I would argue that greater transparency of information arms individuals with greater capacity for self-determination, increasing their bargaining chips and reducing leverage mismatches.
Blaming the voter base without understanding why they voted the way they did is arrogant and presumptuous.
While we have undoubtedly made great strides in our national development, what has been the impact of our ‘Malaysian’ culture on national development?
Can Economics show how, the most irrational and illogical – by conventional wisdom, anyway – emotion that humans have can be rational and utility maximising?
while figuring out the impact of a particular individual may be tricky, we may also ask, what type of individuals are more likely to have a stronger impact on their society?
This is my third argument on why a depreciating Ringgit is sub-optimal for the Malaysian economy.
Inequality is typically a symptom of something else at work. Rather than lambast inequality for inequality’s sake, we should take great care in finding out how that inequality came to be.
Far be it for me to predict what will happen in 2016 in terms of GDP growth, the Ringgit, exports growth and so on - it would perhaps be better for me to opine on how we can continue to play our part to grow our ‘commons’ amidst very challenging times.
what is of paramount importance to understand is that what is good at the aggregate is not necessarily good when disaggregated.
The ‘Sharing Economy’ is not something new, nor is it correctly labelled. Rather, the ‘Sharing Economy’ is actually just the creation of new markets for goods and services that hitherto did not have markets.
Over the weekend, I finished watching The Wire, a HBO drama series concluded in 2008, that revolved around the city of Baltimore, Maryland
It may be cliché to say, but when you are at the top, the only way to go is down.