I think post-colonial India is seriously under-rated. Inertia (and exactly not having shocks) is a saving grace for countries with 1 billion people. India arrived in the new millenium without having starved and persecuted millions of its own people through sheer pride and vanity. There is something to be said for slow and steady. And we don’t know how the China roller-coaster ride will end.

Government should be like the Hippocratic oath – first, do no harm.

A very well made documentary but journalistically poor because the Chicago school is never given a chance to respond to the charges against it. Were its prescriptions dispensed in full in Latin America by the Generals in charge? We are not told.

Ms Klein’s basic point, however, that history does not advance smoothly but lurches from crisis to crisis holds water at least in the case of India. India was shaken out of 50 years of self-imposed autarky by a near default in 1998 which forced it to dismantle its infamous “licence Raj” and other socialist era poicies. This freed the economy and set it on the path to spectacular growth over the next 20 years. Ironically, the success of the first round of liberalisations has prevented further much needed reforms from taking place and Ms Klein would probably argue that India needs another shock to really set it on the path to high growth comparable to that of China’s.

Perhaps what Singapore too needs is another jolt, comparable to expulsion from Malaysia which gave its economy its first impetus, to bring about much needed reform.

I have to agree that different cultures have differing values. Since we are on the topic of economics,i assume they are ‘economically rational beings’ applying the principles.

There might be an alternative model, Rand’s Objectivism, although quite impossible to apply as well.

“This is not to say that any alternative has proven to be better, but I think it is timely to remind ourselves that motherhood is no cure all.”

still be true?

The problem I am grappling with is whether this is the pinnacle of evolution or is there a further step where we humans can see beyond our puny lives and accept a greater good.

Perhaps in another few thousand years, if we still exist and not self destruct thanks to our wanton greed.

Capitalism has brought about many benefits because it harnesses, rewards and sustains ambitions which have made it a very dynamic system. The ambition to produce, to profit, etc. Often alongside capitalism is the ideology of meritocracy whereby one is rewarded by one’s own efforts.

However, excessive ambition can lead to financial, moral and societal ruin. And is it possible for one to succeed purely on individual effort? For example, the food one eats is produced by many hands from (perhaps) as many places far and near. Yet capitalism simplifies things so much just by placing prices on foods, among the many commodities under its markets. Besides the simplicity in valuating commodities, the above-mentioned qualities of ambition, rewards and dynamism create powerful and addictive intuitions for individuals to subscribe to capitalism.

In this regard, I feel that the biggest act that capitalism has accomplished is isolating individual merit and rewarding it to the point of (almost) ignoring the interconnected nature of growth. Ironically, such growth is largely the product of capitalism.

Thus, a better system (capitalist or otherwise) should recognize and construct channels to better reward interactions while not ignoring individual effort. Such a system should also recognize the interconnected nature of issues (e.g. crime, deviance, the family) and grapple with them collectively.

“Handling one societal problem often unearths a couple more.”