There have been a few articles recently which have quite genuinely been in awe of the Chinese government’s stimulus package. However, suggesting that this mega cash and credit injection will drag the world economy out of recession is just plain naive. Why you ask?

Chinese consumer spending is not the same as American consumer spending, and their preference is for goods they can actually afford, which means low-quality and low-cost Chinese manufactured brands such as Haier. The average Chinese can ill afford a car, let alone two or three. At best they will try and buy an air conditioner, television, washing machine and a scooter. They do however, generally possess a mobile phone. But it’s going to be some generic cheap one.

There is little to no consumer protection in China. This is good for business in one sense — they don’t have to worry about pesky things such as Quality Assurance and Customer Support and Warranties. It reduces costs. However, the result is also that the average Chinese person is hesitant to spend money since they can be so easily ripped off. End result? Consumer spending isn’t what it could be.

The Chinese government’s stimulus package is largely pork barreling and fluff. If you travel to China, you will notice there is massive spending “big-ticket” projects — that is, big things which are highly visible and symbolic (bridges, highways, olympic stadiums), and not necessarily on things which are needed (schools, hospitals and decent local roads). Much funding is diverted into the pockets of government officials and their “friends”. The Chinese economy is incredibly inefficient from all this corruption.

Foreign goods are expensive and out of reach for 99% of Chinese. Let me tell you something amusing. In Shanghai, luxury goods cost 50% more than they do here in Melbourne. They are status symbols for the incredibly small minority of rich people in China. If you want to make money in China, you’d better get your branding sorted, and make sure it’s exclusive and luxurious. But it’s very hard for foreign companies to make money in China. The government is quite happy to undercut you and help the local competitor. It’s not a fair playing field. It’s completely rigged against you.

Chinese are thrifty, so chances are that if there is even some trickle down to the average person, they are going to save their money (especially given the economic storm clouds) rather that spend it. Hardly any Chinese have credit cards. They are are not going to spend money they don’t have.

Don’t believe what the government says about the level economic activity. 8% GDP growth, after a 24% drop in exports? In an economy which is pretty much export driven, it’s complete bullshit.

As you may well have heard recently, eBay plans to allow only “secure” methods of payment (actually only PayPal) for auctions in Australia as of June 17. This smacks of flagrant arrogance by eBay, and is also a threat our to consumer rights.

PayPal is owned by eBay, and this decision certainly is a gross case of monopolising self-interest. Not only would sellers and buyers be forced to use Paypal, but no other (competing) systems are offered, such as Google Checkout.

PayPal isn’t bad, but like the banks we all detest, it takes yet another cut out of every transaction. For example, to transfer money from PayPal to one’s bank account, there is a deduction of $1 (regardless of the amount transferred). Every transaction also has an certain commission overhead, and even more if credit cards are used!

Not only is this a dictatorial proposal, is it disadvantageous to both sellers and buyers. Not everyone wishes to use PayPal, and certainly bank deposit transfer for many is a much streamlined method. The right of consumer choice of payment method needs to be maintained.

Indeed this is a tricky situation, since the middleman is eBay, making both the “sellers” and “buyers” customers of the company. eBay claims this change will benefit buyers (giving them more protection), but it also forces them to use a monopolistic system, and at the whim of eBay and PayPal when fees are (inevitably) increased. Indeed, PayPal does have it’s haters, as seen on sites such as paypalsucks.com. In my personal experience, using PayPal has been generally hastle free (although the fees do sting a little), but many sites require “credit card authorisation”, something which I cannot do (as I don’t wish to own a credit card).

Fortunately, the ACCC is allegedly looking into this case.

Update: eBay has “decided” to discontinue this idea! :-)

We’re lucky enough to do all sorts of interesting things when studying Architecture. For design studio at the moment, we’re doing “Culture”, a series of tasks organised by Peter Corrigan. So, in roughly 500 words, a (far too pithy) critique/analysis of The Quiet American:

Set during final years of the French occupation of Vietnam, and the increasing combat successes of Ho Chi Minh, the Quiet American (based on the seminal Graham Greene novel of the same name) stars Michael Caine and Brendon Fraser.

Metaphor is pervasive throughout the film. Fowler is England: old, weary, and with the cynical experience of gaining, running then losing an empire. Diametrically opposite is Pyle, the young America: naive, moralistic, paternalistic, innocent; but also possessing increasingly dangerous powers. The political tensions are mirrored in the sexual tension between the old and the young man as they vie for the affections of the elegant, gorgeous and equally pragmatic Vietnamese lady, Phuong.

The film is far more critical of America’s actions than the occupying French, who are shown as demoralised and losing their grip on the country. Pyle is depicted as increasingly out of touch, wrapped up in the ideas of “York Harding” and paternalistically believing that the people of Vietnam need, want and will ultimately accept democracy (via the “third-force” — America). Indeed this interventionist attitude to political relations has brought America to war several times last 50 years, most recently in Iraq.

Similarly, as Fowler struggles with the journalistic ethic of being completely detached, this again is a metaphor for the struggle of policy and actions in international politics. Finally submitting, Fowler utters: “this is war.”

Phuong is somewhat characteristic of a young lady in a society where most do not have the financial means nor independence to marry for love. She is worldly and able to use her femine wiles pragmatically in order to assure and secure not just her own future, but also that of her family. An analogy could be drawn that Vietnam, with it’s separate and warring factions are similar to that of Phuong’s allegiences to her family, Fowler, and Pyle. Phuong may chose to be the lover of Fowler, but ultimately her family (perhaps a veiled analogy to the grass-roots Vietnamese Communist movement) is more imporant as she knows that Fowler may never be able to fulful her desires for marriage and a stable future.

Stylistically, the film attempts to contrast the foreign zones in Saigon with the mass of humanity in the other areas. This is relatively successful, as there is a definite pathos as the “European” calm is shattered by two simulataneous bomings, as well as Pyle’s final minutes – spent running down twisting alleys. However, the reality is that almost all South-east Asian cities are actually far more crowded, dirty, chaotic and interesting than the Saigon depicted by the film. In the film, the actors are able to successfully navigate the footpath, whereas it is actually the norm to walk on the shoulders of roads (the footpath being cracked, uneven and covered with a maze of bicycles and food stalls, and the road offering relative ease of pedestrian movement).

The film makes for enjoyable viewing, with a sharp political commentary veiled behind a social drama. The Quiet American continues to be relevant today.

If you get Australia’s current population:

And divide it by:

You get the idea that perhaps almost 10% (actually ~9.37%) of Australia is using facebook!

Obviously this isn’t super-accurate as there could be people who choose to associate with other countries instead (by joining a different country network) or not joining a regional network at all. There also could be “wannabe” Australians, skewing the results the other way.

This is a emotionally gruelling but ultimately well made film, about the worst things that could possibly go wrong, following a single act of “evil.”

It mildly bemuses me that this film is rated “R” in America — sure it contains drug use, perky breasts and a fair amount of graphic voilence, but I found myself more caught up in the tragedy and irony of the characters and the disastrous situations unfolding.

The biggest gripe one could have with Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead, is that because of the omnipitent pathos in this production, combined with the nearly 2 hour running time… One feels emotionally drained by the end. This is definitely not a feel-good film. Really, it’s a hard film to watch.

Nonetheless, I’d encourage you to watch it (if you are prepared for the unrelentingly tense atmosphere) as the acting is extremely convincing, and the structure, while not the conventional chronological series of events, isn’t confusing.

See more informatin on IMDB.com.