What could cause a future financial crash? Ian Goldin, professor of globalisation and development at Oxford University, talks to some of the world's leading economists about whether we have learnt lessons from the 2008 financial crash and whether countries are now better prepared to meet the next crisis. Or are we condemned to another economic meltdown, perhaps even more severe, which would provide new fuel to the fires of populism? A decade ago, the world was taken by surprise. Will it be again? Featuring contributions from the IMF's Managing Director, Christine Lagarde, Lord Nick Stern, Professor Peter Piot, Pascal Lamy and Jeffrey Sachs. Producer: Ben Carter
22 November 2018
Al Jazeera: Why Saudi Arabia's foreign policy is failing
At the beginning of the Cold War, Riyadh took a backseat in most regional conflicts, leaving the rowdy revolutionaries of the Arab world (Egypt, Iraq and Syria) to take the lead. On Palestine, for example, the Saudis decided to keep a low profile. Although Riyadh backed the war efforts of the so-called "ring states" - the Arab countries surrounding Israel - it always refrained from getting involved in a direct military confrontation with the Zionist state. When it decided to get involved - for example by leading the 1973 oil embargo - it always did so through soft or economic power. [...]
Throughout the Cold War, Saudi Arabia also played a quiet albeit important role in the international arena, contributing to the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union. In the 1980s, it joined Pakistan and the United States in their efforts to support armed groups resisting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, funding most of the CIA programmes to arm and train the Mujahideen. The House of Saud also helped plunge oil prices in the second half of the 1980s, bringing the oil-dependent Soviet economy to its knees. [...]
For the first time in its recent history, Saudi Arabia found itself completely exposed, with no one to fall back on but itself. To add insult to injury, the Obama administration showed little sensitivity towards Saudi concerns as it sought rapprochement with Iran, leaving Riyadh deeply worried about its security. As the feeling of insecurity in the House of Saud grew, "backseat" diplomacy gave way to a more assertive foreign policy; the tactics, however, remained more or less the same: confrontation by proxy. [...]
Not only has MBS created more enemies than he can handle, but he has also chosen the wrong allies. He has embarked on a dangerous path of normalisation with Israel, believing that it would pay back in the long run. But with this decision, he risks losing the hearts and minds of the Arab people to Turkey and Iran, both of which have positioned themselves as champions of the Palestinian cause.
UnHerd: Could you predict Brexit?
It was run by an organisation called the Good Judgment Project. The GJP was set up by Philip Tetlock who, in 1984, had noticed something. The young psychologist had joined an expert committee set up by the National Academy of Sciences to help prevent nuclear war. The experts were divided. Conservatives wanted to maintain a tough line against the Soviet Union; liberals thought that line was strengthening Kremlin hardliners.
When, a few months later, Mikhail Gorbachev took office and started opening the USSR up, Tetlock was surprised to see that everyone thought this showed they’d been right all along. The conservatives thought the tough line had pushed the Kremlin into action; the liberals thought it would have happened anyway, and that the hard line had just slowed things down. People all thought they were right, whatever had actually happened.
So Tetlock set up an experiment to see how good experts were at predicting the future. First, he had to tie them to falsifiable predictions. Pundits had, and have, a tendency to vague answers that don’t really pin them to anything: “Food shortages could be likely”, and so on. Tetlock gave them specific questions with clear dates: “Will the yen be higher than it is now against the deutschmark in one month’s time?” He then asked the pundits to give percentage values for how likely that was: there is a 75% chance that this will happen, a 60% chance, etc. [...]
What he found was that pundits’ calibration, on average, was no better than random guessing – or, as Tetlock described it, “than a dart-throwing chimpanzee”. But some were significantly better. What predicted who was better was not whether they were conservative or liberal, or even, particularly, their expertise in the field, but how they approached the problem. People who assumed the world was simple and had simple solutions did badly; people who thought it was complex, who realised they could be wrong, and who learnt from mistakes did better. It also helped if you were good with numbers, and good at spotting patterns, as in IQ tests.
Quartzy: The psychological difference between those who love and hate Black Friday
Psychology researchers divide the world into two groups: those who tend to focus more on achieving tasks versus those who focus more on making connections with others. This idea is encapsulated in what’s known as goal theory.
Task-oriented shoppers typically focus on finding the things they need as quickly as possible and with the least amount of effort. Socially oriented shoppers, on the other hand, enjoy the presence of others while they shop.
There is experimental evidence that task-oriented shoppers are more likely to find even a handful of other shoppers nearby to be a crowd and an obstacle to a successful shopping trip. The same research suggests that social shoppers are actually energized by the presence of other consumers. These folks enjoy the experience more when there are others nearby, even if they don’t directly interact.
The Guardian: 'Who let this happen?': students rediscover antisemitism on Auschwitz field trip
These were some of the images that 93 UK university students who this week visited the Nazi death camp at Auschwitz-Birkenau took home, along with a new understanding of the horrors of the Holocaust and a fresh commitment to countering antisemitism on campus.
They were on a government-funded day trip, organised by the Holocaust Educational Trust and the Union of Jewish Students, to take student leaders and senior staff from almost 50 universities to Auschwitz. The £144,000 grant was announced earlier this year by Sajid Javid, then communities minister. [...]
Other organisations are also considering taking people to the former death camp. Chelsea Football Club said last month it may send some of its supporters to Auschwitz to educate them about the potential consequences of racism and antisemitism. [...]
The students and staff will reconvene with trust educators next week for a follow-up seminar to discuss what they learned from the visit and its personal impact on them. Participants have agreed to become trust “ambassadors” in their universities to raise awareness of the Holocaust and challenge antisemitism and other forms of racism and prejudice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)