Saturday, August 13, 2011
Comments I have Made
Proverbs
Friday, August 12, 2011
Sportsmanship
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Studying Abroad
As more people in the world have better education, the importance of qualifications becomes ever – more important. With a growing number of people seeking higher education and better qualifications, the choice of where to go for university studies weighs heavily on even more people. In my opinion, overseas university studies provide their fair share of advantages. While I also accept that students studying abroad might face difficulties, I do not believe that the only cause is living and studying in a different culture or that these difficulties outweigh the advantages.
There are numerous benefits to studying abroad. One of them is practice of another language. While anyone can study foreign languages anywhere in the world, there is a huge benefit from having daily practice in using the language. One does not just become more fluent, but also understands the more complex nuances of the language. Also, one who has had extensive exposure to a language has a distinct advantage over someone who has only relied on theory when applying for jobs or positions that require the usage of this other language. For example, in China, only those people who can pass the Hanyu Shuiping Kaoshi or the Chinese Proficiency Test for foreigners will be able to obtain a visa to work or live in the country. Those who are unable to obtain a passing mark will have to retake the test until they are able to pass. Those who are proficient in the use of Chinese language will have a definite edge over those who are not as they do not have to spend a few weeks or months taking courses on the Chinese language and can immediately apply for a visa.
Having said that, students will inevitably face numerous difficulties while studying abroad. One such difficulty would be separation from family and friends. When one goes abroad to study, one will be alone in the country for an extended period of time. Away from the support and love of parents, one is left to fend for oneself in an unfamiliar land surrounded by unfamiliar people. Most students who go abroad would also not be so forthcoming, and take a longer time to make new friends in a foreign country. Even worse, the more introverted of such foreign students might suddenly find themselves with no one to confide in or to spend time with. Away from the guidance of parents, one might also turn astray from the path of lawfulness. Consider the recent example of the Hwa Chong alumnus who was found with many videos of child pornography on his laptop. He had been on a scholarship in a foreign university. Had he been studying in Singapore, it would be much more convenient for his parents to check on him and maintain a watchful eye over him, and perhaps he would not have turned astray in the first place.
However, I think it is inappropriate to consider these difficulties to stem from living and studying in a different culture. With the advent of airplanes, many countries around the world have become global countries and the presence of foreigners in the country is hardly surprising. I only see a few problems that one might face in trying to live and study in a different culture. One would be the language barrier. While people who go abroad to study generally study the main language of that country as well, one will often be unable to completely master the language within the few months of preparation one is given before the start of the first term of university. There will still be some figures of speech or metaphors used in conversation that one will not understand. However, I do not think this is a very big problem. As countries become more globalised, most have recognised the usage of English as the international language and most people these days can speak English, albeit haltingly. Another problem would be racial discrimination. Although it has become far less common in our present day world, it still exists in many parts of the world. For example, an Australian girl recently made a video about how Asians in her school were “always yammering on their phones” and how they were irritating. In her video, there were many defamatory comments about Asians. This showcases the severity of racial discrimination that lingers in certain parts of the world.
Some people would argue that it is better to stay home. They bring up the monetary cost of studying abroad and dismiss the concept. Others are concerned about losing friends in their home countries. I am of the opinion that the monetary issue, at least, is not a problem. As more parents can afford to provide their children with good education, more students realise the importance of education in a knowledge-based economy. As such, many students are pushing themselves harder to win scholarships and bursaries. Through these scholarships and bursaries, students who have excelled in their studies can obtain government funding to study in foreign universities. Their expenses will be paid for, in exchange for a few years of bondage when they have graduated from university. I also think the drifting apart from friends is not a very large problem. As one ages, one makes many friends, such as those in the same class or school. Inevitably, some of these friends will be forgotten as new ones come in to replace them. In a new country, I think one has the opportunity to make many friends to replace those who gradually drift out of one’s social circle. Additionally, with the advent of technology like the Internet, one can still keep in touch with many friends through various social platforms like FaceBook, Twitter, Tumblr, the list goes on.
To conclude, I believe that the advantages of studying abroad outweigh the disadvantages. Safety remains one’s first concern above all else. Students who are not so mature or independent should also consider heavily whether studying abroad is the right path for them.
Happy National Day
Monday, August 8, 2011
This I Believe: Perseverance
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Financial Firestorm: Will America pull through?
http://www.economist.com/node/21525446
“The Debt-Ceiling Deal”
The deficit-reduction deal that finally raised America’s debt ceiling and prevented immediate default seemed to be successful, at least in the short-term. Republicans managed to prevent higher taxes, while Democrats managed to preserve their healthcare and housing initiatives. Ironically, however, nobody seems to be satisfied with it. Democrats and Republicans alike denounced the scheme, and both pointed the finger of blame at each other.
The deal promises $917 billion in spending cuts over the next decade, in return for an increase in the debt ceiling of $900 million. A plan to further reduce the deficit by $1.5 trillion must be formulated and approved by Congress by December 23rd, in return for another increase in the debt ceiling of the same amount. This is far from a perfect solution, but it will have to do until a better one can be set into motion. Why is the deficit such a big deal? On it’s own, it is economic in nature, and that is something the Government can rectify. But the problem comes in when political parties try to politicize the economics. Then the entire country becomes involved, and the problem is made much more complex.
I think the economics should stay economic and fiscal in nature. Granted, economic policies affect the entire country, just as politics do. But the critical difference is that when facing an economic problem, a country can stand united to meet it head-on, with all of its strength. A plan can be worked out in a relatively short amount of time, and the plan can be set into motion across the entire country. Policies can be effective in just a few months. When political parties try to use economics to impact politics, the country becomes divided. Nobody can agree on what to do, because both parties think the other is wrong, and that their own chosen solution is the best. There is no ability to reach a compromise, let alone a consensus that everyone supports. As Abraham Lincoln once said, “A house divided cannot stand.” That is the case in America, when the Republicans and Democrats were not just fighting a routine political battle. They needed to first fight the economic battle, as a whole, as one entity. When that was won, the political battle could be carried out.
Who can be deemed to be “more correct”? The Republicans press for huge tax cuts, which they claim will help companies to hire more workers and create jobs. The Democrats press for higher taxes on the affluent and more wealth to be distributed amongst the poor. Frankly speaking, I do not think either one will work on its own.
The Republicans believe that with more money, companies can create more jobs. I think it already has become very apparent that companies based in America are no longer hiring from the pool of workers in America, who demand high pay, good working conditions as well as job security. Compare this to the image of a typical Chinese factory worker. He comes from a poor family or village, so he is thankful for any type of job at all. He is used to waking up early and sleeping late. He does not complain about being overworked or having not enough sleep. Isn’t it much easier and much less bothersome for companies to hire workers fro countries with lower standards? This is essentially why America cannot recover effectively from the economic crisis. Companies find it much easier to hire from other countries. But the demands of high salary are driven by higher cost of living. The only solution I see is to retrain workers so they have better qualifications for the job. Essentially, higher tax cuts will never work because the money saved does not benefit the employees. The money saved benefits the top cats and lines their pockets.
The Democrats believe that with more distribution of money to the poorer people, they will be more able to get jobs. How does that premise work? A person who consistently gets “unemployment benefits” for doing absolutely nothing will soon realise that he can live off the government’s “welfare packages”. It is just like giving a child rewards for lazing in front of the television and expecting him to do his homework. The basic idea simply does not work. The main focus should not be on looking after the unemployed. The main focus should be on enabling the unemployed to be employed so they can look after themselves. The added disadvantage is that when such pensions for elderly folks are rolled out, it is very hard to take them back. People will think it is unfair that they worked for so long, and the people before them got to enjoy it but they didn’t. The people of France protested all over the country in response to President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to raise the retirement age from 60 to 62. How do you expect someone to get a job and look after himself when he can get more from lazing in front of the television all day?
I think these two measures can only work if they are employed together, with an added component. Companies will get tax cuts, provided that they use the money to help their employees get trained. Individuals will get pension, provided that they go for retraining classes to improve their qualifications. The basic premises of the two different measures can work if they are modified with conditions. Which company would increase a relatively high employee salary when it could use the money to fatten its profit margins, and which person would go work when he could get money for free? I think this is one of the best ways to share political pain equally between the two parties, and solve America’s budget deficit problems.
Ultimately, America’s leaders will have to pull together and emerge from the fiscal firestorm that already threatens to engulf the nation. Otherwise, America will default on its debt. And when it does, it will be too late.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Copycats of the East
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904292504576484080863377102.html
“Made in China: Fake Stores”
We are all familiar with the traditional Chinese copycat companies, who market goods that are extremely cheap, extremely similar to the goods marketed by global brands such as Apple, and often do not last long. But have we heard of the new Chinese copycats: those who set up imitation IKEA furniture stores, imitation Subway outlets and imitation Dairy Queen ice cream outlets?
Sophisticated store owners are now recreating the store experiences of many global brands which have decided to enter China: such as IKEA, Apple and Subway, down to the nitty-gritty details like helpful store maps, coupons, shopping bag logos and employee uniforms. These stores so remarkably resemble the original brand stalls that it is very easy to confuse the original and the copycat. Sometimes the goods they sell aren’t even fake. In Kunming, China, a foreign blogger posted photos of a fake Apple store selling real Apple goods, such as iPads and iPhones, in an almost identical store setting.
I think this has benefits as it helps to raise awareness for the original stores. I have never heard of Dairy Queen before today, but now I think I will go try the ice-cream they sell, if they have an outlet in Singapore. Subway has undoubtedly become more widely recognized in China because of its copycat counterpart. The fake Subway stores even accept Subway discount coupons if customers confuse the two brands. In the case of the fake Apple outlet in Kunming, Apple also benefits from the sales of the iPads and iPhones as those are imported from its factories. For Subway, which is trying to encourage a type of food not traditionally consumed in China, the extra publicity actually helps many Chinese citizens to gain some exposure to Western style food.
However, it also has detriments. Apple is known to exclusively select its staff for its outlets in other parts of the world, but the Kunming outlet is not subject to such restrictions. It could tarnish the reputation Apple has worked so hard to establish and put many potential customers off Apple goods even before they buy the goods. Also, if this trend continues, the Chinese government will be regarded as powerless to stop rampant infringement of copyrights even in their own country, large though it may be. The Chinese Communist Party spends so much money yearly on internal defence to prevent riots and protests even before they are conceived. With a robust economic growth and vast financial resources, being the biggest creditor of the United States of America, it is hard to believe that China is powerless to even cut down on the number of such imitators, when it has proven to be so effective in controlling public sentiment via censorship of “anti-government” material.
Should these fake spinoffs of original brands be allowed to continue? Perhaps a more apt question is: can they be stopped? Every year, the number of ambitious copycat companies increases, and the trend has been showing no sign of slowing down, even during the economic recession when buyers all over the world became more cautious and thrifty. It is unclear what other effects this will have on China’s reputation as a global economic power, global brands and consumer sentiment in China. One thing, however, is clear: If China does not stop this trend, or at least attempt to, its reputation will be irrevocably tarnished.