http://dailysocial.net/en/2011/09/08/indonesian-government-threatens-rim-with-additional-taxes-over-malaysia-decision/
http://theunspunblog.com/ (see: 'Introspection, not revenge...)
Oh, poor Indonesia. Griping and whining again because Malaysia managed to snag RIM (BlackBerry) from them. It's no small wonder when you live here and get first-hand knowledge of just what Indonesia asks and has asked of RIM to do. Take a read for yourself and it will all make sense. It's so sad because other companies that want to invest here are going to look at this and think, "Why invest there when we can invest and build somewhere civilized and reasonable?" If only the government could pull its head out of its ass and see clearly.
http://theunspunblog.com/ (see: 'Introspection, not revenge...)
Oh, poor Indonesia. Griping and whining again because Malaysia managed to snag RIM (BlackBerry) from them. It's no small wonder when you live here and get first-hand knowledge of just what Indonesia asks and has asked of RIM to do. Take a read for yourself and it will all make sense. It's so sad because other companies that want to invest here are going to look at this and think, "Why invest there when we can invest and build somewhere civilized and reasonable?" If only the government could pull its head out of its ass and see clearly.
Very interesting. Is Indonesia's current government very nationalist? Depending on how a government wants to assert economic independence, they can be rather brash when it comes to foreign investment. I don't know enough about the history of the country to know, but I wonder if there has been a bitter-sweet relationship between Indonesian governments and foreign investment?
ReplyDeleteIn Latin America, for example, various governments flip-flopped between supporting and facilitating foreign investment and attempting to regulate (and at times nationalize) foreign companies operating inside the country.
I know Indonesia isn't Latin America, but many (if not most) former European colonies have struggled with economic modernization. The argument for foreign investment is that it brings in money, jobs,goods,and services to a nation, and therefore helps modernize the economy. The argument against it is that the wealth generated by the foreign companies is shipped back to Europe or North America and more recently China, South Korea, and Japan and just makes the nation a workshop for the developed world.
I am not sure I meant that to become a lesson on post-colonial economies. Interesting stuff, though.
Yeah, quite nationalist. They labor laws are very skewed toward their own workforce. They want foreign investment because they don't have the money, ability, resources or drive to get anything done on their own. However, corruption is endemic in every aspect of life and there is so little legal protection offered to anyone or anything foreign that few companies are willing to take the risk.
ReplyDeleteThey have struggled, and are still struggling, but with the amount of people here and the resources available, there's no reason why they can't succeed and become an economic powerhouse. The biggest hindrance is corruption and I see no end to that any time soon. Malaysia and Singapore (both former British colonies) are booming. Indonesia still likes to blame the Dutch and the Chinese for a lot of their problems (makes a lot of sense eh?) so until that stops and they stand up on their own, things won't get much better than they are now.
God, this sounds so Anglo-centric and awful, but British colonies have traditionally outperformed other former European colonies. I do not know if that is a coincidence or something about the nature of British culture or governance. Look at South Africa or Nigeria in Africa. Look at Singapore and Malaysia. Look at India. These places certainly aren't utopias (where is?), but they out-perform their neighbors.
ReplyDeleteIt is so counter to political correctness to say this, but some cultures seem to do better at certain things than others. I do not know why and I really do not think I can could ever explain why, but it is just the reality. Why did Britain develop into an economic powerhouse and build the world's largest empire? Britain is a tiny place on the outskirts of Europe. Why didn't China build a global empire? They certainly had enough people and had more than enough resources! WHY!? I don't know, but culture played a role somewhere.
Sorry to ramble on. These are just really interesting questions and issues. Development is such a strange thing and discussing it always poses more questions than answers.
It's not awful bro. We, as foreigners, say it as do Indonesians that know anything. It's just the hard truth.
ReplyDeleteJust ran across your blog. I really enjoyed it!
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work...you can find mine at pagun-view.blogspot.com Enjoy!
Thank you sir! I haven't had many entries as of late—no motivation really–but I hope to get back at it shortly. I'll give your blog a read as well.
ReplyDeleteTo answer the question of why China didn't become a world empire: It was well on the way to becoming one. Long before the Renaissance in Europe, China had exploring and trading fleets all over the world, including, according to some fairly persuasive historians, North America. A deliberate policy of isolationism was imposed by a new emperor; the fleets were burned, trade was cancelled and China withdrew behind its bamboo curtain. It is only now reversing that policy; watch out!
ReplyDelete