Yep, seems like the big expectation here is to retain jobs and keep a competitive market in Australian domestic travel. Doesn’t seem likely anymore, which is a shame, because I always liked flying Virgin over the cattle-mustering experience that was flying Jetstar.
There’s also some fantastic videos explaining the inner workings of the 555 timer (from a practical perspective) in this series on building a clock module for a breadboard computer - https://eater.net/8bit/clock
After reading only the headline, I for one assumed it was the official's child, so it's at least somewhat misleading, perhaps not intentionally though.
At least personally, I generally don't assume son or daughter imply age. It's just the relationship. Here's an example headline where the son was almost 100 years old[1]:
I just realised we just spent more on 5 days for a holiday rental over Christmas than this family received for selling 2 kidneys to try and escape their debt. It’s crushing to read stories like these. Surely there must be some sort of structural reform possible to “the way the world works” to prevent this absurd imbalance.
>Surely there must be some sort of structural reform possible to “the way the world works” to prevent this absurd imbalance.
Yes, it's called redistributing wealth from those that have it, to those that don't. That means people that have large homes, yards, SUVs, vacations requiring flights, give them up, and pour their resources into lifting up those that don't have it. And not just money, but time and effort to educate the uneducated and impoverished, and blood to fight the oppressors.
It's not a realistic goal, hence it's "the way the world works". It does help one appreciate how lucky one is to be born in the right place at the right time.
The primary problem with this suggestion is that it ignores the actual problem. The barriers to the common man's prosperity in Pakistan are erected by the political elites in Pakistan. A world where you can meaningfully talk about employing redistribution is a world where you have already removed those elites and empowered the population against them: a world in which we're having a rather different argument.
If we are advocating revolution, the next thing is for Pakistan to actually meaningfully industrialize, and gain sufficient wealth — redistributing what already exists only goes a short way. In the ideal case this involves the world economy, and probably looks like outside investment building factories, and the factories paying Pakistani people mediocre money while the new government builds institutions suitable for a modern economy — courts that respect the rule of law, laws that provide a balance between the needs of capital suppliers and labor, laws that promote meaningful competition instead of entrenching well-connected political elites, and a modern education system.
The likelier alternative is they eschew participation in the world economy, building things from scratch themselves, doing it badly, without a rule of law, with a bad education system, with heavy state involvement that provides power to well-connected political elites, and a populist attitude which ignores the needs of capital, promoting empty slogans about economic justice instead of committing to the hard work and sacrifice associated with actually achieving it. The net result will be depressed capital formation, with an economy tilted towards state-run sectors and large companies which are friendly with the new regime. Since capital is important for productivity, the economy will continue to stagnate, though presumably it will see some improvement (it'd be hard not to at this point).
"Redistributing wealth" is not really an appropriate answer for what has been described, as any newly received resources would just be transferred away under the same everdebt setup. What's needed is for such debts are made unenforceable through societal reform - debts not being inherited, bankruptcy protection, increased ability to travel, technological advancements, etc.
It's an incredible financial challenge, to say the least.
In 1960 Pakistan had 25% the population of the US at about 2.7% the GDP per capita of the US. Today Pakistan has 60% of the population of the US at about 2.4% the GDP per capita of the US. The vast majority of developing countries have gained considerable ground on the US over that time on a per capita output basis, Pakistan has lost ground.
To bring Pakistan up to the output level per capita of China or Russia (roughly near the world average; plausibly giving them the necessary room to make considerable employment, social welfare and infrastructure improvements) - Pakistan needs to add about $1.8 trillion per year to its economic output, an economy nearly the size of Italy or Brazil. To reach the level of Croatia, their output has to climb by $2.6 trillion per year, an economy the size of France.
I don't see how the world can change anything structurally outside of Pakistan, in terms of how the world works, that will dent that enormous scale of a financial problem. Pakistan has to change dramatically internally. China and many other countries have managed that sort of prominent internal change over time, hopefully Pakistan can as well.
While the poverty of Pakistan is indeed a problem, I would argue that it is not the cause of this situation. This situation is human exploitation backed by the government. The change needed here requires political, not just economic changes. I would suggest that this form of servitude is part of the cause of Pakistan's limited economic growth. Minimum wage and the ability to declare bankruptcy would go a long way to disrupting this particular status quo.
Your comment would be more interesting and constructive if you you provided information (ideally with references) rather than asking rhetorical questions.
As it is, I don't really know what point you are trying to make.
Will gladly provide it you. Pakistan is largely an agrarian feudal society, even with some new nouveau riche coming industrialist families.
Coincidentally many military families do make Pakistani "old money" class. Generals make for huge portion of land owners (they are even few kanals of prime rib agricultural lands in their official retirement package.) The second biggest real estate company in the country also belong the the army.
Any reform that threatens land value get instantaneously attacked by them, politicians get killed. Even when laws pass the parliament, local authorities under control of landlord class will do everything they can to sabotage their implementation though active and passive resistance.
As I recall, the part of Punjab tenancy act from the Raj that gave tenant first right of refusal upon sale of the land was overturned by Zia’s Federal Sharia bench in 1980s
More close to home, I'd like more discussion about our own debt-based economy. The emphasis on rent seeking. The "Gig Economy", where people pay for the opportunity to work, aka pay for play, franchising. All these weird MLM schemes.
Update: I forgot to mention Freedom Markets™, my pejorative for the cult of laissez faire, might makes right, I've-got-mine-screw-you, and other misanthropic notions.
This will be priced into debts, see short term lending rates. Those who can't make money by lending won't lend, meaning the borrowers will have to either not get the money or turn to those who don't play by the legal system.
>I'm curious, but ignorant, of the Quran's notion of riba, the prohibition on interest payments.
The money from interest is instead added to the price. It has some differences (less ability to save money by paying off early), but overall the lenders still make their money.
>I'd like more discussion about our own debt-based economy.
For starters, we can look to stop the sin tax on labor. Granted, most people don't call it a sin tax, but the difference between a sin tax and a tax appears to be marketing.
If credit shrinks, asset prices decrease so borrowers would need less money anyway. In the end it's all about who owns the capital.
Mesopotamian civilizations had to forgive debts periodically because the economy was heavily leveraged: farmers had to rent the land. A bad harvest could mean they'd have to sell their children to slavery. They were also surrounded by nomadic tribes. Social unrest would spiral out of control pretty quickly as broke people would join the nomads and turn to pillage.
You clearly have an ideological opposition to capitalism, and that taint your views.
The Bible or the Quran can't protect you for the human natural desire and need to make money.
You should google about islamic banks to know what happens when interest is banned. Hint: the difference is just cosmetic.
So if christians implemented a jubilee, I have no doubt it would be baked into some credit score and automatically increase all cost for people who took advantage of it - that or something else essentially similar.
The best thing that can happen to countries like Pakistan? Capitalism. Free market.
People are not stupid. They look at the neighboring countries who have more economically liberal regimes, see what they get, and vote with their feet.
Are you sure that Pakistan's system of bonded service is capitalism? Perhaps we have different definitions. I checked wiki, dictionary.com and there's no mention of slavery, usury.
Okay. I think I better understand what you're saying.
Reading the wikipedia entry on capitalism was a nice refresher. I am not an economist, so interpret as you wish: These farmers are not wage laborers. So capitalism doesn't apply. (Doubly so for sharecroppers, bonded labor, slaves. Obviously.)
My suggestion is in specific response to the observation that a financial fix would be impractical. I agree. So my proposal is to leverage Pakistan's Muslim cultural heritage. Jubilee's are part of the Abrahamic tradition, spanning Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. So maybe it'd find more traction where capitalism has not.
Maybe focus on the doable rather than on grand structural reforms. Pakistan could be pressured to improve legal protections for labourers. There could be land redistribution or a redistributive welfare state. All of these have happened in other developing countries, without world revolution or armed struggle.
Interesting interpretation of the data. It would proably lead to the same conclusion though, that teachers are being rewarded for having naturally smarter/more developed students rather than their own performance.
We're in the process of migrating off a 4+ million line Delphi application that basically runs the whole business, but it's a 10+ year project to "grind the monolith", so who knows when we'll actually be done. In the meantime, we don't have much choice but to keep paying the licensing costs...
It's not really 1 x ten year project as such, but heaps of smaller 3-6 month projects (many running in parallel) to add chunks of new functionality (as microservices) and rewrite parts of the monolith that we can cleanly cleave off.
New parts of UI that are needed don't get added to the Delphi app, but get built as web pages (using React mostly at the moment), which get launched in Chrome windows from the Delphi application.
One day our Delphi app will be an empty shell of it's former self and we can have a huge decommissioning ceremony (party!), but that day's still a long way off... :)
