Thursday, March 29, 2018

Cameron Kasky & Emma González on Twitter

A couple of tweets for my blog, lest they get lost in the avalanche... 



And a few hours later she responds...

[Embedded tweets are linked so anyone can to read the threads. Time stamps are html active.] 

Sunday, March 25, 2018

Syrian Mismanagement Analysis by EHSAN22

Thanks to Joshua Landis @joshua_landis for this thread. The writer's identity is not publicly available but I am satisfied that he is both knowledgeable and credible. 
"Important thread by @EHSANI2 explaining 50 years of economic errors that led up to the collapse of Syria's economy and vicious civil war.  Unfortunately, this dismal story of mismanagement & bad policy is the common story of many Arab countries. A must read." 


Thread containing 64 Tweets. Apologies to Readers For The Extreme Length. Motivation was To Shed Light On Importance Of Eco & The Financial Challenges Of Governance Systems. To Understand #Syria ‘s war for example, One Ought To Go Back Perhaps Decades To See…

2-The seeds of the #Viciouscircle that the Mideast region finds itself in today were planted at least 5 decades ago. Excessive public spending without matching revenues were the catalyst to a faulty & dangerous incentive system that helped to balloon populations beyond control

3-A governance system that was ostensibly put in place to help the poor ended up being a built-in factory for poverty generation. Excessive subsidies helped misallocate resources & mask the true cost of living for households. Correlation between family size and income was lost

4-Successive Mideast leaders are often referred to as evil dictators. I see them more as lousy economists and poor users of simple arithmetic and excel spreadsheets that can help demonstrate the simple, yet devastating power of compounding

5-Unless you are a Gulf-based monarchy enjoying the revenue stream from oil and gas that can postpone your day of reckoning, the numbers in nearly every single Arab country don't add up.

6-Important to note that excessive population growth is not the issue here. Japan & many parts of Europe are suffering from too little population growth. The problem in Arab societies is lack of productivity stemming from weak private sector & overburdened bankrupt public sector

7-As students of Economics know, "Potential" Economic Growth of a country is derived by adding the growth rate of its labor force to the growth rate of the economy's productivity. High labor force growth therefore ought to be a plus for the "Potential Growth".

8-The Arab World's problem is that it suffers from shockingly low levels of "productivity". This may seem like a fancy word but the concept encapsulates everything that Arab economies and societies suffer from

9-Why does the Arab world have such low productivity? The answer lies in everything from excessive size of public sector, subsidies and overbearing regulatory system leading to corruption. As public sector liabilities grow, education, healthcare & infrastructure funding suffers

10-Why is the size of the public sector coupled w excessive subsidies the problem? Because what starts as the noble cause of helping the poor ends up masking the true costs of raising family size. Governments soon go broke. Services suffer. Anger rises. We know the drill now

11-Average cost of raising a child until age 18 for a middle-income family in the U.S. is approximately $245,340 (or $304,480, adjusted for projected inflation). That is about $15,000 per child per year for a two-parent family with median annual income (College costs excluded)

12-Growing up in Syria, I can still recall the "Family Booklet". The more dependents you had on that booklet, the more was your allocation of subsidized rice, sugar, tea, edible oil, etc. Your home electricity was also subsidized. So was your diesel. Schooling? Free all the way

13-Not only almost all your food staples and energy use was subsidized, the Syrian State used to give a prize (Nishan) to women who gave birth to 12 children or more. Syria at that time had about 6 million people (produced 300k oil barrels a day & had plenty of water)

14-Without having to pay full price for bread, sugar, electricity, tea, fuel or education (all the way to college) and with the State becoming by far the largest employer (job guaranteed), the Syrian population doubled every 22 years. Imagine the pressures on the State coffers

15-No need for much imagination about how Syrian State fared as its population doubled every 22 years while its oil reserves & production dropped by 50%. It was still expected to offer all those freebies to a populace that never once asked how the State was to pay for all this

16-Not only Syrians never asked how their state could meet those obligations while they doubled every 22 years but the State itself never explained. It is debatable that the State was even aware of the power of compounding and what that does in the outer years (50 years ahead)

17-As State finances (revenue minus expenses with little to no borrowing program) suffered, so did the services. Schools, hospitals, municipal services became insufficiently funded. They were examples of Paul who had to be robbed to pay Peter (subsidies & losing public sector)

18- As the state could not increase salaries with inflation, real wages & standards of living suffered. Even Mother Teresa would have had to accept a bribe if she had 5 kids and a salary of $150 a month. Corruption is an inevitable by-product of a broken system.

19-When the State can't meet its built-in obligations, services suffer, corruption is rampant. The public's anger grows and fingers start to point at anyone and everyone that is getting a bigger slice of the cake that is not growing anywhere near number of mouths it needs to feed

20-In the end, Governments that start off by offering more than they can sustainably afford in the long run, end up being criticized and even toppled for seemingly not providing enough to a population that grew beyond that capacity of the system to handle

21-When Governments spend, they can fund their expenditures in three ways: 1-Collect taxes. 2-Borrow (assuming Lenders are available). 3-Print money (assuming the central bank is not totally independent of the Govt)

22-Without sustainable tax base, it's unlikely lenders will be willing to fund governments unless the latter are asked to pay unsustainably high interest rates. Similarly, printing money will soon lead to debasing the currency & rampant inflation. What about Collecting taxes?

23-Inscribed over the front door of the US tax office, (IRS) are the words "Taxes are what we pay for a civilised society." As one once also said: "Countries that don't have a properly observed tax regime usually fall into chaos and corruption"

24-Growing up in #Syria , avoiding taxes was akin to breathing. It had to be done. Often times, tax rates were impossibly high (top marginal rate was once over 70%). Not paying taxes is not just the fault of citizens but also Govts who need to accurately calibrate those rates

25-Regardless of underlying factors behind poor tax collection, fact is that the Syrian Govt was expected to provide services, run losing businesses (public sector) & offer generous subsidies without matching tax collection or borrowing. Something had to give- Quality of services

26-As spending increased with rise of the population,Govt investment in schools, hospitals, roads, municipal services, civil servant salaries & human capital suffered and even froze.The public had the right to complain but the public did't want to know how govt was funding itself

27-"When the children come, God will hand their fortunes along with them". This is what we grew up hearing from families whose income did not seem to support the number of children they had. People would laugh it off as a joke. Sadly, this was Syria's ticking time bomb ==>

28-On my trip to Syria few months ago, young gentleman at my hotel explained to me how he was finding it hard to resist the pressure from his extended family and friends to stop at 5 kids. His father had 11. His brothers had 8-9. Having only 5 himself was insulting to his manhood

29-Like most Arab countries, Syria's peak fertility (Avg number of children per woman) was between 1975-1980. The world's highest then was Yemen at 8.7. Syria was 9th in the world at 7.47. It was in the company of Senegal, Malawi, Niger, Kenya, Rwanda, Afghanistan & Gaza

30-Even by 2005-2010, #Syria 's population growth rate was still in the top 10 in the world at 3.26%. It also had one of the world's youngest populations with a median age of only 15.4 years (only 4.8% was over the age of 60).These statistics are from UN'S World Population tables

31-#Egypt did embark on strong population control strategy. Over two decades and by early 2000, its population growth rate dropped from 3.5% to 1.7%. Large billboards were used in rural areas. An expanded use of contraception program was also effective. Sadly, success didn't last

32-By 2007, complacency set in. Mubarak also started pushing back against international NGO's administrating the programs. Once he was overthrown & Mursi came in, all contraceptions were banned. Before long, growth rate was back up to 2.55% taking country's population near 100mm

33-While #Egypt tried its hand with family planning, #Syria never did. This thread is not about merits or problems of population growth. It's about fiscal pressures this dynamic inflicts on State budgets in a world of high subsidies, excessive public spending & limited resources

34-Syrian Gov was either not fully aware of the unfolding dynamic or that it was aware but it found it politically difficult to embark on a serious family planning program. Was the religious minority status of the leadership a factor & how would the religious establishment react?

35-Whatever the motivations or the excuses were, fact remains that no steps were taken to match the baked-in future population numbers with revenues or resources. Only way was to make cuts in Govt investment, freeze public salaries and watch the quality of the services decline

36-Many have blamed current Syrian Leadership for a long list of governance shortfalls. No one (included Assad himself) can claim otherwise. What this long thread tried to highlight is that at least empirically speaking, Bashar Assad inherited a near impossible situation

37-Ironically, when Hafez Assad took over, he wrestled the Ba’ath party to the right as he fought off the more leftist wing that took power with him first. He immediately embarked on his “corrective movement”. I recall American cars being allowed as imports (yellow dodge taxis)

38-Older members of my family still refer to the period between 1970 and 1976 as Syria’s golden period. Merchants saw their businesses boom as foreign trade was relaxed and the corrective movement quickly became seen as a tilt to the right from an earlier ultra leftist leaning

39-Regardless of your politics, Hafez Assad was a larger than life figure in modern Syrian politics. Soon after taking over, he powered forward building a top down centralized State (Syria was part of Soviet camp during Cold War) that would come to dominate Syria’s future

40-Merely 6 years after taking over, sporadic assassinations became widespread. Syrians would later find out their Govt was at war with the Moslem Brotherhood culminating in Hama. This 6 year battle between Islamists & Damascus left its mark in Syria’s DNA ever since

41-Having been near a death situation, Syrian Leadership abruptly reversed the trends from 1970-1976 when it opened the economy and relaxed international trade and moved almost the exact opposite direction. The old Eco corrective movement was frozen. Security reined supreme now

42-Between 1982 and the year 2000 when Bashar took over, Syrian Leadership spent most of its energies making sure the Islamist and Ikhwan would never see the day of light again. Being charged with belonging to MB received the death sentence by law

43-Add collapse of the Soviet union (Syria was a big victim of this huge event), falling reserves and oil production, currency devaluation, restrictions on foreign exchange transfers using draconian laws, Syria’s economy took a beating just when its fertility was top 10 globally

44-Fast forward to 2000 when current President Assad takes over. Yes, expectations & hopes are high both domestically & internationally. A very young population now has one of theirs. He studied abroad. He was surely going to reverse direction both politically & economically

45-From the start, Bashar’s main challenge was always going to be how to meet those high expectations. Political activists & thinkers quickly set up Damascus salons to carve a new political platform where they can start to participate in political life.

46-Economically speaking, there was now talk about allowing foreign banks and even starting a stock market. Economic reforms of this type were always going to produce winners & losers. Those w capital made it big. They now owned banks, insurance co’s & hotels. And the losers? ==>

47-Losers were all those one of 7.4 kids born around 1980 to mothers w high fertility rates (tweet #29) & fathers who did not have the income to support them. Those in rural areas fared worse. They were ill prepared or

48-The state never implemented family planning campaign (how would Islamists have reacted to Alawi President trying to reduce the numbers of the majority?). The state also never communicated to the public that course country was on was arithmetically untenable. Clock kept ticking

49-This is not to say State didn’t make mistakes. Old agrarian policies were by now resulting in overexploitation of groundwater resources (again this was an inherited legacy). What was new was 2007-2009 drought that was one of worst in recent memory. What about corruption? =>

50-Corruption thrives in heavily bureaucratic centralized systems where civil servants suffer from frozen salaries and inflation rates that eats away at their real purchasing power. Without supplemental income, employees at all levels of the state apparatus will hardly survive

51-As the State can't afford to raise salaries with inflation, employees at all levels are left to fend off for themselves to make ends meet. The state knows it, the public knows it & what you end up with is institutionalized corruption as inevitable consequence of broken system

52-For corruption at this level to be addressed, level of public spending & liabilities have to fall dramatically. Size of Govt has to be smaller. Public sector has to slim down.Those left can now receive proper wages. Taxes must all get collected as State gets handle on finances

53-What about corruption at highest levels? What about Rami Makhlouf? As we found out recently in Saudi, this problem is not restricted to Syria. This is not to say that Rami & leadership made a mistake in occupying such visible position in Syria's Eco (cell phone for one) ==>

54-Rami Makhlouf seems to have turned into the lightening rod for every Syrian whose purchasing power or standard of living fell behind. While its impossible not to appreciate the reasons behind this widespread public sentiment at the time, a little bit of math helps here ==>

55-Many cite the "billions that Rami stole". Suppose that all this is true & that Rami siphoned off $1 billion every single year. Had this money gone to the public, each of 23 million Syrian would have had their income rise $43 a year ($3.65 per month). Hardly solves the issue =>

56-No one ought to dismiss the negative effects of high level corruption at the high end. Appearance & optics matter tremendously & Rami’s case is a perfect microcosm of that. But,had Rami not been around, it would make very little difference to the broader issue at hand

57-What about Western political meddling? The state department had run a democracy promotion program since Sep 11 & many activists were supplied with media training & equipment to help them capitalize on the moment when it presented itself. March 2011 was that moment

58-What about political reforms that were expected after Assad’s arrival in 2000? This was classic case of high expectations clashing with reality on the ground & the system as a whole. What was seen as needed “reforms” to some was viewed as dangerous slippery slope by others

59-What was described above was the nasty cocktail mix that was waiting in the wings as events unfolded in March 2011. Those who wanted more political participation, the poor, those from the rural areas, the Islamists and the Regional/western adversaries of the Syrian Leadership

60-Assad May not have anticipated the Tsunami early but by the summer & end of 2011, he made up his mind. This was going to be a fight till the end where losing was not an option. There would be no panic but he would stop at nothing till he ensures victory.

61-In conclusion, Assad was dealt a tough hand. He inherited a legacy that was born out of years of governance challenges. How to maintain a largely socialist structure while population doubled every 22 years & revenues from country’s natural resources were falling by nearly 50%

62-When & if Syria’s war is over, a new chapter & contract must start. The private sector must become the engine of growth. Regulations must be streamlined. Taxes must be cut to level low enough to ensure respectable collection rate. One final idea =>

63-Wish list: Rather than Financial handouts, Syria must ask for 20y grace period that would allow it to get to export to the rest of the world free of duties. Sanctions ought to also be lifted. Investments in labor intensive industries must be encouraged to help employment

64-If & when the economy finds its footing, critical that women labor participation rises from the abysmal rates in the region. Studies conclusively show that increased women participation in the labor force is the single biggest factor behind population growth control. End

Saturday, March 24, 2018

Tweet: "Women are too emotional"

This tweet is inappropriate for a Facebook post today, but I have to mark it somewhere for future reference.
The replies thread is too rich to lose...

  • Damnit, of course I see this tweet after I tweet mine..... your quick wit prevails again.
  • Same hand to head pose too!
  • It’s a lesbian rule. Lesbianing.
  • If only we had been warned, if somebody had the presence of mind to suggest something along the lines of "A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons"...
  • Sighhh. If only someone had... Who knew? Who knew?
  • Apparently somebody sent an email, but I don't recollect her name.Hahahaha well doneI've said this before, but Trump has made a better case for a female President than any female could have done.To be fair, he’s made an excellent case for an adult president.
  • He’s also making tanning beds very unpopular....
  • A woman would have already buried the body, cleaned up, secured an alibi and bought a new pair of shoes.
  • And started dinner while sipping wine!!
  • I've surrendered my last ounce of Male Apologist, got crushed under all the stupid. I'm down for a mandated 50/50 Congress like a co-ed volleyball team so we don't accidentally blow ourselves up.
  • Samantha Bee's endometriosis report was like the final tiny straw.
  • So that's what it feels like to snort salad through my nose laughing.The first rule of Political Fight Club is you don't tweet about Political Fight Club.
More at the link, going on and on...


Friday, March 9, 2018

Korea Notes -- 2005 & 2018

After 2005 N. Korea nearly starved, 
literally, until the economy got so bad 
that reports of cannibalism prompted 
humanitarian aid in one form or an-
other. 
Click on the image to enlarge. 
Notice the dates: 2013, eight years 
after these notes & links to the Way-
back Machine.

I no longer have control over my old blog so this is a re-post from 2005. I have more thoughts to add but at the moment this is captured for the record because much has happened since then:

  • Kim Jong Il died in 2011 and his youngest son, Kim Jong Un became the next Dear Leader. 
  • Continued dividends from the Vietnam conflict, already paying well in 2005, added more than a decade to the flourishing success in South Korea (just as the Korean conflict aided Japan). 
  • North Korea not only survived but emerged as a nuclear state despite a few horrible years of privation so severe that reports of cannibalism appeared a few years later. 
  • As of yesterday (at this writing) the bizarre saber-rattling of our own president has resulted in what could be another Nixon in China moment.
  • And thanks to the nuclear ambitions of both China and North Korea, America's military presence (particularly in Korea and Japan) has continued to prime the Asian economy.


Reply to a Jane Galt post

Just came across today's post on Asymetrical Information regarding recent reports of deterioration of North Korean leadership. I started to leave a comment, but in my usual way I had too many words and decided a blog post would be better. Here I have more space. And she and her readers would probably not find my remarks either interesting or germane so I'll stick with a link instead.

Interesting post. Reports of cannibalism have been seeping out for a couple of years now, with Japanese journalists doing a lot of reporting. I often wonder how long North Korea can last until it completely implodes. I read whatever comes along about Korea because my tour of duty in South Korea raised my awareness of the country.

I can see how M.A.S.H. can be viewed as a thinly-veiled commentary on Vietnam, but I don't think most people would put that construction on either the movie or the TV series. After having served in the US Army Medical Service Corp, in Korea, all of 1966 and half of 1967, I was entirely taken by the film just a couple of years later. I can assure you that the not-too-military attitude of the doctors that I worked with was not too far off from the M.A.S.H. profile. Many of those guys were in effect drafted just as I was, but because of their professional training they were made officers rather than enlisted men, with "professional" pay, "hazardous duty" pay, and whatever other perqs Uncle Sugar could manage in order to pursuade them to serve. It made for good medicine, if not good military decorum. I served under a Captain who could not get a security clearance because he was a foreign national. Had there been a need for him to access certain confidential documents in the safe, a Spec-5 assigned as our pharmacy tech would have to open the safe for him!

The point of my comment, however, has to do with the attitude of (South) Koreans in 1966 regarding the Vietnam conflict, and also the line dividing their own country. These two topics were connected in the minds of many Koreans with whom I spoke.

I was shocked the first time I heard it, but after hearing it more than once I began to understand that Koreans regarded what we call "the Korean Conflict" as the sparkplug launching the Japanese economy as the economic engine of the Pacific rapidly being manifest at the time. Japan was the staging area for a good many US (or UN, if you prefer - that being the putative authority for our being there, then and now) military needs. Uniforms, food, storage areas, docks and whatever immediate support was needed for the US participation was furnished, at considerable economic advantage, by the newly pacified Japan, just a few years following WWII. Even when I was there, I think we may have been receiving supplies from Japan; reconstituted milk, for example, comes to mind.

Whether or not, or to what extent, any of this is true is beside the point. It was the thinking of Koreans at the time, undescored by a hatred of Japan that defies description in English. Prior to the Second World War, Korea had been dominated as a Japanese territory from the end of the Russo-Japanese War, 1915. During those years, the Japanese had treated Korea in a manner reminiscent of European Colonialism. Korean children had to learn and speak Japanese in school, people were required to change their names to Japanese names, historic artifacts of the country were collected and displayed in a National Museum, constructed for the purpose. But Korean young women were also transported across Asia to serve as sex slaves to the Japanese military, and their Japanese overlords treated Koreans with the same disrespect as Colonial subjects were by their masters. Again, how much of this is true is beside the point, although I have seen and read nothing to contradict the substance of it. That was the thinking of Koreans with whom I spoke.

At the time I was in Korea there were reported to be about 50,000 US troops stationed there. At the same time, interestingly enough, there were about the same number of South Korean troops stationed in Vietnam. There were so many Koreans in Vietnam that it was feasible for bilingual Koreans (Korean/English) to take assignments as translators in Vietnam. I heard reports of Korean taxi drivers going to work in Saigon in order to earn money to send home to their families. (We are witnessing the same phenomenon now, here, with aliens, both legal and illegal, coming to America to work, to live at what we imagine to be a "subsistence" level, while sending a significant amount of their earnings home to Africa, Mexico, Bangladesh or whatever third world country was their home. These are just a few about which I know personally from having employed them in my cafeteria.) And Korean soldiers assigned to Vietnam, of course, were the principle conduits of wealth back to Korea. In other words, South Koreans saw the Vietnam Conflict as their opportunity to flourish, in the same way that the Korean Conflict had aided Japan.

Regarding the DMZ and the division of their own country, it was clear to me that the notion of "Two Koreas" is a fanciful figment of the American imagination. My first reality check was in the form of a map, quickly drawn on a scrap of paper by a Korean X-ray technician explaining to me the location of Taejon. I had received a "permanent" assignment after a few weeks of OJT at the 21st Evac Hospital at Inchon, near Seoul. I mentioned that I had heard of Taejon, but I didn't know exactly were it was.
"Here, I can show you," he said.
Taking a piece of paper he sketched a line drawing representing an outline of Korea. Next he drew a line through the middle and said, "Here is DMZ..."
Bam!
Instantly, I understood something more than the location of Taejon. I learned that in his mind the word "Korea" meant the entire country, not what I had been thinking of as "The Republic of South Korea." It was one of those "aha" moments for me. I remember it to this day. And for the rest of my tour of duty I never imagined that the Republic of South Korea was anything other than a temporary political construct, largely a creation of the American imagination.

As time passed, I came to the understanding that were it not for the US presence in Korea, there would be a good chance that the South might invade the North. Politically, we have been fed the line that a possible North Korean invasion of the South was the reason for the Demilitarized Zone (odd designation, since it is one of the most heavily fortified pieces of geography on the map). That may be true, but it is only half of the truth, the other half being that the South may have been just as eager to invade the North to free them from their Communist leaders. The degree of hatred for Communism in South Korea was only matched by their hatred of the Japanese. And their willingness to take a stand for their beliefs was as strong as anyplace else on earth.

Regarding the post to which I am responding, this is an operative paragraph...
...I've always been rather surprised at liberals and basically isolationist libertarians who concede World War II, but offer Korea as an example of a morally questionable war. Dear Leader is doing his best to turn the entire country into a concentration camp; how is it morally questionable to have kept tens of millions in South Korea from having suffered that fate?
My response seems off-topic. But I offer it as another point of view from the vantage point of an old-fashioned "liberal" and conscientious objector who finds all wars to be morally questionable. My own take on Korea is shaped by the tail end of a discussion I caught on C-SPAN about a month ago. Regrettably, I don't know who was speaking or what the occasion was, but the man was clearly well informed. He was clear in his argument that the main stumbling block to a political solution to the challenge of North Korea was none other than the Republic of South Korea. A visceral dislike of both China and Japan causes the diplomatic result that South Korea refuses even to sit in talks with those other two important players in their neighborhood, even to discuss a way to deal with North Korea.

When I remember how much the population of South Korea must absolutely agree with that position, it makes me question whether "democracy" is really what we want to prevail in this situation.

Addendum:
The original link to that "Jane Galt" post vanished but the Wayback Machine captured it for the record:
Something's afoot in the land of Dear Leader. 
I went to school with a fellow who had been in Naval Intelligence, stationed in South Korea, before matriculating. He didn't tell me anything classified or anything, but he did offer horrifying reports of what was going on in the provinces, including cannibalism, as the regime not only produced a horrifying famine, but used the distribution of food to crack down on provinces it considered troublesome. 
That's why I've always been rather surprised at liberals and basically isolationist libertarians who concede World War II, but offer Korea as an example of a morally questionable war. Dear Leader is doing his best to turn the entire country into a concentration camp; how is it morally questionable to have kept tens of millions in South Korea from having suffered that fate? 
Oh, one could argue that US intervention prolonged the regime, or made it worse. But one can look at the first few decades of communist regimes in nearby countries to see that even if the regime hadn't lasted so long, the time it did last would have been plenty horrible enough that it should at least induce a few qualms about abandoning the South Koreans to such a fate. 
Yet it doesn't seem to. I was an enormous fan of M*A*S*H when it was first on the air, though I was far too young to grasp the political implications (I think I was nine when the series ended.) Now, of course, I realise that it was a thinly veiled metaphor for the Vietnam war: American boys and innocent asians being killed by a bunch of power-mad brass waging war for the fun of it. 
I often wonder if Alan Alda--or any of the other producers, directors, writers or actors of either the movie or the television series--ever looks at the news coming out of North Korea and thinks "Yeah, I guess maybe we were wrong about that." I doubt it, though. 
Posted by Jane Galt at January 31, 2005 09:05 AM