. However, if they have already been magnetised by other nations, then the government should demagnetise it and fly them back to their lovely motherland.