Inspired by Bangalore traffic, I have come up with this poem. Do let me know if it can be called so:
Bad traffic! Slithering, smoke-spewing traffic!
Like a dying dragon, punctured at every rib
Choking like a burning rope!
Directionless, emotionless, spasmodic
Like a mortally wounded multi-headed monster!
Tangled, intertwined, choked
Like serpents in an embrace!
Can be expanded the next time I get stuck in a traffic jam.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
The danger of genius
In Ender's Game, Orson Scott Card comes up with an interesting hypothesis - as a species, mankind ensures its survival by producing geniuses every once in a while. That's the gift of evolution to us. We keep straining ourselves till we produce a genius, who invents the wheel, sets up an empire.
I quite agree with him, as our superiority can only be partially be explained our spectacular thumb, or our high levels of 'intelligence'. We would have survived, I am sure of that, but wouldn't have touched a population of 6.76 billion. Either we would have been wiped out by diseases, or could not have inhabited regions with extreme climates. Or simply, there wouldn't have been adequate food. The world would have been a different place had it not been for the likes of Edward Jenner (smallpox vaccination), Louis Pasteur (germ theory), Tesla (developments in electricity), or of course, Einstein. Forget about television or radio waves, I am sure that more than 95% of us cannot manufacture iron, or glass, without guidance even if these products are an elementary part of our lives.
But I wonder if this theory works in the reverse as well. That is, mankind also produces evil geniuses once in a while to control our population. Like Hitler (70 million killed in WW II, about 12 million through 'ethnic cleansing'), Genghis Khan, Timur the Lame (100,000 on a single day) or Napoleon (killed about 550,000 through the Russian invasion). In fact, world population has increased by about 5.1 billion from 1900-2008, a period of just over a hundred years. Compare that to the growth from 50o BC to 1900 AD - an increase of 1.6 billion over more than 2000 years. The scary deduction thus is that when the next evil genius comes, the casualties are going to be much greater. Unless I am being a Malthusian soothsayer.
We could have very well annihilated ourselves during the Cold War, but thankfully, better sense prevailed. What could be the next "Moment of Apocalypse"? It could be climatic disasters, but then the culprit would be the collective genius of mankind, for not controlling global warming or the destruction of the ozone layer. Any contagious disease could be disastrous too, considering that the world is now such a small place. But I would place my bet on wars - that's how we have worked traditionally. The motivation this time, however, would not be gold or oil or religious relic. It would be food.
I quite agree with him, as our superiority can only be partially be explained our spectacular thumb, or our high levels of 'intelligence'. We would have survived, I am sure of that, but wouldn't have touched a population of 6.76 billion. Either we would have been wiped out by diseases, or could not have inhabited regions with extreme climates. Or simply, there wouldn't have been adequate food. The world would have been a different place had it not been for the likes of Edward Jenner (smallpox vaccination), Louis Pasteur (germ theory), Tesla (developments in electricity), or of course, Einstein. Forget about television or radio waves, I am sure that more than 95% of us cannot manufacture iron, or glass, without guidance even if these products are an elementary part of our lives.
But I wonder if this theory works in the reverse as well. That is, mankind also produces evil geniuses once in a while to control our population. Like Hitler (70 million killed in WW II, about 12 million through 'ethnic cleansing'), Genghis Khan, Timur the Lame (100,000 on a single day) or Napoleon (killed about 550,000 through the Russian invasion). In fact, world population has increased by about 5.1 billion from 1900-2008, a period of just over a hundred years. Compare that to the growth from 50o BC to 1900 AD - an increase of 1.6 billion over more than 2000 years. The scary deduction thus is that when the next evil genius comes, the casualties are going to be much greater. Unless I am being a Malthusian soothsayer.
We could have very well annihilated ourselves during the Cold War, but thankfully, better sense prevailed. What could be the next "Moment of Apocalypse"? It could be climatic disasters, but then the culprit would be the collective genius of mankind, for not controlling global warming or the destruction of the ozone layer. Any contagious disease could be disastrous too, considering that the world is now such a small place. But I would place my bet on wars - that's how we have worked traditionally. The motivation this time, however, would not be gold or oil or religious relic. It would be food.
Sunday, March 08, 2009
The problem of the United States
To my mind, the only person capable of cleaning up the US financial mess, is Mr Wolfe from Pulp Fiction. For what the US needs now is a person who is focused, not afraid of taking unpopular decisions and doesn't mind getting his hands dirty (although Wolfe delegated the task to Vincent and Jules).
For now, US is content with pumping money into banks to control the panic, which is passable as a short-term solution. But that isn't likely to cure the chronic malady, because it is rooted deep in history, somewhere in the early 80s. The Fed has just been postponing the pain by pumping liquidity after every crisis, encouraging people to spend more, and achieving a temporary illusion of growth. The last time the Fed wisely dealt with a crisis was in the 1970s, when Volcker increased the interest rates to 20%, successfully putting an end to a stagflation scenario. For the US, the going was good from 1950-1970, when the country produced more than it consumed, ensuring healthy employment and a robust currency. Lets go back into history to have a closer look.
After World War II, the US pulled itself out of the Great Depression and was in a much better shape than the rest of the world - the European countries were battered by bomb damage, and the Asian/African ones had suffered centuries of colonization. Not only did the war create over 17 million jobs in the US, the country escaped virtually unscathed compared to its competitors in Europe. As a result, by the early 1950s, Americans owned 80% of the world's electrical goods, controlled two-thirds of the global productive capacity and produced over 60% of its oil and 66% of steel. Resources were plenty, and even a blue-collar worker earning less than $2 per hour could afford a lifestyle that the rest of the world envied. To get an idea of the kind of life an ordinary shipping clerk enjoyed in the 1950s, refer Life magazine's Nov'1951 issue, which published a photo of all the food that the Czekalinski family consumed in an year.
During the early 1950s, US exported more than what it imported, resulting in an impressive trade surplus of about 4% of GDP. The tables started turning in late 1970s, and by 1998, US was running a trade deficit amounting to 4% of GDP. As a result, the highly skilled jobs at factories started vanishing, and US citizens started consuming more of foreign stuff - starting with the Japanese automobiles and electronic goods. Ideally, people should have either started saving more, or built home-grown industries to cater to the growing consumption. But that never happened.
to be continued...
For now, US is content with pumping money into banks to control the panic, which is passable as a short-term solution. But that isn't likely to cure the chronic malady, because it is rooted deep in history, somewhere in the early 80s. The Fed has just been postponing the pain by pumping liquidity after every crisis, encouraging people to spend more, and achieving a temporary illusion of growth. The last time the Fed wisely dealt with a crisis was in the 1970s, when Volcker increased the interest rates to 20%, successfully putting an end to a stagflation scenario. For the US, the going was good from 1950-1970, when the country produced more than it consumed, ensuring healthy employment and a robust currency. Lets go back into history to have a closer look.
After World War II, the US pulled itself out of the Great Depression and was in a much better shape than the rest of the world - the European countries were battered by bomb damage, and the Asian/African ones had suffered centuries of colonization. Not only did the war create over 17 million jobs in the US, the country escaped virtually unscathed compared to its competitors in Europe. As a result, by the early 1950s, Americans owned 80% of the world's electrical goods, controlled two-thirds of the global productive capacity and produced over 60% of its oil and 66% of steel. Resources were plenty, and even a blue-collar worker earning less than $2 per hour could afford a lifestyle that the rest of the world envied. To get an idea of the kind of life an ordinary shipping clerk enjoyed in the 1950s, refer Life magazine's Nov'1951 issue, which published a photo of all the food that the Czekalinski family consumed in an year.
During the early 1950s, US exported more than what it imported, resulting in an impressive trade surplus of about 4% of GDP. The tables started turning in late 1970s, and by 1998, US was running a trade deficit amounting to 4% of GDP. As a result, the highly skilled jobs at factories started vanishing, and US citizens started consuming more of foreign stuff - starting with the Japanese automobiles and electronic goods. Ideally, people should have either started saving more, or built home-grown industries to cater to the growing consumption. But that never happened.
to be continued...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)