How do we run business here
karena kantornya persis depan apartemen gua, kita suka pulang bareng, disini lah sering ngobrol.Menarik sekali dari dia gua bisa belajar hal hal remeh yang mungkin gak bisa dibaca di buku, atau di internet. Hal yang cuma bisa diceritakan,yang cuma berasal dari pengalaman.
Awalnya smua berasal dari curhat,masalah di kantor,karena sebagian besar kantornya tampaknya bakal pindah ke India dan China. Dari situ mulai ngobrol outsourcing,nilai tukar,international trade, efek euro dan dollar,Diskriminasi sosial, sosiologi perkotaan dan lain lain.
tapi yang gua paling suka belajar dari dia,tentang kenyataan yang ada di Perancis, yang gak pernah kepikiran ama gua. contoh di paris ini, biaya anak sekolah kita gak bayar ke sekolah, tapi ke mairie seperti kecamatan, tapi kadang kadang juga setingkat walikota. Mairie ini yang akan membayar ke sekolah sekolah sesuai dengan unit costnya. Mairie ini sangat sangat independen, bahkan hari ini sedang ada kampanye pemilihan di daerah 15 arrondissement, tempat apartemen gua berada.I'll get back to this later.
Biaya anak sekolah, dalam hal ini di tingkat universitas, sangat beragam, tergantung dengan tingkat pendapatan orang tuanya. Kawan gua, sama sama penerima beasiswa, anak semata wayangnya di ecole primaire (semacam SD) gak bayar sama sekali, alias gratis, karena tingkat pendapatan penerima beasiswa-boursier- dibawah tingkat makmur perancis
lain halnya dengan tingkat skolah di atas universitas. ini tingkat biaya sekolah beragam, walau tetap bisa dibilang sangat rendah. Mahasiswa dengan tingkat pendapatan rendah tidak membayar pajak,akan tetapi mendapat banyak tunjangan dari pemerintah, lain halnya mahasiswa dengan orang yang berpendapatan tinggi terutama tingkat PhD, mereka harus membayar pajak yang tinggi, sekitar 20 persen gaji setahun.
Konsep ini berlanjut sampai tingkat terkecil, seperti misalnya harga makanan kantin sekolah, juga diatur seperti itu (walaupun ini lebih bersifat pungutan tidak resmi), anak yang berasal dari keluarga tidak mampu akan membayar lebih sedikit dibanding yang kaya, untuk barang yang sama.Caranya? mereka akan kasih kupon pembelian setiap membeli, dan tiap bulan orang tua akan di kenai biaya unit dikali dengan harga yang telah disubsidi.Untuk level universitas juga begitu, ada yang namanya CROUS, yang menyediakan makanan murah tapi sehat+ kenyang, dengan 2.75 euro kita bisa makan enak di cafetaria nya bagi level pelajar, sedangkan buat level pekerja, mereka akan dikenai biaya yang dobel. Ini terus terang, bagi gua menarik,terutama karena ini sudah dimulai dari sejak mereka sekolah taman kanak kanak.
Sebagai orang yang mengaku belajar ekonomi, insting gue langsung bilang, wah itu resiko menghasilkan free-rider, bisa saja anak orang kaya bilang ke anak miskin, "lo beliin gua itu dong, ntar gua bayar ke elo", well bisa saja, tapi sepertinya itu gak kejadian, kenapa? karena anak orang miskin juga pinter, dia tau, opportunity cost untuk jadi antek antek orang kaya ini,dia bakal lebih worst off. Dan lagi lagi yang paling penting adalah ini dimulai dari usia sejak dini yang dipahami oleh anak anak. Bahwa rent-seeking temptation sudah dikenalkan sejak dini, tapi tidak melembaga sedemikian rupa, menurut gua yang sangat menarik.
fakta lain yang menarik adalah, dorongan entrepreneurship sangat tinggi disini, orang bisa datang ke kadin paris (chambre de commerece de paris) untuk dapat informasi tentang pekerjaan yang bisa dilakukan, sekaligus info untuk mendapatkan pendanaan, dana sangat melimpah(terutama bagi penduduk asli)Bank seperti berlomba memberikan pendanaan.Hal yang sama juga di informasi tenaga kerja,jarak beberapa rumah dari tempat gua ada semacam pusat informasi pekerjaan,belum pernah masuk sih, tapi ruangnya di desain transparan,dinding nya cuma kaca besar,jadi kita bisa liat apa di dalamnya tanpa masuk. Satu ruangan besar isinya penuh dengan komputer, kita hanya tinggal log on, cari tawaran kerja, dan lowongan yang kira kira bakal ada.
hmm lowongan yang bakal ada? maksudnya? nah ini juga yang menarik. Ini semacam kombinasi social security yang baik dan departemen tenaga kerjanya. Karena Social security yang sangat baik, setiap individu dari kecil sampe tua terjamin oleh asuransi dan dana pensiun, dari mulai asuransi jiwa, sampai asuransi kesehatan, artinya ada consumption smoothing yang sangat baik. as a result,orang yang sudah masuk ke usia lanjut,gak perlu bekerja, hidup mereka sudah terjamin dengan tabungan dan investasi, tambah lagi setiap masalah yang tak terduga ditutup oleh asuransi.
jadi setiap kali para pengusaha ini pensiun, mereka yang tidak memiliki penerus akan bilang ke mairie atau chambre de commerce. "Nih usaha gua, gua mo nikmatin idup, tolong terusin,atau jualin aja ama yang mau",dengan adanya sistem ini lowongan kerja dalam skala tertentu menjadi predictable, di tahun 2008 misalnya,tiap tiap camat disini tahu, ah, kita bakal punya 5 tukang roti yang pensiun, 10 tukang daging, dan 10 pialang saham,so,mereka bisa tawarkan ini pada orang yang gak punya pekerjaan.
kekurangannya sih,sistem ini gak applicable buat orang yang berpendapatan tetap, untuk mendapatkan fasilitas informasi ini, orang tersebut tidak boleh bekerja, atau recently being laid off,jadi orang yang bekerja tapi ingin investasi lagi, mesti gunakan "sistem convensional".
Memang pajak pendapatan sangat tinggi, akibatnya pengangguran relatif tinggi sekali di perancis di banding negara eropa lain yang lebih terbuka,level pengangguran terjaga lebih karena kesepakatan pengusaha dengan asosiasi pekerja yang aktif sekali. terutama paris.
yang lebih menarik adalah tingkat inflasi yang rendah dibanding negara asia, tapi relatif tinggi buat negara eropa secara rata rata,yang by the way cenderung meningkat terus. I'll comeback to this later.
Sistem eropa barat memang sedikit sosialis,tapi tidak kebablasan seperti negara negara eropa timur. Gue melihat penting banget negara kita ngadopsi sistem ini, gua melihat diri gua sebagai orang yang liberal,tapi konsep perancis ini, terus terang, I find it very interesting. Konsep BOS misalnya,selama ini selalu diselewengkan, karena orang tua murid, berinteraksi langsung dengan administrasi sekolah, walau duitnya turun, masih saja ada benefit untuk curang. Lain halnya jika administrasi berinteraksi dengan Camat, atau walikota, dia tidak punya bargaining power buat ngontrol walikota, tapi justru sebaliknya. Sedangkan walikota juga "terpaksa"
mengawasi kepala sekolah, karena terpilih tidaknya dia di tahun mendatang, adalah tergantung kepada ada nya dukungan orang tua orang tua murid itu.
banyak sekali sih yang bisa diaplikasiin di indonesia, sayangnya lagi lagi kita punya masalah di diseminasi informasi dan transparansi, di norway bahkan katanya kita bisa tahu berapa jumlah pendapatan orang di sebelah kita, hanya dengan search engine di internet,asalkan kita tau nama lengkap dan pekerjaaanya. itu yang gua sebut diseminasi informasi, transparansi. data data dan data yang akurat.. smua cita cita ini gak akah bisa terwujud secara tiba tiba, tapi perlu Hukum dan institusi yang mengawal masyarakat ber transformasi dalam aktivitas bermasyarakat menuju ke tingkat masyarakat yang lebih baik.
ps : ini ada satu contoh dari norway cara mengatasi prostitusi
ps : blog post updated karena ada kritik membangun dari mas Rio Hasan
Why should rich people got rich? it's the matter of seeing things differently
the blog mentioned some data, but kinda outdated, but whatever. she mentioned poverty rates in 2006, but accommodating Bakrie's richness in 2007 in comparison. First of all, those data is incomparable .Bad mistakes. if we see the newest data, indeed poverty decline as well, not very larged though. the idea is here, the growth has positive effect on everybody, notably the rich and the powerful though. In this I agree.
I don't see any problem with this, not that I'm pro-inequality, it is the fact that all nation is having, in all part of the world. As long as rich people got richer, and the poor people got less poorer, it's kinda OK for me, well better than poor people got poorer, no?
I mean, the very problem of inequality and poverty is that, we don't know exactly what are the determinants, in my opinion it's most likely social -interaction problem, rather than Macroeconomic problem, it's the information sharing, not the problem in growth. Off course inflation got higher effect in the short run, but really, access to credit, and information is kinda better in explaining long term poverty.
may be my post is kinda strange for one studying development, what I am saying is that it is normal that people get rich everyday, as long it doesn't take the proportion of the most poor people, in Aburizal bakrie's case I am not convinced enough the reasoning is, what's for sure, not because he has bakrie's plantation(the blog mentioned these reasons), it's more like better preferences in BUMI resource's stocks, keeping the price higher than ever. Complaining that these people got our natural resources depleted for their own wealth is kinda odd, let's say we'll give poor people couple of hectares of land in kalimantan, what would they do? -this is typically what Venezuela do-, their resources are now underutilized, not only the people got no knowledge to use it properly, but also when they want to sell it, no one will buy the land, so what's the use of having hectares of land, but unable to use it?
let's go back to bakries problem.I don't know whether his wealth won't come from poor farmer in papua back there, but what do I know is, when he got rich, he need to invest, meaning more jobs, so to measure the effect in bakries richness to the people, is how much real investment will come in the future?. indeed, Lapindo did take some people's home, but its (lapindo) loss is not to be neglected either. So while having devastated by the loss in lapindo's assets,it still gives him larger flow of money, meaning he got more gains in other investment (I do Pity the fact that the money comes from financial market) but it measured how this guy/company can handle unexpected shock, hopefully he will create more investment in the future, and more money to the poor. I believe it was called trickle down effects.
I praise the non-communist term, saying that free economy give people a relatively equal opportunity to be rich (and to be poor?), than Communist term. The whole idea of market economy is that all things are dynamic. Ones can sometimes moving out of poverty, and sometime moving in to poverty, the same case goes to wealthiness. People can be poor but in subsequent period got surprisingly rich, for randomized reasons. But in communist term, people should always be equal, should share the same burden in poverty, in their thinking, being poor together is better than having wealth gap, as poor people will always be victimized by the rich. so just eliminate the gap, so every people share the same despair. This is awfully wrong, in the sense that, it's true that most people got rich because their family had been rich for some time, but there are cases where, once poor people might in the future turned out to be one of the richest people in the country, these kind of people that will survive in this horrific competition world.
Rodrik for president
Wow. I was astonished with the paper, how it dismantled the augmented Washington consensus
at first, I think John williamson's revised WC would be good enough, but no, rodrik explains it better.. personally, i'll vote him for president of WB, or may be replacing monsieur Bourguignon?
Had I been Sby, I'll contact Rodrik first for suggestions, than fernando de soto..
or may be Rodrik for president in our republic? no..no...no I'm talking non-sense
hmm..did I?
update :
Arya gaduh post the much shorter resume of the paper
short sighted or domestic love bias?
will never share the same idea with them, ever!
their deductions have lots of flaws everywhere, what were they thinking?
First, we need to see this world as a whole of opportunity, of working, socializing, getting higher salary, higher satisfaction in life, avoiding traffic-jam, etc, lots of incentive to move to other countries. we should not have limited the scope
Second, about people becoming illegal workers, what's the problem? do they want to be illegal workers in the first place? no, I don't think so, thus comparing it, or even worse,blaming it to the lack of job demand effect in home countries would be even more misleading. People goes abroad every day, people seek more appropriate job all the time, what's wrong with that? in this case, it happened to be that they are looking for it across countries. then what makes them ilegal?
what makes them illegal, is that something, or someone identify them as "unexpected workers"
or unidentified workers,who's to blame? the guy who got the power in extra-territorial authorization, why don't these guy's ability to move in labor market was -whatsoever the means-, happened to be somewhat undetected ?
Third,let's say, I'm rich, I work in highly reputable company with high salary, should I stop searching jobs?. well, could be, but if I'm trying to get more salary, with a more reputable company, should that considered to be wrong?.
Their conclusion seems to be kinda odd for me, since they are assuming as if the country is rich, people should not look for jobs somewhere else,I would say, mind you!, if people got richer than ever, they will look for something else..that's stated in qur'an, and as long as it's halal, nothing's wrong with it..even the first man on earth got the same problem, no? I mean,seeing that we all his descendents and all, that's probably human nature.
and so why blaming economist? should you blame the immigration people instead? having those actively demanded labor, constrained in the borders, forcing them to jump over the fence, without adequate papers on their hands
the sad thing is, the guy saying this hold an economist title in his e-mail, funny he?
poverty and institutional path dependence
The initial point of causes of multiple equilibria in economic development is the fact that Inefficient equilibria tends to self-reinforce, whenever there is an inefficient equilibrium, there is no reason that convergences should happen, but instead, would stabilize the polarization process, and hence a multiple equilibria.
The main idea of institutional effects on economic development is that individuals are bounded rational; their rationality is embedded by the environment and their subjective experience, inference and individual deduction. As a result, market transactions are not always happen in the most efficient ways since people has limited ability in calculations and output processing, and therefore transactions are costly, institutions are then created to reduce these transaction costs, uncertainties and overcome market failure. Hence institution matters.
Institution have significant contribution to poverty through two channels, first, bad institutions make market can not function appropriately, hence market is unable to resolve the most efficient output for everyone. Second, the institution itself could be the source of inefficiencies. Furthermore, Institution failure ignite poverty trap, because of its durability and path dependency.
First, Institutions were meant to overcome market failure, however, institutions are created and enabled by the current ruling political power, which tends to use the institutional laws to maintain their supreme power. as North (1993, p.3) has emphasized, “institutions are not necessarily or even usually created to be socially efficient; rather they, or at least the formal rules are created to serve the interests of those with the bargaining power to create a new rules “. This might resulted in an inefficient economic activities and rent-seeking behavior. Second, the path dependency of institutions is also because it is inherent in the way that informal norms form the foundation of community, at least for informal institutions which are unlikely to change in short term period. Third, Bounded rationality of the agents is itself a source of self-reinforcing inefficient outcomes independent of institutions the inability to escape from environment effects often trapped individuals in practically herding behaviour. The three Self-reinforcing mechanism potentially cause the Poverty trap
cross posting a little bit won't hurt..
Rajawali adalah salah satu jenis burung yang selalu terbang sendiri, tidak pernah terbang bergerombol atau menunggu kelompoknya untuk terbang bersama-sama. Rajawali tidak pernah takut akan badai, bahkan ketika badai datang Rajawali terbang lebih tinggi lagi. Rajawali juga tidak pernah memanjakan anak-anaknya. Apabila sang induk menganggap anak-anaknya sudah siap untuk terbang, maka sang induk akan merusak sarangnya agar anak-anaknya “terpaksa” terbang dan mencari makan untuk dirinya sendiri.
Ketika Rajawali merasa hidupnya akan berakhir, maka dia akan terbang setinggi-tingginya ke arah matahari, sampai mati dan jatuh kembali ke bumi. Seolah-olah diakhir hidupnya dia masih berusaha mencapai “prestasi” setinggi-tingginya.
Well, for a start, Rajawali muda was the name of Apache-indian tribe,who save all the rest of red skins communities in the karl may's book, buat thanks for the inspiration.
diminishing utility?..,mind you...
This morning, me and my friend,while finishing our breakfast, we spent some time browsing the net,in the sudden, we were then discussing intensely the "anggota DPR m***m",after some time browsing the news, we came to "gossip time", AA gym getting married for the second time, even I consider it as individual rights, and that doesn't bothered me at all. it occured to us,however,normally, men, tends to have an increasing beauty of scale in Polygami. the second wife tends to be better thatn the first, and the third one might be even better than the second.
Even I do agree that the term "better" is highly arguable, but still Economics is surely against such utility maximizing, well, so much with Marginal Diminishing utility...
i wonder, is it true that whenever we're considering women,then people is naturally irrational? yet, transitivity doesn't work as well..
Coordination failure of job ( part 2)
Lets get back to the case of one guy hired at the MT’s, my proposition is, whenever a guy apply to one position without knowing that that’s her/his true preference, or whether that’s her/his second best choice, this could creates a grave coordination failure that should be even worse over time.
Whenever a company hired someone, it means that they are investing in that particular guy, what if the case of Rosenstein has pointed out occurred?, Just say that this hired guy is not –in reality- as capable as was shown at their CV, you are over invested him, a fresh-university graduate with lack of experience will do nothing, then the W is higher than his MPL, people on the top starts to worry, and displeased, enforcing the guy to work out off his limit, finally the guy just went out. Let’s say that the company getting a new fresh-employee, in contrast to the former, he is very diligent, and quite significant in increasing profit, the problem come up with the salary, because at that time, managers is cutting the position’s wage level, due to disappointing productivity before. This time the wage is way under the productivity, and so on and so on. The market mechanism without this stupid coordination failure will converge the MPL and wage almost simultaneously.
The problem that seems to be similar with Rosenstein and rodan’s case, is that over investing to one, means under investing to another, and the variance of over and under investing, (that is the variance of MPL-W =0) there are jobs that if the investment were right would initiate a greater effects in revenue and becoming greater each year, and there are jobs that is becoming less and less important,(under-developed?)in one company.
Hence,this is basically, the right man in the right place, in a perfect timing, but if we look more deeply, there are people who are so specialized, hence they could not move flexibly, change their jobs, and trapped in an unfavorable job, in the sense of salaries, fringe benefits, etc. In my opinion, that's would be one of many possible micro-explanation why, there are people who's continously trapped in poverty. Coordination failure in the job market.
off course,we should apply the coordination failure example above to various other job decision making. For instance why people morelikely to choose civil servant than an entrepreneur,or others.In my point of view, following Bannerjee et.al. that would be one of reason why people tends to be poor, and always be poor.
overconfidence and coordination failure (part 1)
Early in the morning, I’ve read one of their jokes already.
It reminds me of the problem that make him receive a nobel, Coordination failure of the society, what would happen really if all people like these guys turns out to be the ultimate winner of the job market? Well nothing wrong with that really.
Ok then, first of all this man -Ã mon avis- is way out of his mind, really, applying for something that- I figure- he doesn’t have any knowledge about it. This is the case of some imperfect market that Akerlof has shown, in his famous melon theorem, and the used car market case. The thing is, the imperfect information of market of jobs creates two fundamental problems, adverse selection, and a moral hazard. In fact there are two ways direction of moral hazard, and adverse selection at one blow.
Consider it this way, neither of the two, the supply side of job (the one seeking for job), and the demand side (searching for employee) have adequate information about each one of them, as a result speculative attack appears to be the only solution. It seems to me that the job information in the adds is not sufficient enough to control this imperfect information, it was clearly defined, that his capacity is not even adequate to apply, instead, this guy apply anyway, even such more qualified guys-that is fresh-undergrad educated guys- would prefer to apply a more appropriate job, instead of applying as a manager.
As a fresh-graduated, -as we all have been there- this guy is desperate to have a job, and he didn’t understand what to do after his college, and then he starting to do some random-non-linier job application procedures, anything, anything he could ever think off, as long as he could find “management” word in the job seeker adds, the problem is they doesn’t even know what kind of job, -even worse- what kind of company he was applying. Therefore there are possibilities that this guy- who think he was totally expert in management, yet his limited experience- would choose the wrong job.
The company on the other hand, will never ever be able to even guess what is the real contribution of the future employee would be to its income, there are possibility it underestimate-or overestimate the marginal productivity of their future employee, which reflected on their wages, furthermore, companies will never be assured by the behavior of the workers, whether they going to be risk averse kind-or –kutu loncat – type of workers?
These imperfection leads to coordination failure in the market, resulting MPL= wage will never be achieved. Companies, naturally developed some other kind of screening process, called-management trainee-(MT in short) well, now they have many kinds of name, it almost the same anyway. Desolately, this MT programs is easily adopted, with relatively low benefit-cost gap, then suddenly fresh grad working as an MT in Bank Mandiri, and MT in some un-identify Company object’s MT would have slight differences. The same thing with the example earlier, the term “manager” and management would be biased to some imaginary working status. In short MT it self is a mystery for jobseekers, and CV’s is still one of the best tool of -fresh-graduate-job-seeker- to lie about their productivity potential. MT’s is also famously recognize for its difficulty and long time recruitment process, this hopefully will reduce this imperfect information would lead to the moral hazard and adverse selection. My conclusion : that’s true for Adverse selection (still in doubt, though) but not for the moral hazard.
Let me tell you a problem of a friend of mine, after completing its degree in an immense success, he tries his luck in MT program in a well known national Bank, as expected he passed all the easy stuff phase, at the last interview, he was a little bit worry at that time, this one is not easy, because interview is sometime a little bit unpredictable-well that’s what interview’s for, but there was some unbalanced information there, my friend has already knew the general questions in the interview, -based on his experience and some other hints from friends-. In the other hand the interviewers knew nothing about him, than what’s happened is the question was easily responded, and finally he was recruited.
Is it the problem of adverse selection solved? Well in this case yes, the bank has even over benefited so much in recruiting him. But not the moral hazard, after some time, my friends then find some other more interesting jobs, and scholarships abroad, as a result the on the job training is now become less favorable, my friends left the company, in the expense of some fine. Now that is clearly a moral hazard problem, he was forced to pay the cost of the company has spent for recruiting and training him, but still, this would be such a completely waste of time and a waste of resources for the company.
Well we’re talking about a bank here, weren’t they supposed to be the one who handling risk? Well they weren’t really good about it don’t you think?
(to be continued....)
poor farmers and price..
Well this morning, digging up to one of my favorite blog, founding interesting article,Oke then, some questions revealed, whether rising price of rice would hurt the farmers or not?, well that's an old story i have had in the past, and really, till now, i'm still wondering why would that (ever) happened anyway.
The Quarrel between works of economist in development economics, in a certain manner would however change a cross time. My guess is the man, from whom kompas has quoted his words in this article is an old fashioned (-outdated-) one -if I say he to be an economist though.
What he’s arguing is a nowadays still being such a controversy among development economics, is it rising price of rice would make farmers better off?, or weather farmers will increase their production as a result of price effect?, would the income-marshallian effect would eliminate slutsky substitution effect ? Well I would say, that depends, depend on where do you look, what do you seek, and when.
You see, that’s the problem being Political economist, you’ll never be, or consider to be neutral, though I should say Economics were never been neutral anyway, but policy must be neutral, neutral with what you keep in your tiny head, cause your head could not keep up with all complexity in this growing market economies. Neither if you are market fundamentalist, nor I should say Structuralist.
That’s why I’m completely disagree with people consider themselves as an economist, development economist, talking to the news, about policy, without solid facts, they are nothing but politician need some vote for another election campaign success.What these guys were telling the news is that Farmers are often abused by the global market, and therefore we need to accelerate their income by keep the price (of rise) rising, well guys reveillez-vous … have you heard anything with such a complex problem with agricultural households? There is a problem called Separable problem, agricultural household is facing two intertwined problem in the same time, therefore their profit maximizing condition were constrained in a non-recursive way, and instead simultaneity occurred.
Even when price is rising up to the sky, farmers will surprisingly might reduce their production, and therefore cause a higher gap of income, cause the price effect is not only the rice, it multiplies a lot, through the other consumption goods rising as well.
So when will farmers will have a greater profit, and becoming rich?, frankly I don’t really know, what the answer for this, anyone has a clue? I’ve been thinking about this since I was studying Introduction to Development Economics, well I suppose that farmers will get better off by increasing their production, not by raising their price, because their welfare is endogen to the price.
Nevertheless some research as Benjamin(1992), Pitt and Rozenweig(1987) has proven that there is no such things like separability condition in Indonesia, well I think they have overrated our country, first of all, their research is only conducted in Java region, could not aggregate their result though, What happen if this separable thing were concentrated in some areas without adequate source of water, with pathetic quality of soil? What if Jakarta is so polluted, then what happened in Jakarta, would be totally different with what happened in Papua for instance. Secondly, their stories were way out of our time, it’s been almost 20 years now, and were facing a lot of up and downs in our economy. Thirdly, these researches were concentrated in labor market imperfect market, in a general term. Off course there should be another way in having another conclusion totally way around.
Another thing to look more precise is that often, the cause of separable is complex, it might comes from any different kind of market imperfection, and even the source might come from one market that is totally perfect ,why? Well because this one single market that is ironically perfect has caused some other market imperfect.-this is inspired by some of easterly critics of multi tasking of MDG-
Looking to the facts on the field, people has a large constrained of collateral, thus access in credit, Farmers have a large barriers of trade because no easy access to the market, then the transport cost is high, people in the mountains were so isolated that their cultivated their land on and on without sufficient fertilizers, there is too many imperfection against the farmers, and I agree that these guys need help. But saying that rising prices of basic needs is a fair deal for consequences of oil price shock, is confusing and misleading.
Instead of using our budget for subsidizing rice, we should increase the ability of trade and access on information, by giving them decent infrastructure, friendly bureaucracy, cutting some hands in the bureaucracy in export and import for example, do you know that rice produced in Thailand is far more “pulen” and More tasty, and it smell so good, that people would prefer buying it than other cheap rice. Here, thousand miles from Thailand, we eat Thailand product, and we pay in euro, and no indo-rice product made it to come here. Anyway how many Indonesian people, having opportunity to go abroad, who consume Indonesian rice, if they already had a chance to have Thailand rice? not many I guess, with a small disparity of price I’d prefer to let go my nationalism in rice, though.
You may argue that they are dumping their products, I would say, if they do that, why don’t we do the same thing? We import rice from Thailand, which is relatively cheaper, and then we export, say to France, all of our commodity, or may be even exported it to Thailand, in the end, the price would converge, and the only thing that that we could use in comparing the two is their quality, that is our base line, and In the end, no one will buy our rice, since we’re consuming the same Thailand rice.
So the bottom line is, the problem is not what Thailand has did with their price, but also why they could make such quality well known to the world. Another example is another close neighbor of ours, Vietnam, they Exported many kinds of things, small agricultural things, like chilies, spinach, etc, noodles, fisheries, fast food-kind of things, that were really fancy in this country. As a result, their price goes up, with a single addition in their package, a usual package of frozen “tongkol” mixed up with ingredients, will change to a well prepared Vietnam gourmand, with a little help of Microwaves, and so is fast food, we could get a tasty Chinese foods by buying all the ingredients available here.
A strange thing here is Indofood, and KOKITA stuff were easily found here, but no Indonesian imported it, it licensed to some Indian company, in contrast, Chinese supermarket “tang frere” were amazingly famous, and we can find all asian taste ingredients there, even Indonesian’s sambel oelek, what I’m going to say about this is that,global market were not so racial to the agricultural goods, the thing is you to improve your quality, your package, your additional values, and yet the most important increase your market potential. That’s where Chinese success came from, they have already ruled the world, even before Chinese open up their market. That’s why we always find Chinese restaurant every where, Chinese banks in every corners of the street of Paris.
What's I’m saying is, if you want your farmers to be rich, stop them of being a farmer and a farmer only, and becoming a farmer and entrepreneur at once, farmers in Indonesia were so characterized with lack of education, and information, they lack of source of money, but they need education and information the most,that is the information to reveal what is the real meaning of globalization, what is to have freedom to choose. And how they could sell their product, off course we have no means to give such policy like the common agricultural policy in Europe, and certainly we could not let the farmers hurt by the prices.
But still do not give up hope, we could make it, as long we stop complaining, and stop listening to politician, pretending as an economist.
sans domicile fixe..
Twenty or thirty years ago, anyone visiting the Soviet Union or China would have been taken aback by the dirt cheap prices of things. A monthly rental was about ten over dollars then; a suit at just a few bucks; a cattie of pork at a few dimes; and a movie ticket at merely a few cents.
Fabulous! Things were so cheap and you thought it was almost paradise.But,even as things were affordable, they were not necessarily available.
While rental was dirt cheap, you might have to wait for well over a decade before you could get someone to rent his apartment to you. If you were looking for a wedding suit, you might need to make an order before you even decided to look for a girlfriend. A movie ticket at only a few cents? But where to get it anyway, if you were not someone in the politics?
If you were dead hungry, perhaps you would think you shouldn't have been standing in the queue! But no. You still had to. In Beijing or Moscow, long queue s were omnipresent year round. Everyone was waiting to get nothing more than just a loaf of baguette or a few grams of pork.
Ordinary people spent most of their time waiting to get something. No more time for work or study and no time to run the machines. The society remained stagnant.
What use was it if things were cheap but unavailable?And now, while waiting for CROUS calling up my name for an apartment in what so called city of lights PARIS, sitting here wondering why,a boursier gouvernement français (as I have considered my self) is more likely probably called SDF ( sans domicile fixed) the picture of Pekinese and Muscovites lining up for baguettes or pork comes into my mind.
Between the two, we see resembling situations, similar problems, and identical mistakes.Under the planned economic system of a socialist regime, the government subsidises by digging deep into the state coffers to bring down the prices of goods. Although prices are lower now, production is stalled. In the end, the government's burden gets heavier and the country loses its economic dynamism, while people in the street are suffering from a chronic dearth of daily commodities.
The French government has spent a fortune to subsidize apartments prices, resulting in significantly low prices of renting an apartment for foreign students, . This has made these –what so called- residence CROUS is always (play!?!) hard to get. A bigger problem is that, it is way cheaper than other apartment in the city, students pay only 190 euros for their rooms, while others have to pay more than 450 euros. Thanks to CAF and other kinds of subsidies of personal apartment. This extremely noble act of French government has camouflaged the real price of apartment, thus the real cost of studying in France, as a result this gives rise to two problems. Firstly, the subsidy on apartment for student is too high; secondly, the gap between the prices of apartment for students and Paris citoyens uses is too wide, resulting in the flow of rich parisien blinded with jealousy towards students allocated apartments via all kinds of channels. In this case may be via Sarcozy Big ass
while greedy French home owners, were forced to use agencies to sell and lend their petites chambres in high prices, students, lacking of governmental support, and consequently ignorance of French government were forced to live on the streets. Once I had thought that French would be a excellent example of a great symbol of socialism that really works, then I came to the very same conclusion that : “If the government continues to subsidize, more and more cheap apartment will end up in the hand of pure franco-parisien or in the hand of rich and powerful, while students, especially who came from developing countries like Indonesia can only stay in the queue in utter frustration, or stare at the "sold out" signs in desperation, exceptionally, perhaps students of North Korea and India might have some privilege more, considering they still have their nukes..
What is the use of cheap rooms if it is not readily available? The only way to address the problem is to narrow the subsidy gap, or even do away with the subsidy entirely so people pay the same price for Apartment. Certainly our bourse must have some “in sense” than “non- sense” number, at least 1200 euros will do, a cheap ones, compares to your expenses to go to your pharmacies for having serious head-ache, thanks to unwanted students form Indonesia running around to your office, and make you lie to them each time they come.
The government can always think of some other ways to lighten the burden of students in studying and, for instance through cash transfer program, job fulfillment, or even by allowing them to charge higher fees in baby sitting, to offset their higher operation costs.
Subsidy policies which are economically inefficient are what socialist regimes used to have. These countries have learned from their past mistakes and begun to discard such irrelevant policies to embrace market economy.Today, in the malls of Beijing and Moscow, we won't get to see long queues of people jostling for daily commodities. Instead, in the well-stocked supermarkets there, goods are always in demand, although they are no longer cheap.
It is better to be affordable and available, than affordable but unavailable.
here we go again
in few days, i'm gonna be somewhere else in this world, trying desperately to stick with my own beliefs, principals,and off course norms, thus adaptation gonna be the hard ones,
but as people often say, " no pain no gain"...
wish me luck..and happy birthday mother..
hope i will never give up hope..
and keep on commiting to become what i'm dreaming to be...
like you used to be...
alhamdullilahi rabbil alamiin...
Dengan nama Allah yang maha penyayang dan maha pengasih...
Dear Mr/Mrs Anonymous,,,
Ada satu comment yang dilancarkan Mr/Mrs Anonymous dalam tulisan tentang bali bomber beberapa waktu lalu, kritik yang bagus, argumen bahwa tak sepantasnya orang orang menilai orang lain dari prespektif pandangan masing masing...well saya sangat setuju, itulah kenapa ilmu sosial sendiri dibangun dan terus membangun (artinya tak ada yang tetap, eksak, selalu berkembang, well. that's what makes it so interesting)..Ilmu ekonomi seperti halnya ilmu lainnya melihat segala hal dari point of view yang berbeda, sebagai orang ketiga, netral dan inheren dengan asumsi asumsi.. jadi point saya, tulisan ini menilai dengan sudut pandang yang netral, belum tentu benar, but I have my own judgements which is based on empirical studies and theories.. secara ilmiah, ilmu sosial terdiri dari pertama, observasi. Kedua, menambahkan fakta fakta empirik, dan kemudian mengambil kesimpulan sesuai dengan kaidah teoritis yang ada.
so, sah sah saja orang melakukan analisa ilmiah, tokh saya tidak menerangkan hal gaib pada orang yang tak percaya hal gaib, tapi menganalisa kondisi yang ada dari prespektif yang berbeda, plus just trying to be rational and to rationalize this irrational world
Kepercayaan
Ah apa artinya sih kepercayaan..sampai sampai indikator makroekonomi harus masuk juga tingkat kepercayaan investor, yang dicerminkan oleh rating bonds, atau kepercayaan rakyat dengan ekspektasi inflasi yang berlebihan ( lho katanya BI cukup credible, dan pengamat pasar sangat percaya ama tindakan BI dalam meredam inflasi?, confusing)
Kepercayaan presiden terhadap kabinet pembantunya juga jadi isu penting baru baru ini, seberapa besar sih indkator kepercayaan presiden terhadap pembantunya, hingga hanya menyelenggarakan reshuffle terbatas. Kenapa Mentri yang tidak disukai publik malah masih dipercaya oleh presiden..kenapa kepercayaan presiden dan rakyat berbeda?
lebih jauh lagi kenapa kepercayaan antar individu berbeda? mengapa di desa desa sekarang dana pinjaman dari negara donor semakin tak effektif? kenapa dana BLT tidak bisa turun 100% ke masyarakat ? kenapa setelah dana bos digulirkan, murid SD Negeri masih harus bayar 200rb per semester? apa masyarakat desa yang katanya masih lugu itu masih bisa dipercaya? apakah pendidik tanpa tanda jasa sekarang tinggal nama bagusnya saja?
pertanyaan yang lebih penting, apakah memang kita layak saling percaya? atau kah kita selalu harus saling curiga?
waspada, dan bergaerak maju, itu filosofi perang, dalam pasar yang kompetitif kita wajib menjalankan kode etik perang...tapi tetap saja masih saja ada unsur saling percaya, bagi jurnalis dan juru tulis, serta juru obat, mereka sajalah yang bisa dipercaya
kenapa? karena mereka tak ada conflict of interest? dunia belantara ekonomi ini memang ada yang namanya penyeimbang market failure, macam juru obat, dia membantu yang harus dibantu, karena kawan sekitar terlalu sibuk menyelamatkan nyawa.
pemerintah lah namanya..tapi benarkah ia benar benar free of conflict of interest?
Diskusi dengan kawan kemarin, dimana politik kini telah memberangus economic thought,
sekarang pantaskah kita masih percaya pada Pemerintah?
Mahadaya pasar !!!
(to be continued...)
Bombers, what the heck they were really doing?
interesting question she had made, why those people did this terrible things?
I had took some time before, wondering what really makes those guys committed those bombings, eventually I came up with some ideas, logical things I suppose. What stimulates them using bombs? hurting others??
On her blogs, she criticize her friend's thinking about the motive of those bombers, cause she thinks, this is really irrational, hurting our indonesian fellows, just to tell something to Americans
well I kinda agree with
"He *Dr. Azahari of course, not my friend* had to do all of those bombing things because he had no other better choice. It's a kind of publication, campaign or whatever it is (I should say this is a protest, if it could said so) to message people in the world that the world isn't fair"
this had made the relative price of doing a relatively more peacefull ways of protest is higher than just spending couple of millions rupiah( and of course some un known people's lifes) for a deadly bomb, The terror and fear have cost a lot for westerners, specially for their utilities of leisure and safetyness, a great loss for a country like US. the cost is downsloping, and the benefit (for those stupid crooks) arises.
that 's also the reason why anarchy is almost related to relatively more repressive, highly bureaucratic and highly corrupted countries than a more democratic countries. That's why London only had it once, compared to five bombs in Indonesia in the past 5 years. The house of representative and bureaucrats there relatively gives more respect on people thoughts. the case in france, the people there were treated like "dogs"(quoting some media), the only choice and obviously relatively cheap (at least in bars they could have some meal, which unlikely affordable when they are still a free -second rate french man) for them is to rage the cities in france, in order to show the country, "hey!!, we are living creatures here, human beings".
The main difference between dogs and humans is we could burn your fancy cars and make your classy stores turn in to ashes.
So why bother bombing us?
the answer of your questions is then again a matter of cost and benefit, it would be easier to hurt people away from they homeland, and the benefit is now those country must spend more money to the third world countries to fight terrorism just to make sure their citizens are protected the way they usually get in their home. what's in it for the terrorist, well, those super power countries now must act as the world's police, and these should weaken their home land defence ( at least tom clancy's book said so, forgive me for being his fans, though)
people who tied large scale bombs to their own body, shows they don't have any more interesting choice in their lives. I'm almost certain that if they have some choices, and the freedom to obtain it, they will choose to live.
its only a matter of price relativity, and how people make their choices, how they respond to incentives. in opposite to ur thinking, this bastards really act as economic agents, at least their action could be explained in economic ways.
these irrational people really act in a rational ways, the only thing that we can do to stop them is to make it(bombings) more costly, than speaking outspokenly in the crowds, but clearly not giving them more incentives to blast their own body by capturing Imam's and Ulama (moslem scholars)
Mahadaya pasar..
Salah satu senior yang telah sukses di Amerika
Saya rasa ini sangat terkait dengan kejelimetan perdebatan ekonom selama ini, apakah ada satu sistem ekonomi yang benar benar paling benar dan applicable buat seluruh bangsa dan negara. sayangnya sering kali penelitian ini terjebak dengan kemewahan ekonometrika, yang menyimpan keraguan kausalitas atau hanya korelasi semata
yang menarik adalah kesimpulan akhir yang ditarik penulis,
"On the other hand, we can also see that it is not one's religiosity that provides salvation. It is one's ethics, as well as the ability to adjust with institutional challenges, that changes one's fate".
menurut saya sistem ekonomi pasar bukanlah suatu hal yang tabu, bahkan menurut saya di dunia ini hanya ada dua titik ekstrim sistem ekonomi, yaitu ekonomi terkontrol (marxian) dan ekonomi berdasar mekanisme pasar. Sistem ekonomi yang dikembangkan oleh keynesian merupakan metamorfosis dari sistem ekonomi pasar yang banci (meminjam kata kata Mas Arianto Patunru,PhD) .
ekonomi islam, menurut kaum muslimin adalah yang paling tepat dan benar, sama halnya dengan kaum neo klasik memuja setiap kata dari capitalism and freedom-nya Friedman. atau pemuja general theory-nya keynes. Menilik dari sistem analisis yang melihat trend dari time series yang dilakukan oleh Robert Barro maupun Timur Kuran, agaknya ada indikator lain yang tak masuk ke dalam model. dimana tiap tiap sistem ekonomi yang sukses miliki maupun pernah ia miliki. Menariknya tiap tiap mahzab pernah mengalami masa keemasannya masing masing, dalam periode waktu yang tak dapat dipandang sebelah mata.
Islam misalnya pernah mencapai masa keemasan di masa khalifah Umar bin abdul aziz, hingga dari daerah khurasan hingga jazirah afrika kala itu tak ditemui satupun kaum dhuafa, hingga baitul maal pun penuh dengan kepeng zakat dan gandum (dikutip dari khutbah tarawih, Masjid Muhamadiyah Al-Falah Benhil,Ramadhan 1426 H)
Ethics, that's the key word for success, furthermore the thing that wholeheartedly believed by the majority of the people within the country.
Baik keynesian Libertarian, dan ekonomi islam hanyalah interpretasi sepihak dari tiap tiap kaum, yang saling berselisih dan beradu argumen kekurangan dan kelebihan masing masing. Diskusi yang (katanya) produktif ini berjalan hingga ratusan tahun, dan menjalar antar lintas generasi.
Menurut saya Ekonomi adalah ilmu murni yang jauh dari sentimen kedaerahan atau bahkan sedikit moralitas bawaan dari komunitas masing masing. Seperti halnya Fisika, Kimia, dan Matematika, tak seharusnya ada yang namanya Kimia islam, atau Fisika klasik, atau Austrian mathematics, atau gaya gravitasi Komunis. Ilmu ini berlaku universal, dan telah selesai diperdebatkan bahkan sebelum Manusia pertama, Kakek Buyut kita Adam landing di bumi.
Saya lebih senang menyebutnya taken for granted, atau mungkin sunatullah, simply hanya Supply and demand oriented, perbedaan harga relatif, insentif yang rasional, implicit cost dan lainnya.
Forum yang mengagungkan islam di kampus pernah mencetak leaflet yang menyatakan islam bukan ekonomi pasar tanpa bunga, atau ekonomi sosialis yang bertuhan (kira kira seperti itulah), hal ini mungkin yang saya sebut keberpihakan sepihak, keinginan untuk berbeda demi mengedepankan kebenaran yang dianut tiap kaum.
Akan tetapi dari beberapa buku ekonomi islam yang saya baca, dominasi supply and demand dalam ekonomi islam sangatlah kentara, demikian pula model model makroekonomi keynes selalu menjunjung tinggi agregat demand ini sangat penuh dengan interaksi pasar.
Lalu apa yang membedakan antara tiap tiap mahzab tersebut, hingga mereka begitu ngotonya dan masih mampu terus mendefinisikan dirinya masing masing sebagai mahzab yang terdiferensiasi secara jelas dari mahzab yang lain? dan yang paling substansial tiap tiapnya punya pengalaman keberhasilan secara empiris yang mengesankan.
Menurut Friedman, Suatu teori benar asalkan tidak ada bukti empiris yang menunjukkan bahwa teori itu gagal dan salah, karena menurutnya sebaik baik model adalah model yang tidak ideal tapi akurat memprediksi kenyataan. Kefanatikan nya pada hasil empirik ini yang sangat mengesankan. Melihat dari seluruh mahzab yang disebut diatas, masing masing pernah jaya dan pernah pula gagal tak berdaya, ini menunjukkan kita tak bisa mengambil kesimpulan apakah mahzab tersebut salah, atau benar, unconclucion
Jadi manakah yang benar???
Jawab yang bisa saya dapat adalah ada satu indikator yang mendorong, dan menjadi suluh dan menjadi pedoman tiap tiap individu untuk berperilaku. Kefanatikan tiap mahzab menuntut kekonsistenan penganutnya untuk melanggengkan eksistensinya yang eventually membentuk suatu pola sistemik dari pelaku ekonomi dalam jaman nya masing masing. hal ini terkait erat dengan seperti yang disebut oleh senior kita di atas, ethics. Moral sentiments (favourite word, when I was in the Economic system class).
Pertama,Adagium holistik yang dianut oleh sebagian besar masyarakat, dianut secara fanatik, dan yang terpenting adalah secara sukarela (tak perlu coercion power) telah menghasilkan sistem ekonomi yang teratur dan stabil. Yang kedua adalah kemampuan adaptasi terhadap perubahan institusional, disini masyarakat dituntut untuk dinamis dan berubah, aktif partisipatif, masyarakat memiliki kemampuan dan potensi untuk terus mengembangkan dirinya, Menjadi yang terbaik dan menang.
Protestan Ethics, mendorong masyarakatnya untuk berbuat, dan bergerak sehingga berhasil di dunia, kepercayaanya terhadap nasib buruk di akhirat karena kelalaian di dunia, dimana surga dan neraka tergantung pada pencapaian nya di dunia menjadi suluh yang sangat efektif hingga setiap jiwa berusaha yang terbaik.
Masyarakat Yahudi, yang percaya mereka adalah yang terpilih sebagai "anak tuhan", sangat mumpuni dalam berdagang, Kebanyakan diantara mereka kini menjadi langganan headline di majalah "forbes".
Di zaman Rasulullah, Islam berkembang dengan pesatnya, mendorong manusia berperilaku holistik, kaya raya seperti Abdurahman bin Auf, Ustman bin Affan, tapi dermawan seperti Nabi Idris. Dalam perilaku dan mind set masyarakat seperti itu mana mungkin tersisa kaum dhuafa?. Tiap tiap orang kaya terobsesi dengan "penyakit" filantropis, setiap Kaum dhuafa akan berusaha untuk keluar dari kubangan kemiskinan, karena adanya hadist nabi yang menyatakan "Kemiskinan dekat dengan kekafiran", belum lagi sindiran halus seperti "tangan diatas lebih baik daripada tangan dibawah". Saya percaya tidak semua orang di jaman keemasan islam adalah orang kaya(sering kali yang paling fakir adalah pejabat tinggi setempat), tapi tak satupun merasa dirinya tak berpunya, dan mampu membayar zakat.
Sinisme terhadap Ajaran Adam Smith yang menyarankan ke mahadayaan pasar, juga sering kali menggeser berita ke-filantropisan bapak Ekonomi modern ini, ini menunjukkan keidentikan masing masing mahzab, dan betapa dekatnya konsep ekonomi adam smith dengan konsep ekonomi islam, perbedaan terbesar justru ada pada konsep general theory nya keynes, Suku bunga, yang sering kali menyerempet konsep usuary.
sayangnya cap neo liberal, neo kapitalis sering kali dianalogikan dengan pro barat, dan kebijakan strukturalis yang notabene sangat keynesian dianggap sebagai budaya timur yang lebih bermoral. Pasar sering dianggap sebagai monster cacat(tidak sempurna) yang bisa memangsa siapa saja, tanpa pandang bulu.
Konsep menarik dari Friedman, bahwa pasar adalah mekanisme paling adil dan paling demokratis, pada tiap gandum yang terjual di pasar, tidak pernah ada sentimen siapakah yang menumbuknya hingga bisa sampai dimakan, tidak perduli apakah dia muslim, Kristen, yahudi, Kaum pagan atau komunis sekalipun. Tidak ada pengaruhnya apakah ia saudara teroris, bekas tapol PKI, Muslim berjenggot, ataukah pendukung HAMAS. Hanya satu saja yang berpengaruh dan berlaku universal, harga relatif !!, Di kala masa paranoia sekarang ini siapa yang mampu menjadi demikian demokratis seperti Mekanisme Pasar??.
pasar mungkin saja bisa memangsa siapa saja, tapi tidak mungkin ia telantarkan jiwa dinamis dan produktif, hanya yang lamban dan terus menerus lemah (bukan saja lemah, tapi pasrah) saja yang menanggung resiko tergusur.
pasar adalah dimana pagar otonomi individu tak terlanggar, tapi ia juga memberi ruang bagi pemilik rumah untuk berbagi dengan tetangga sekitarnya. Satu saja, tak ada yang namanya pemaksaan.
Mengapa? karena sukarela saja yang akan bertahan, perbedaan harga relatif saja yang bisa membuat individu menetapkan pilihan secara rasional tanpa merasa menyesal. Jika saja harga relatif secara moneter mungkin dianggap tidak manusiawi, bagaimanakah dengan harga relatif yang memasukkan keinginan untuk berbuat baik, yang merupakan salah satu bagian dari utilitas manusia?
Terlepas dari berbagai nama seperti sistem Keynesian, Libertarian, maupun Ekonomi islam, sebenarnya inti penentu dari keberhasilan adalah sunatullah dalam supply and demand karena pasar berjalan dengan baik yang didukung oleh perilaku holistik secara sukarela para individu di dalamnya. Bukan nama sistem ekonomi yang berperan, tapi perilaku masyarakat yang inheren dalam pemberdayaan pasar. Keberhasilan yang pernah dicapai oleh Keynesian atau kaum klasik saya kira tidak terlepas dari keadaan seperti yang ditimbulkan oleh mahzab islam, dan Webber’s ethics
itulah jawaban yang bisa saya tarik.
Mahadaya pasar !!!!!
"the last of the red footed punans"
Tulisan ini hanya spontanitas belaka setelah saya membaca ulasan kompas hari Sabtu 9 Juli 2005,Ulasan mengenai dayak di harian ini sungguh sangat menyenangkan untuk dibaca, ditelaah, dan direnungi. Ekspedisi ke teritorial dayak sungguh membuka mata saya betapa banyak hal dan khazanah budaya negeri ini yang belum terjamah oleh pengetahuan saya yang pandir ini.
terima kasih banyak kompas, yang telah bercerita banyak tentang dunia, dunia yang lepas dari kengerian bom london, hingga ketidakadilan Amerika yang lebih mementingkan perekonomiannnya yang boros minyak daripada pemanasan global. Saya ucapkan selamat pada anggota ekspedisi, yang telah menjalani pengalaman yang tidak pernah dialami oleh sebagian besar kaum urban jakarta, yang menghabiskan harinya untuk segenggam uang, kolesterol, dan bualan acara televisi. Saya adalah salah satu orang yang merasa iri akan anda semua. Terima kasih
Perubahan untuk hidup, atau hidup untuk berubah…
Adam smith (the great philosopher kata Pak Edi),mendoktrin kita selama kuliah bahwa setiap individu apabila melakukan yang terbaik bagi dirinya sendiri, in the end akan membuat welfare meningkat bagi seluruh masyarakat. Invisible hand akan selalu Menendang semua pekerja yang terlalu lamban, dan memaksa orang produktif, Memaksa kapitalis membayar pekerja yang produktif lebih mahal daripada yang malas. Membunuh para monopolis ( yang membuat harga terlalu mahal). Membuat orang selalu bisa memaksimalkan utilitas yang ada. Kemampuan individu untuk terus memperbaiki diri demi utilitas tertinggi adalah basic dari pemikiran ini.
Sen, pemenang nobel dari
Apakah pencabutan subsidi salah?
Lihat saja anak anak FE di depok yang bawa BMW yang borosnya minta ampun, bisa abis 50.000 sendiri ke depok, yang artinya kurang lebih 1,5 juta.per bulan makan BBM bersubsidi (gue yakin mereka mikir dua kali nanti kalo udah kerja sebagai lulusan FEUI dengan gaji standar, huh!!!!). Kontribusi apa mereka ke negara ini dengan makan 1,5 juta dana subsidi tiap bulan ? apa ruginya sih naek kereta?
Apakah bener ilmu ekonomi telah mati?,Apa yang salah?
Kalau tidak, lalu kenapa pengalaman empiris negara barat yang sukses tidak jalan juga di tempat kita? Sistem apa yang benar?, Apakah ekonomi pancasila Sri edi swasono yang didengungkan?, Dari awal gue selalu mikir ini siapa yang salah pemerintah kah? Atau rent-seekingers? Atau masyarakatnya??
Kenapa –kalo melihat kasus temen gue di atas- dia dengan mudahnya menyalahkan pemerintah (walau tanpa pengetahuan yang cukup), IMF, world bank, dll. Kenapa kita selalu menyalahkan sesuatu yang tidak sesuai dengan keinginan kita? Semua orang pengin kaya, tapi gak semua bisa kaya bukan? Harus usaha !!!!!. Apakah dengan sistem yang lebih religius kita akan langsung berubah? Apakah dengan sistem yang pancasilais kita akan lebih baik??
permasalahan mobilitas sosial yang mandek memang menjadi masalah yang inheren dalam negara berkembang yang cenderung laten, dari sini lah segala permasalahan harus dilihat dan dihujjahkan. Dalam berbagai seri keluhan yang diceritakan secara gamblang dan empirik oleh ko mpas, permasalahan utama adalah ketergantungan yang tak terhindarkan pada fosil berumur ribuan tahun tersebut, seakan akan ke-inelastis-an BBM sudah mendekati garis lurus.
dikisahkan misalnya seorang pemilik katering yang mengeluhkan ketidakmampuannya menahan biaya yang merangkak naik, karena BBM naik, Seorang dayak juga dikisahkan semakin sulit mendapat minyak murah karena ongkos "taxi mahakam" tak lagi ramah di kantong.Belum lagi keluhan mahalnya makanan warteg buat mahasiswa.
Kekeliruan kebenaran, Kejernihan kesalahan
Ntah berapa lama manusia menghuni dunia
memenuhi otak mungil ku dengan ocehan gila
Manusia..ntah berapa juta kali berbuat salah
mengulanginya lagi, menyesali, dan mengulangi lagi.
tanpa sekali pun menyesali kebodohan pengulangan yang berulang
sejarah yang berulang, kalimat kebanggaan..
tanpa sadar ketololan yang tercermin
saking seringnya berbuat salah
semua kekeliruan menjadi benar
yang keruh terasa nikmat, oleh karenanya dianggap bening
yang jernih terasa hambar, anggap sajalah racun
si raja midas kini telah terbangun
tuhan baru dunia, karena cacat yang terendam duka
konon di awal dunia
manusia selalu saja bisa mengunjungi nirwana
mendapat apa yang ia minta
si buruk rupa dapatkan cinta
si fakir menjadi kikir
si hina menjadi digdaya
karena nirwana di atas kepala mereka
si fakir midas, penuh dengan cinta
pada nirwana dimintanya kepeng dan emas
Raja nirwana sangatlah blas dan kasih
"sentuhlah dunia ubahlah jadi intan permata"
sabda raja di raja...
Midas yang kaya cinta kini digdaya
emas dan kepeng kini terserak tak berdaya
miliknya saja
tapi cintanya kini hanyalah selembar kepeng dan permata
tinggalah midas menyesali dirinya.
tapi kawannya sesama manusia
cinta kepeng sepenuh jiwa
kepada midas ia menghamba dan meminta
lupa ia pada nirwana
diraupnya intan permata
dipalingkanya dari cinta nirwana
hingga suatu masa
aku melihat diriku hina
lupa pada asal dan jiwa