Pareto Efficiency?

Whoever said that a distribution set can be Pareto efficient and disgusting was right on the money. In fact I tend to think that the latter is sufficient for the former, practically. Enough said.

Go Egypt!

The Egyptian people have a real chance to have a go at democracy. Rid themselves of corruption that pervades most if not all institutions in the country and come out a prosperous beckon of the North of Africa and as it has become apparent from the surges in the farther East, a tacit example even to Arab nations. Egypt can achieve a lot if it looks carefully where it treads and chooses to let it's democratic river flow as majestically as only to rival the Nile. Freedom, unity, liberalism and progressiveness should not be taken for granted but rather be allowed to shine in Egypt.

If Egypt is to destabilize, it should not be on the basis of religion. Religious conflict would be grave because that has the potential of retarding every positive move that is to be realised from the deposition of a dictator. If Egyptian are going to strive for anything, it had better been religious tolerance.
The hope for now is that the military does not make the transition difficult. So far the military has been behind the people's wishes and that is commendable and other African armies should borrow many leafs.

Change that is in the air should not be expunged so soon.

Reviewing Kenyan Resilience on Independence Day

Kenya stands out amongst most developing African countries for its resilient, innovative, diverse, savvy, patient, forgiving and intelligible populace. The Kenyan mass has underlying distinguishing features that cut the marks many classes above other nations in the same endowment categories, the immediate neighbours to the East being a classic example.

Whether studied economically, socially, politically or spiritually, the East African pillar that is Kenya embodies characteristics of a potential giant waiting to be realised with time.

A perfect illustration of Kenyan resilience in its raw form can be deduced clearly from the events that were experienced in the country in the 2007 general elections. This election period was different from all others and most bloody of all. The nation underwent the worst ethnic clashes of current times which left hundreds dead and thousands displaced. Despite the state of violence that the nation went through, it took Kenyans a few months to come round and realise how grave the taste of violence is and they let peace reign. Whereas racial tensions are still fife and a reality in Kenya even as this publication goes online, blame can not be placed on the Kenyan people entirely for events that happened at the 2007-8 violence and it is a conceded truth that leadership failure is the big culprit in all of this. The Hague is taking up the case up to this day and it is my sincere belief that justice will be served right. The Kenyan people can be said to be cohesive once more but we must be wary and alert of any political persuasions that might instigate selfish divisive motives in the lead up to the up coming 2012 elections or in the future for that matter.

The question of leadership is one that has to be asked and answers sought tirelessly. Who does it is immaterial to the argument but some answers must be sought if progress is to be realised. Kenyan politics, like most other elsewhere in the world is not free of corruption. It is sometimes labelled as graft, which to me often symbolises something more critical than just corruption, massive anaemic corruption. I believe this culture can be changed primarily by elected officials but have Kenyans not tried this?  Innocent Kenyans have the drive to effect change whenever chance shows up at their doorsteps but change has continually eluded them far too often. What should serve as an attempt to act on this issue comes in the form of elections and these in recent times have only come by to replace corrupt regimes with less corrupt ones. Ultimately the elected officials troll their way to full-blown corruption as if it were routine. Wikileaks have recently released cables detailing corruption scandals in Kenya not to mention the much earlier Kroll Report which most would be familiar with.

Whilst the Kenyan population is very forgiving, it is also the hope of Kenyans that leaders will take a step to do something to stamp out corruption. Change for it to be effective will have to come from up the ranks but since this is not at all times forthcoming, Kenyans have to try to do it their way. I am not saying that what Kenyans should do is take up arms in protest, but they should take it upon themselves to make sure that they lead their lives in less and less corrupt ways in hope that the more people do the same that change will actually be visible. Kenyans must not wait for leaders to boss them into leading less corrupt lives but simple acts can mean great things. A simple admission of a speeding fine in place of a direct bribe to the traffic officer could be a possible starting point for instance.

Whilst Kenyans keep hearing of reports of multimillion shilling corruption or 'graft' cases, they must endeavour to working towards the change they so rightfully desire. The characteristic Kenyan boldness must not stop at winning athletic medals but it must also guide Kenyans to become the less corrupt nation it ought to be in order for it to prosper as a whole. Doing this might maybe, just maybe signal Kenyan leaders to take some form of action as Kenya celebrates its independence on December 12th.

Happy Jamhuri day Kenya.

Jon Stewart's Final Comments at the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear

I was so touched by the comments by Jon at the end The Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear in October 30, 2010, I had to put this one up. Thanks to the redditor who put the transcription of the speech.

"And now I thought we might have a moment, however brief, for some sincerity, if that’s ok; I know there are boundaries for a comedian, pundit, talker guy, and I’m sure I’ll find out tomorrow how I have violated them.
I’m really happy you guys are here, even if none of us are really quite sure why we are here. Some of you may have seen today as a clarion call for action, or some of the hipper, more ironic cats as a clarion call for ‘action.’ Clearly, some of you just wanted to see the Air and Space Museum and got royally screwed. And I’m sure a lot of you are here to have a nice time, and I hope you did. I know that many of you made a great effort to be here today, and I want you to know that everyone involved with this project worked incredibly hard to make sure that we honor the effort that you put in and gave you the best show we could possibly do. We know your time is valuable, and we didn’t want to waste it. And we are all extremely honored to have had a chance to perform for you on this beautiful space, on The Mall in Washington, D.C.
So, uh, what exactly was this? I can’t control what people think this was, I can only tell you my intentions. This was not a rally to ridicule people of faith, or people of activism, or to look down our noses at the heartland, or passionate argument, or to suggest that times are not difficult and that we have nothing to fear. They are and we do. But we live now in hard times, not end times. And we can have animus and not be enemies. But, unfortunately, one of our main tools in delineating the two broke. The country’s 24-hour, politico, pundit, perpetual, panic conflictanator did not cause our problems, but its existence makes solving them that much harder. The press can hold its magnifying glass up to our problems, bringing them into focus, illuminating issues heretofore unseen. Or they can use that magnifying glass to light ants on fire, and then perhaps host a week of shows on the sudden, unexpected, dangerous flaming ant epidemic. If we amplify everything, we hear nothing.
There are terrorists and racists and Stalinists and theocrats, but those titles that must earned; you must have the resume. Not being able to be able to distinguish between real racists and Tea Party-ers, or real bigots and Juan Williams or Rick Sanchez is an insult, not only to those people, but to the racists themselves, who have put in the exhausting effort it takes to hate. Just as the inability to distinguish terrorists from Muslims makes us less safe, not more. The press is our immune system. If it overreacts to everything, we actually get sicker, and perhaps eczema. And yet, with that being said, I feel good: strangely, calmly good. Because the image of Americans that is reflected back to us by our political and media process is false. It is us through a fun-house mirror, and not the good kind that makes you look slim in the waist and maybe taller, but the kind where you have a giant forehead and an ass shaped like a month-old pumpkin and one eyeball.
So why would we work together? Why would you reach across the aisle to a pumpkin-assed, forehead, eyeball monster? If the picture of us were true, of course our inabilities to solve problems would actually be quite sane and reasonable. Why would you work with Marxists actively subverting our Constitution, or racists and homophobes who see no one’s humanity but their own? We hear every damn day about how fragile our country is, on the brink of catastrophe torn by polarizing hate. And how it’s a shame that we can’t work together to get things done. But the truth is, we do. We work together to get things done every damn day. The only place we don’t is here or on cable TV. But Americans don’t live here or on cable TV. Where we live, our values and principles form the foundation that sustains us while we get things done, not the barriers that prevent us from getting things done.
Most Americans don’t live their lives solely as Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, or Conservatives. Americans live their lives more as people that are just a little bit late for something they have to do. Often, something they do not want to do, but they do it. Impossible things every day, that are only made possible through the little reasonable compromises we all make.
Look. Look on the screen. This is where we are; this is who we are: these cars. That’s a schoolteacher who probably thinks his taxes are too high. He’s going to work. There’s another car. A woman with two small kids, can’t really think about anything else right now. There’s another car, swaying, I don’t even know if you can see it. The lady’s in the NRA and loves Oprah. There’s another car. An investment banker: gay, also likes Oprah. Another car’s a Latino carpenter. Another car a fundamentalist vacuum salesman. Atheist obstetrician. Mormon Jay-Z fan. But this is us. Every one of the cars you see is filled with individuals of strong beliefs and principles they hold dear. Often, principles and beliefs in direct opposition to their fellow travelers. And yet these millions of cars must somehow find a way to squeeze one by one into a mile-long, thirty-foot wide tunnel carved underneath a mighty river. Carved by people who by the way I’m sure had their differences. And they do it. Concession by concession. You go, then I’ll go. You go, then I’ll go. You go, then I’ll go. Oh my God, is that an NRA sticker on your car? Is that an Obama sticker on your car? Ah, well that’s okay, you go, then I’ll go. And sure, at some point there will be a selfish jerk who zips up the shoulder and cuts in at the last minute. But that individual is rare, and he is scorned not hired as an analyst.
Because we know instinctively as a people that if we are to get through the darkness and back into the light, we have to work together. And the truth is, there will always be darkness. And sometimes, the light at the end of the tunnel isn’t the promised land. Sometimes, it’s just New Jersey. But we do it anyway, together. If you want to know why I’m here and what I want from you, I can only assure you this: you have already given it to me. Your presence was what I wanted. Sanity will always be and has always been in the eye of the beholder. And to see you here today and the kind of people that you are has restored mine. Thank you.”

                                                                          For the sake of Referencing Thanks to soccernamlak. at reddit.

Direct Effects of Money on Aggregate Demand: Another Look at the Evidence

Here is an interesting discussion paper by Stephen Elias and Mariano Kulish of the Reserve Bank of Australia.
The conclusion reads:

The question of whether money has direct effects has become more important as policy rates have approached the zero lower bound in the euro area, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States. Monetary authorities in these economies have turned to unconventional monetary policies which involve balance sheet expansions of one form or another.

Our contribution in this paper is to reinterpret some of the econometric evidence which on the surface often suggests that, after controlling for the short-term real interest rate, real base money growth can be a significant determinant of total
output for a number of countries and sample periods. Our interpretation of these types of results is that they are likely to be biased.

We reach this conclusion by using a model that has no direct effects of money. Yet the model is capable of producing data which leads to positive and statistically significant coefficients on real money growth in a real output regression similar
to those that are often found when using actual data. From the perspective of the structural model, it then becomes clear that the reduced-form regressions suffer from an omitted variable bias. In particular, the bias on real money growth is large enough to undermine the validity of any inference about the existence of direct
effects of money.

We have also repeated the analysis with a model in which money has sizeable direct effects and have also found a bias, but this time operating in the opposite
direction – that is, the estimate of the reduced-form coefficient on real money is not significantly different from zero. The empirical regressions also exclude key
variables from this model, in which case the estimated coefficients on real money growth go to zero.

In short, the reduced-form regressions – even when they fit the data well – are misleading. They simply fail to uncover the true structural relationship between money and the rest of the economy. They lead to incorrect inferences on the existence of direct effects and they are an unreliable guide to calibrate monetary
policies, in general, including at the zero lower bound.