[Vnbiz] Not on Vietnam but may shed light on the inflation debate....a readers rsponse from

Wed Mar 12 19:59:29 PDT 2008

Dear HPP and All:

I agree entrepreneurship, private ownership and motivation need be
supported, encouraged, enabled and facilitated. It is the only way to stem
the inequalities that always result in upheavel.  I believe I have a fair
understanding of globaliation but not simply its economic factors.
Economists do view globalization as the growing integration and interdepence
of markets, nations and people.  Yet, I belive that there is some widespread
consensus that the emergence, and ongoing proliferation of FTA's, signal
alteration to the commonly held believe that the "zillion pieces" are
trending toward short to medium term continuation of a model that has been
commonly accepted as occuring and moving forward.  Look to some Japanese and
South Korean alteration of policies which previously
emphasized multi-lateral trade expansion infavor of FTA's after NAFTA.  On a
side note I realize that the EU is a monetary union, with at least some
French and other EU elites hoping for a Political Union, rather than an FTA.

As any good Entrepreneur must measure commonly accepted belief with a
healthy dose of looking forward, foresight. So must any concerned citizen of
the world and leaders of nations.  In that looking forward we need to
consider a multitude of issues, as many of those zillion pieces that is
possible.  In doing that I am afraid that I, at least for one, do not see
things as all, even most, or perhaps, as you do.

It is the analyst in me who can not help but see the change around the
corner.  I am not sure it will be for the better but am sure that the world
is gravely unstable.  From resource to climate, from inequality of wealth to
stacking the cards toward global imbalances, all is pointing to major
paradigm shifts that portend something very different, at least in my mind,
then that which you seem to trust.  In a world of "zillions of pieces" the
sheer inability of man to make equitable sense and control of those pieces
trends the world toward familiar outcomes.  As globalization started with
some ancient man so will the world resort to old responses and the world has
terrible sustainability problems which will .  Some may say that technology,
transportation and the proliferation of ICTs prevent such possibility,
others may see that they simply have the ability in inflame the very
challenging problems we face.  At the end of the day I see paradigm shifts
where responses alter directions.

Craig
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 5:43 PM, <Hong-Phong_Pho at ita.doc.gov> wrote:

> [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
>
>
>
> Dear Craig:
> Thanks for posting the links.
> Think of globalization as a zillion-piece puzzle that's not static (more
> like a three-D movie), and integration as on on-going process.  The WTO is
> but an evolving framework with basic rules to try to manage all the flying
> pieces on the economic front.  Globalization has been taking place since
> people from one tribe started to cross geographic boundaries to interact
> with others, whether or not peacefully. Setting up rules helps facilitate
> the interactions to make them more predictable and productive.  It's far
> from creating a single world market.  Even FTA are different from the
> integrated markets  like the EU.  I think of them as working on different
> corners of the puzzle that's part of the whole, just at higher "resolution".
>  Trading blocks proliferation doesn't necessarily contradict the WTO common
> denominator.
> Greed is when the desire to have your own piece of the pie is taken to
> extreme, couple with the willingness to crush the desires and needs of
> others to have your way.  Greed can and must be regulated, not banned.  But
> without the fire of entrepreneurship and the motivation of private
> ownership, things just don't seem to work very well economically for most
> people in society (except for the very few at the top whose greed is
> unregulated).
> Best,  HPP
>
>
>
>   *"Craig Stevenson" <cstevenson2000 at gmail.com>*
> Sent by: vnbiz-bounces at mail.saigon.com
>
> 03/11/2008 03:39 AM   Please respond to
> vnbiz at vietlinks.net
>
>    To
> vnbiz at vietlinks.net  cc
>   Subject
> Re: [Vnbiz] Not on Vietnam but may shed light on the inflation
>  debate....a readers rsponse from
>
>
>
>
> [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
>
> Dear Phong:
>
> I will post the links to the podcasts as soon as I have found them and you
> can review the perspectives of those more knowledgeable than me.  In
> addition to the points on Silica, they discuss options and the absolute
> futility of one single, even that all possible options well planned might
> not even being enough, certainly isn't enough at current levels of
> technology.  Transmission of energy is the key .
>
> One major question is that if the world is moving toward free markets and
> globalization is creating a single world market then why has there been a
> proliferation of regional trading blocs?
>
> (certainly different forms and levels of integration, but nonetheless is
> more the trend where the WTO is but a baseline of trade integration and even
> an FTA a higher level of commitment to speak nothing of customs union,
> common markets, and monetary unions)
> EU
> NAFTA
> ASEAN
> Mercosur
> GCC
>
>
> WTO = the lowest common denominator and not nearly as special a
> relationship as those listed above
> etc....
>
> Might it be that the vision of market supremacy has changed will change
> where there is such intervention in markets.  Might it not be better were
> development, and primacy of trade relations be conducted on a bio-regional
> scale?
>
> These are the questions which I believe will rise in importance as we move
> forward.  If there is one-thing that I have learned over the years it is
> that common consensus rarely results in actual manifestation of that
> conceded; ie things rarely turn out to be as expected.  Wild Cards,
> Alternative Futures, an human expectations all shape what is coming.  Excuse
> me for believing my perspective right, but I have been proved right too many
> times over the last 15 years.  As always, perhaps, my persepctive is wrong,
> I just don't think so and hear few arguments that convince me otherwise.
>  Finally, I do not think greed is the admirable quality (that should be)
> driving the development of man.
>
> Craig
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 8:22 PM, <*Hong-Phong_Pho at ita.doc.gov*<Hong-Phong_Pho at ita.doc.gov>>
> wrote:
> [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
>
>
>
> Dear anh Craig:
> It goes without saying that governments will try to intervene, some more
> than others, some only as necessary, others much more than necessary.
> Between the two extremes of command and market economy, I think we can
> generally agree and which one works better at generating wealth.  As to
> distribution, it's academic if all you have to spread around is poverty.
>  Vietnam is still recovering from economic commandism, that's why I try to
> steer clear of any suggestion to have the government engaged in such direct
> interference.  I am not oblivious to pressures you mentioned.  Vietnam is
> already restricting rice exports to help ensure food security. Subsidize
> rice prices if you have to by discharging reserves.  Subsidizing fertilizers
> for farmers as necessary.
> Dear anh Hoanh:
> So much for "All private companies have to do the same thing to "pass-on
> the saving" to the customers if they want to stay in business for a long
> time."?
> So why won't the U.S. government just take all the "windfall" profits from
> the U.S. oil companies and give U.S. consumers a break on gas price?
> Instead, between local and federal taxes, gas prices are even higher than
> charged by the oil companies.
> You talk about US still subsidizing oil companies.  Do you know what these
> subsidies are for and why they are in place?
> Yes, supply and demand still work, even in this environment.  Oil
> companies took big risks for big returns.
> Best,  HPP
>
> P.S.  Insolation favors countries closer to the equator.  Silica is sand,
> among the most abundant resource on earth.  Scientifically, we are not there
> yet for photovoltaics, so solar will have to be one a among a number of
> alternative energy solution.  HPP
>
>
>   *"Tran Dinh Hoanh" <**tdhoanh at gmail.com* <tdhoanh at gmail.com>*>*
> Sent by: *vnbiz-bounces at mail.saigon.com* <vnbiz-bounces at mail.saigon.com>
>
> 03/09/2008 09:39 PM
>   Please respond to*
> **vnbiz at vietlinks.net* <vnbiz at vietlinks.net>
>
>
>   To
> *vnbiz at vietlinks.net* <vnbiz at vietlinks.net>  cc
>   Subject
> Re: [Vnbiz] Not on Vietnam but may shed light on the inflation
>  debate....a readers rsponse from
>
>
>
>
>
> [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
>
> Dear anh Craig & CACC,
>
> What you said about alternating price support and
> alternative-energy-research depending on economic conditions makes good
> sense.  We ought to think about that seriously.  The world is so depending
> on oil that world politics is so messed up due to oil.  Eventually we will
> run out of oil anyway.  I think the world will be much more balanced if
> solar energy becomes a main source of energy.  It will be a great equalizer,
> just like Internet, because, with little variation here and there,  the sun
> very much shines equally on all countries.
>
> BTW, I wonder if there is any alternative energy research currently in
> Vietnam?   Does anyone know the answer?
>
> Have a great day!
>
> Hoanh
>
> On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 1:40 AM, Craig Stevenson <*cstevenson2000 at gmail.com
> * <cstevenson2000 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
>
>
> Dear CACC:
>
> Frankly, aren't oil reserves for VN nearing elimination.  Without
> resolution of the Spratley's (Sorry I do not know the VN name) crucial to
> any real further discussion of this.  Really, despite high costs at present
> shouldn't we be discussing taxes to be used for other generation of enrgy
> resources, alternatives.  Subsidy might lessen the blow to the consumer
> which is important to offset wage increase demands and perhaps to subsidize
> fertilizer to farmers etc to offset domestically produced food costs for the
> same reason.  Any talk of subsidy should also speak of taxes in the same
> manner marked to prices in the market.  Perhaps, oil rises and subsidies
> kick into place, oil falls and subsidies lessen or taxes kick in at certain
> prices which go earmarked to an energy indepndence fund, etc...
>
> Phong, in all reality, wouldn't current events seem to imply that the
> concept that "markets rule and should rule" is undermined to the very large
> imbalances in a world economy that isn't actually, fully dependent upon
> market forces.  All intervene in every market to varying degrees.  Further,
> it might be that the curent "market-supremacy model", built for/from
> political expediency in an era of the cold war, that currently
> philosophically reigns, might not actually be relevant, or lasting, in a
> world where, despite how we (would, might) prefer it be, doesn't exist in
> reality.  A peg distorts the market, as does a tax, as does financial
> globalization, inequality, interdependence, and speculation unfortunately.
>  Might it not be that neither Hayak nor Keynes is right.  Of course neither
> should VN reutrn to a command economy, especially after the distribution of
> wealth effects of late, nor should it blindly follow a market rules
> philosophy. I believe the world misunderstands  the nature (and certainly
> misjudges the implications) of the fundamental shifts that could occur quite
> quickly do to global imbalances and I guarentee possible movement doesn't
> likely tend toward free market liberalism.
>
> Craig
> On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 12:39 AM, Tran Dinh Hoanh <*tdhoanh at gmail.com*<tdhoanh at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
>
>
> Dear brother Phong,
>
> Oil will never be a "market economy."  At least not in our lifetime.  Oil
> is a global monopoly.  Oil price is a monopoly price determined by OPEC.  So
> the price of oil is not really ruled by supply and demand of a market
> economy.
>
> That is why in a year when the American citizens paid exhorbitant prices
> for gasoline and gas price rose continuously (and still rising as of now),
> Exxon had a 41-billion-USD profits in 2007, the largest profit in the US
> corporate history.  Four largest oil companies had more than 100 billion USD
> of profit in 2007.   *
> http://www.usnews.com/articles/business/economy/2008/02/01/exxons-profits-measuring-a-record-windfall.html
> *<http://www.usnews.com/articles/business/economy/2008/02/01/exxons-profits-measuring-a-record-windfall.html>
>
> And the US government is STILL subsididing US oil companies.
>
> Vietnam oil is controlled by two monopoly arms in import and export.  And
> the monopolies won't go away anytime soon because of the important role of
> oil in the national security and economy and becasue the monopolistic nature
> of the global oil industry.
>
> So any talk about "market economy" and the law of supply and demand in oil
> is unrealistic.   It is "supply and demand" in a distorted and monopolistic
> environment.  What we need to do is to understand the monopolistic character
> of oil industry to structure production, distribution and pricing in a way
> that is fair and good for citizens and the national economy, and not to
> allow absurd things happen like in the US--the government subsidizing oil
> companies, and in a year when citizens pay rapid price increases, oil
> companies post record windfall profits.
>
> Have a great day!
>
> Hoanh
>
>
>
> --
> Tran Dinh Hoanh, Esq., LLB, JD
> Washington DC _______________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe, please contact admins at*
> **vnbizadmin at vietlinks.net* <vnbizadmin at vietlinks.net>
> Info at *http://mail.saigon.com/mailman/listinfo/vnbiz*<http://mail.saigon.com/mailman/listinfo/vnbiz>
> Archive at *
> **http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vnbiz/*<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vnbiz/>
> or *http://groups-beta.google.com/group/VNBIZforum/*<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/VNBIZforum/>
> or *http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz*<http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe, please contact admins at*
> **vnbizadmin at vietlinks.net* <vnbizadmin at vietlinks.net>
> Info at *http://mail.saigon.com/mailman/listinfo/vnbiz*<http://mail.saigon.com/mailman/listinfo/vnbiz>
> Archive at*
> **http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vnbiz/*<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vnbiz/>
> or *http://groups-beta.google.com/group/VNBIZforum/*<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/VNBIZforum/>
> or *http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz*<http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe, please contact admins at
> vnbizadmin at vietlinks.net
> Info at http://mail.saigon.com/mailman/listinfo/vnbiz
> Archive at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vnbiz/
> or http://groups-beta.google.com/group/VNBIZforum/
> or http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe, please contact admins at
> vnbizadmin at vietlinks.net
> Info at http://mail.saigon.com/mailman/listinfo/vnbiz
> Archive at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vnbiz/
> or http://groups-beta.google.com/group/VNBIZforum/
> or http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz/attachments/20080312/b9fed558/attachment-0001.html 