| Username |
Post |
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 19-Dec-01 05:25 PM
It is my wish to exchange ideas in open forum rather than in private email. Hence I take the liberty to respond to this email in this public forum. Also, I am sorry for the delay to reply to this mail:
Here was the mail I received:
Siwalik,
With all due respect, your views are self-conflicting. Furthermore, it
seems you've partially misunderstood me. I do not want to monger over
our different views, but here is the clarification:
>Sujan's assertion is wrong in suggesting that it is best for Nepalese >to remain abroad.
This is quite the opposite of what I've been preaching all along. In
fact, this was your view from your previous post (para. 1), where you
stated that the Nepalese who return are most likely to criminalize the
political system, therefore, it is in theirs' and Nepal's best interest
to stay abroad. To this, I disagreed, and If you go over my last post
(para. 6, line 1) you will see such a disagreement. Here it is:
'In particular, Siwalik points out that it is best for Nep. to remain
abroad because of the consequences stated above. This, I emphatically
disagree."
There is some truth to most of your statements in the second paragraph.
However, they are derived from a theoretical perspective, probably a
snapshot of a page from an Economics 101 course dealing with
Core-Periphery concept. And theory cannot always be proven. Hence, 'country such as ours doing business with developed nations is a very bad thing' hans't yet been proven. It is best to stick with real examples with some practicality, which may help us to follow them as a model rather than a mere 'theoretical speculation'. One great example is that of South Korea. I am sure you've studied it's success. From the humble beginnings in the 1970's to one of the dominant players in every sense of the word today is quite captivating. It's GDP and per-capita income was no different than Nepal at that time, but today it's disposable income is quite comparable to any one of the G7 nations.
A few other points of interest:
My views are mostly based in 'how to develop a free-enterprise system
with little govt. interference.' The lack of our government to see the
power of such an enterprise is unfortunate. 'Compassionate capitalism
and privatization are what they should be preaching' rather than trying
to fake their own know-how over every industry that exists there. I
say all this can be perforated with ease only if we circumvent the usual Nepali politics.....
-Sujan
Here is my reply:
There seems to be these questions that are controversial:
n Is it best for Nepalese to remain abroad?
n The role of Nepalese who return
n Trade between nations
There seems to be misunderstanding of my position in the above issues so I will attempt to clarify as best as I can.
First, I do not “preach” anything and do not like being “preached”. There is no such thing as the best thing on “remaining abroad or returning home” that applies to all. It is one to his/her own. It is better to remain abroad if returning means getting involved in the rampant corruption and maintaining of status quo, and being a “rent seeker”. If returning means trying to make a difference and make positive contribution to Nepalese society, by all means, it is better to return. It is better to remain abroad if one’s priority is personal material gain and there is not much concern for society at large. It is better to return if one lives for others as well as personal fulfillment.
Many Nepalese have returned after getting educated abroad. For some reason, they have not been able to lift Nepal up. Now, I do not know what hinders them. Maybe it is a lack of organized effort, or maybe it is a lack of courage. Maybe it is simply choosing the easier option and fitting in. But, I have not seen great change in Nepalese development due to contribution of these “returnees”. However, I do believe that if we had free exchange of ideas and form a strong base to make a difference, it is possible to change things in Nepal. This means there has to be a strong partnership between those who return and those who stay abroad. Both can be beneficial to Nepal’s developmental needs.
Second, trade is never bad. I do not believe it to be detrimental to any entrepreneurs. In fact, trade is a way to lift underdeveloped societies. But taking a course in “Modern World System” can give us added insight about the nature of trade in this world, and determines who benefits. This sort of information and insight does not come from “snapshot of a page from an Economics 101 course.” It is not a theory as such, it is a perspective. But it will help in understanding what kind of trade will help. Not all trade is beneficial. Those that create greater surplus values are helpful. Trading only primary products has not helping anyone. Apart from that, I am not aware what you are talking about.
However, I would like some clarification and your take on this statement:
“It is best to stick with real examples with some practicality, which may help us to follow them as a model rather than a mere 'theoretical speculation'. One great example is that of South Korea. I am sure you've studied it's success. From the humble beginnings in the 1970's to one of the dominant players in every sense of the word today is quite captivating. It's GDP and per-capita income was no different than Nepal at that time, but today it's disposable income is quite comparable to any one of the G7 nations.”
Could you explain how S. Koran and Nepal can be compared? Do you think Nepal can emulated S. Korea’s success and if so how? Also, I am interested to hear about “compassionate capitalism”. What is this concept? How is it applicable to Nepal? Do you think Nepal can advance rapidly under this strategy and privatization? I am curious as to know this magic formula. I hope you have come across something that I have been searching and I would be glad if you chose to share…
Thanks.
|
| Sujan |
Posted
on 05-Jan-02 05:12 PM
All,
Apologies for responding so late, but I rather took a long much-needed break.
If you are receiving e-mail from posters in this board, you can adjust your own user settings before posting, so that you won't be notified by e-mail everytime someone replies to your post. By no means I meant to sent you my reply via your e-mail.
There is still a looming misunderstanding here in the messages I've been conveying about this topic. To clarify, 'preach' is a word I used to emphasize the importance of the matter, but not in a literal sense as a reverend or a priest would do. Here is more clarification:
The truth is not any one of us are willing to return to Nepal for our own economical benefit. This is a no-brainer since we live in the world's #1 economy, hence a high probability that we will be better off here economically. So then what are the reasons to return and help our poor motherland? One word that definitely sticks out among others is 'patriotism'. Yes, one can still be a patriot by living abroad if one can show significant ties. So, in answer to Siwalik's first paragraph I say those 'self-economical' reasons to return lack some serious truth. There is no way it is going to happen.
Many don't return after graduation. And for those who have there isn't any source that says their presence hasn't been able to lift up Nepal. In fact, I say these few 'returnees' have contributed significantly in the development of some sectors, especially in information technology among others. What is happening is 'brain drain at work'. While a few return vast majority of young students/undergrads/entrepreneurs leave the country. This imbalance in the workforce/would-be workforce has caused the growth to slow down significanty, but not shrink, although this is quite possible. In reading an earlier thread a moment ago, Ashu mentioned someone, who I will use as an example. He had the guts to return, not for fame or money, but to provide electricity (his major was electrical engieering) to remote villages in Nepal. That person should be a role model for most of us and I am not saying this just because he did his graduate work at my alma mater. Now, obviously he didnt' return for his own economical benefit.
As far as trade is concerned it requires a whole new discussion, so I will leave it for now unless someone really feels I should discuss it.
Now on to the clarification that Siwalik asked for:
>Could you explain how S. Koran and Nepal can be compared?
>Do you think Nepal can emulated S. Korea’s success and if so how?
South Korea and Nepal certainly isn't comparable now in terms of economical output. But, rather what is comparable is how similar their economic situation was in the late 60's and early 70's. As one of the Asian Tigers its growth has been phenomenal, far exceeding other countries in terms % increase in GDP year after year since its inception of new policies. Who was its launching pad? It's hard to believe, but it was mosly the works of IMF. Their funding provided for the investments needed in the right sectors, and it worked. This was mostly done by giving loans to organizations that promoted education in the field of engineering and technology among other sectors. Since IMF is mostly controlled by Fortune 500 execs in the US (although it's role supposedly is a NGO) this newly trained workforce gave their comapnies the opportunity to outsource their labor abroad. The produced goods at cheap labor eventually meant higher profits for the shareholders. And all stakeholders seem to be happy. S. Korea eventually took this opportunity to learn and eventually opened up their own companies to market their products at home. So, now you can see the transitions taking place. Most Asian Tiger countries have a similar story. To emulate S. Korean at this point would be a long shot. Certainly, there are many reasons for this. Among them 'brain drain', which wasn't so prevalent back then. I think by studying 'the S. Korean formula' and taking current issues at hand to build our country is rather plausible. And again, this also requires a whole new discussion.
>Also, I am interested to hear about “compassionate capitalism”. What is this >concept? How is it applicable to Nepal? Do you think Nepal can advance rapidly >under this strategy and privatization? I am curious as to know this magic formula. >I hope you have come across something that I have been searching and I
>would be glad if you chose to share…
First, let me be clear that magic formula does not exist in the matter we are discussing. And your hints of sarcasm are well noted. I mentioned 'compassinate capitalism' because most nepali politicians seem to portray capitalism as a harsh, immoral, dog-eat-dog type of a system. I would like to think that democracy and free enterprise are the Nepal's only economic hope, but most of these innate politicians don't think so. This brings another point- most of us living abroad study and live in a free capitalistic society. If we were to return and make some contribution, our expertise would certainly lie in the realms of capitalism. Hence, my mention of C.C. was meant not to undermine capitalism and it's strength. The concept of C.C. is simply giving back to the community, to help the unfortunate, and build a better society that you would not only live, but also invite others. Clearly, this has been done and proven in the US. But C.C. can only become fruitful once capital has been acuired. So, how is this done? Privatization is how. Make politicians and the government buy from the private sector. And this is plasusible only if there are enough resources to create an industry within the private sector. But they can't achieve this without the help from most of us, who have the ability to go there and change what I call "the political infrastructure."
Perhaps some of you public policy majors can pave the way for this much-needed change, so that us finance and computer science majors can set the free-enterprise system in a steaming-action...
-Sujan
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 08-Jan-02 05:34 AM
Sujan, are you SAP, formerly of Berkeley?
Just curious.
Anyway, welcome to this kurakani here.
Some thoughts and observations:
************
Sujan wrote:
In fact, I say these few 'returnees' have contributed significantly in the development of some sectors, especially in information technology among
others.
***********
Ashu's response:
I think it's hard to quantify or rigorously assess just how much or to what
extent these returnees have 'contributed' to Nepal ko bikas. But there is
NO question that they have indeed contributed much both personally or professionally.
OK, they might not have contributed in big, BIG, PROFOUND and head-line grabbing steps (that would presumably satisfy Siwalik's concerns), but they
have indeed contributed in small, incremental, one-at-a-time and in a
necessarily fragmented/diverse steps in their own ways.
At work, to cite an anecdotal evidence, my Nepali colleagues went to schools at the US, Canada, Germany, Australia, England and India and Japan and other places -- and most seem to be doing relatively fine in Nepal.
***************
Sujan wrote
In reading an earlier thread a moment ago, Ashu mentioned someone, who I will use as an example. He had the guts to return, not for fame or money, but to provide electricity (his major was electrical engieering) to remote villages in Nepal. That person should be a role model for most of us and I am not saying this just because he did his graduate work at my alma mater. Now, obviously he didnt' return for his own economical benefit.
**********************
Ashu's response:
Well, I am not sure whether issues are so clear-cut like that.
Let me explain.
In America, if you have certain backgrounds and certain skills, it's possible to be making $100,000 or more a year even in your 20s. That's like almost 4 times the per capita income there. In Nepal too, I am seeing more and more that if you
have certain backgrounds, skills and desired attributes, it IS possible to be earning well over Rs.100,000 a month in your late 20s and early 30s.
Anecdotally speaking, quite a few of my foreign-educated Nepali friends are in
this category, and they seem, on the whole relatively happy. Granted, and agreed, this seems to apply only to the high-value-adding and highly-skilled workers (who are by definition trained abroad and very small in number), but
the trend of rising salaries is slowly but surely happening in Nepal.
The person in question above, by the way, is a hugely talented/skilled individual for whom, let it be said, the Nepali job market is willing to pay HUGE sums of money every month. The way I see it, the professional investments/sacrifices he made in his 20s (i.e. working for low wages for years to bring bijuli to rural villages) have now been paying him very handsome returns -- not to mention prestige, influence, networks and so on -- now that he in his early 40s. And his travel schedules at times seems to shame that of New York McKinsey consultants!
Also, there have been cases where certain Nepal-based full-time Nepali bankers were offered jobs in London and New York a couple of years ago (when the markets were strong).
So, in some cases, and depending on luck, personality types, skill-sets and networks, working in Nepal for some years could well be -- NOT only ypur chance to help your desh in whatever way-- but also very smart investment
of time ane efforts for BETTER future career prospects as a GLOBAL
professional.
So, your choices need NOT come down to: America or Nepal ONLY, but that it could well come down to something like: America now, then Nepal for three years or so, then maybe Singapore or London for a few years, before being back in Nepal or America again, and so on.
In theory, then, it's thus quite possible for a highly-skilled, highly networked and hardworking Nepali professional to be a roaming global professional while being rooted in Nepal, and I think, in the 10-15 years or so, we'll see a great many young, under-40 Nepalis in that position.
***********************************
Finally,
On some level, I am worried about "brain drain", I suppose.
But my BIGGER worry is how Nepali professionals -- either in Nepal or abroad -- are somehow NOT able to tap into global "brain networks" and leverage those networks for Nepal ko bikas.
In theory, this could mean: in some years, Nepali investment bankers on Wall Street using their influence to find money for hydro-power or tourism projects in Nepal; this could mean, Nepali writers in the US using their networks to make the US press sit up and write more and cover more about Nepal, and so on and on.
Sometimes, for Nepal ko bikas, you don't have to be physically present in Nepal. You just have to be the kind of person whose emails or phone calls or contacts
will and can work wonders for Nepal ko bikas (howsoever defined).
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| Sujan |
Posted
on 26-Jan-02 02:13 PM
Hi Ashu,
Apologies for posting so late. Unfortunately, I can't afford to log in as often as I would like-- time and I don't get along very much.
To lay your curiosity to rest- yes, I did attend Berkeley as an undergrad (the most exhilarating and epiphanic-causing 4 years of my life!).
Did I meet you in one of the Bay Area- Berkeley, Stanford or even S.F get-togethers? I dont' recall your name though.
Nevertheless, this is an excellent site for Nepal-related issues.
Good luck,
-Sujan
|
