Big in Malaysia

KUALA LUMPUR: Former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak was sentenced to 12 years in jail and fined RM210 million (US$49.38 million) on Tuesday (Jul 28), following a guilty verdict in his first corruption trial involving millions of ringgit linked to state fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).

The charges include abuse of power, money laundering and criminal breach of trust.

High Court judge Mohamad Nazlan Mohamad Ghazali said when reading the judgment: “I find that the prosecution has successfully proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt. I therefore find the accused guilty and convict the accused on all seven charges."

From CNA.

Fish problem

Someone like Lomborg or his new best buddy Schellenberger might respond to this story with "so what, we now farm heaps of fish", but I suspect this is a much bigger problem because of the role such fish apparently play in fertilising the great forests surrounding the rivers.  (Something most of us probably only ever realised via David Attenborough pointing it out in one of this relatively recent series):

Populations of migratory river fish around the world have plunged by a “catastrophic” 76% since 1970, an analysis has found.

The fall was even greater in Europe at 93%, and for some groups of fish, with sturgeon and eel populations both down by more than 90%.

Species such as salmon, trout and giant catfish are vital not just to the rivers and lakes in which they breed or feed but to entire ecosystems. By swimming upstream, they transport nutrients from the oceans and provide food for many land animals, including bears, wolves and birds of prey.

The migratory fish are also critical for the food security and livelihoods of millions of people around the world, while recreational fishing is worth billions of dollars a year. The causes of the decline are the hundreds of thousands of dams around the world, overfishing, the climate crisis and water pollution.

 

A clear case for that "Why not both?" meme

Spotted at Twitter:

Jeez, Jason - there's no need to chose between either Carlson or glibertarians in the credibility stakes.  Both are terrible.

On Carlson in particular - he has been sending out contradictory messaging on COVID and masks, just as Hannity has, and both would clearly be responsible for a large percentage of the Fox ageing audience not taking COVID precautions seriously. 

Of course, he is also escalating, for political purposes, the sense of a national security crisis and encouraging Trump to use his heavy handed response which polling would indicate even most Americans think is hurting the situation rather than helping.   (See this article in Washington Post today.)  

I think there is room to criticise a lack of effective Democrat leadership on trying to get protesters to de-escalate too (Biden should be taking a higher profile on this), but any President should be taking a de-escalation approach.   (Yeah, I know, Trump is constitutionally incapable of being a figure of unifying appeal - but it's still a scandal that a "news" network works to goad him into being even more divisive than he needs to be.)

Capitalism in transition to...something?

What's the movie meme with the woman shouting "What's happening?!" ?  Oh yeah - one of my all time favourite Spielberg related movies - Poltergeist.   Disappointing that I had to Google that to double check.

Seems to me that those in the field of economics ought to be doing more of that, because I've been increasingly suspecting over the last few years that there is a crisis of confidence going on with respect to the understanding of some of the very basic concepts in the whole field. 

I don't know that John Quiggin would agree, but I take support for my gut feeling from his recent post:  The End of Interest.  Some extracts:

Amid all the strange, alarming and exciting things that have happened lately, the fact that real long-term (30-year) interest rates have fallen below zero has been largely overlooked. Yet this is the end of capitalism, at least as it has traditionally been understood. Interest is the pure form of return to capital, excluding any return to monopoly power, corporate control, managerial skills or compensation for risk.

If there is no real return to capital, then then there is no capitalism. In case it isn’t obvious, I’ll make the point in subsequent posts that there is no reason to expect the system that replaces capitalism (I’ll call it plutocracy for the moment) to be an improvement.....

In thinking about the future of the economic system, interest rates on 30-year bonds are much more significant than the ‘cash’ rates set by central banks, such as the Federal Funds rate, which have been at or near zero ever since the GFC, or the short-term market rates they influence. These rates aren’t critical in evaluating long-term investments.

The central idea of capitalism is, as the name implies, that of capital. Capital is accumulated through saving, then invested in machines, buildings and other capital assets to be used by workers in producing goods and services. Part of the value of those goods and services is paid out as wages, and the rest is returned to capital, as interest on loans and bonds or as profits for shareholders. Some of the return to capital is saved and reinvested, allowing growth to continue indefinitely. Workers, on this account, can become capitalists too, by saving and investing some of their wages. At a minimum, they should be able to save enough, while working, to finance a decent standard of living in retirement.

I await his further posts with interest.

Still surprising to be reminded of this...

More information on this topic:

The national exit polls have broken out their survey results by racial group since 1976, and since that year, the Republican nominee for president has received, on average, 54.8 percent of the white vote, while the Democratic nominee has garnered an average of 40.6 percent. In 1980, 1992, and 1996, third-party candidacies affected the distribution of the white vote. The highest percentage secured by a Republican was the 66 percent won by Ronald Reagan in his landslide re-election in 1984; the lowest Democratic number was Walter Mondale’s 34 percent in that same election. Jimmy Carter received the largest percentage of white votes for a Democrat with 48 percent in 1976; George H.W. Bush received the lowest at 41 percent in 1992 when Ross Perot ran, splitting the white vote and dropping Bush from the 60 percent white share he received in 1988.

Singapore builds a COVID ward

There was a lot of scepticism about the quality of the Chinese COVID hospital built from scratch in ridiculously short time, but if you want to see a country doing something similar with a high quality outcome, watch this video about Singapore building a COVID ward in a hospital car park:



Once again, I will swoon over the technocratic success story of Singapore, and Homer will complain I am supporting a disgusting authoritarian regime.  

Big in Turkey

When I turned the TV on yesterday morning, SBS was showing its re-broadcast of foreign news services, and the one from Turkey was just beginning.  After about 20 minutes of (I think) a 30 minute evening news show, I switched over, because it was still talking about Hagia Sophia going back to being a mosque.

It was, it would seem, a popular move amongst most Turks.  Some polling would indicate that's right.

Yet some polling earlier in the year indicated that private religious beliefs were not as devout as they were a decade ago.  The suggestion is that it might be a bit of youth rebellion against their conservative government trying to get people to be more religious.

Going more conservative in Islam in particular has probably never turned out well for a country's economic development, has it?   I see now, Googling the topic of Islam and economic development generally, there's been some pretty negative analysis around for a long time. Here's an abstract:

This essay critically evaluates the analytic literature concerned with causal connections between Islam and economic performance. It focuses on works since 1997, when this literature was last surveyed. Among the findings are the following: Ramadan fasting by pregnant women harms prenatal development; Islamic charities mainly benefit the middle class; Islam affects educational outcomes less through Islamic schooling than through structural factors that handicap learning as a whole; Islamic finance hardly affects Muslim financial behavior; and low generalized trust depresses Muslim trade. The last feature reflects the Muslim world's delay in transitioning from personal to impersonal exchange. The delay resulted from the persistent simplicity of the private enterprises formed under Islamic law. Weak property rights reinforced the private sector's stagnation by driving capital out of commerce and into rigid waqfs. Waqfs limited economic development through their inflexibility and democratization by restraining the development of civil society. Parts of the Muslim world conquered by Arab armies are especially undemocratic, which suggests that early Islamic institutions, including slave-based armies, were particularly critical to the persistence of authoritarian patterns of governance. States have contributed themselves to the persistence of authoritarianism by treating Islam as an instrument of governance. As the world started to industrialize, non-Muslim subjects of Muslim-governed states pulled ahead of their Muslim neighbors by exercising the choice of law they enjoyed under Islamic law in favor of a Western legal system. 

To be honest, I would have thought that the Ramadan fast would not apply to pregnant women, and the issue of it hurting pre-natal development is something I hadn't heard of before.*   The full paper for that abstract is available here.  It's very long, so I skipped to the end summary, and yeah, things look bad for the connection between Islam and economic development.  (Unless, I guess, you're a tiny country sitting on top of a giant pool of oil.)


* Or maybe I have, but forgotten.  When I Google the topic, there are lots of articles about it as a controversial topic.  Apparently, pregnant women are told that they do not have to fast if they are concerned bout the health of their fetus, but many chose to do so anyway.   One study from Iraq seem to say that more of the better educated chose not to fast.  I find it hard to imagine how pregnant mothers in the countries with severe heat during it can think that not drinking during the day is OK for the baby.    

Snowflake cavemen

In research that strikes me as kind of amusing, though particularly useless, it turns out there is good reason to suspect that Neanderthals had a low pain threshold:

As several Neandertal genomes of high quality are now available researchers can identify genetic changes that were present in many or all Neandertals, investigate their physiological effects and look into their consequences when they occur in people today. Looking into one gene that carries such changes, Hugo Zeberg, Svante Pääbo and colleagues found that some people, especially from central and south America but also in Europe, have inherited a Neandertal variant of a gene that encodes an ion channel that initiates the sensation of pain.

By using data from a huge population study in the UK, the authors show that people in the UK who carry the Neandertal variant of the ion channel experience more pain. "The biggest factor for how much pain people report is their age. But carrying the Neandertal variant of the ion channel makes you experience more pain similar to if you were eight years older," says lead author Hugo Zeberg, a researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and Karolinska Institutet. "The Neandertal variant of the ion channel carries three amino acid differences to the common, 'modern' variant,'" explains Zeberg. "While single amino acid substitutions do not affect the function of the ion channel, the full Neandertal variant carrying three amino acid substitutions leads to heightened pain sensitivity in present-day people."

There's a little bit more in the article here.

All rather unfortunate if you had a higher than modern chance of being gnawed on by a sabretooth.

As noted by lots of other people...

....Andrew Bolt is approaching Donald Trump levels of lack of self awareness:

Add caption

No, no they are not...

Article at The Guardian:

Rediscovering the male soap opera: 'The highs and lows of wrestling rivalry are intoxicating' 

It seems to be about a gay (or queer, to use his term) bloke saying that the camp drama of TV wrestling really appealed to him as a queer kid.   I guess I can get that - and still be completely puzzled as to why adult straight men or women would want anything to do with this lurid form of cosplay.

Things going "bang" in Iran

An interesting article at ABC News on the question of why Iran seems to be having so many infrastructure explosions.

It notes that Israel could well be behind some of it, aiming to prevent Biden re-negotiating the nuclear deal if he wins in November. 

Not sure Taleb is his friend

Well, that's odd.

James Allan, the conservative law lecturer at UQ who I have previously pointed out makes statements unsupported by, you know, facts, has a typical Australian right wing conservative blowhard's take on COVID-19:  its danger has been vastly overestimated and the lockdown approach has been a terrible error.

But in the Spectator column in which he is opining this, he starts with citing Nassim Taleb's "skin in the game" idea as being crucial to understanding why governments have got it wrong. 

Which seems odd for this reason: I think Taleb is far too idiosyncratic to spend much time paying attention to, but as far as I know, from my brief looks at his Twitter account since the pandemic started, he has never been a sceptic of the danger of COVID 19 and lately has spent time arguing that governments requiring face mask wearing would be a good policy they should have been pushing earlier.  

In other words, Allan seems to be using one idea of Taleb's to make an argument, but ignoring Taleb's actual opinion on COVID and risk.  Which seems a foolish (that is, typical Australian version of a conservative) thing to do. 

Perhaps Jason can confirm this is correct, as I assume you still follow Taleb much more closely than I do....

The man for whom the 1950's has never ended

I've said many times before he is a reincarnation of a middle aged Catholic man from the 1950's, but the extent to which Catholic conservative CL seems to think other people all share his viewpoint still amazes me sometimes:
 

And I say this even on the basis that, sure, I'm socially conservative enough to say that I think its better for parents to be married rather than in de facto relationships.   But it's ridiculous to suggest that unmarried mothers are in no position to set workplace relationship standards because they are unmarried.

I should also mention - he is profoundly ignorant (and arrogant) on anything to do with science:

Donald Trump was right along. And all the “experts” were wrong. Absolutely, totally, unambiguously…wrong. If the figure really is closer to 500,000 (or higher), COVID-19 is not a whole lot worse than the sniffles. This is the biggest episode of mass hysteria in modern history and if you’re still denying that, you’re a crank.

But Sinclair Davidson likes to run a blog for for the dangerous promotion of bad science takes that endangers people both now and into the future.


 

A completely normal observation

Way, way stranger than fiction.

That new climate sensitivity estimate

The report in Science seems pretty good in its explanation of what the new paper considered.

Short story:

Now, in a landmark effort, a team of 25 scientists has significantly narrowed the bounds on this critical factor, known as climate sensitivity. The assessment, conducted under the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) and publishing this week in Reviews of Geophysics, relies on three strands of evidence: trends indicated by contemporary warming, the latest understanding of the feedback effects that can slow or accelerate climate change, and lessons from ancient climates. They support a likely warming range of between 2.6°C and 3.9°C