Shammi Kapoor dies ....

Reports the BBC

Here is one of my favorite Hindi film song with Shammi Kapoor (and Sharmila Tagore)



Of course, such slow numbers are not what he was really known for ... so, here is one of his crazy ones; I like this one too :)

Cruel Summer :)

From afar, I heard this song when out on the bike path:

Quote of the day, on dark and dirty Tamils

I was very dirty and dark,” she said, and after a pause, “I was looking like a Tamilian

 If it were in a movie, in an appropriate context, it would have drawn loud laughs from the audience.  But, ...

... it was a US diplomat in Chennai, Vice-Consul Maureen Chao, who said that.  A very un-diplomatic moment!

A consulate press release said the Vice-Consul was describing positive memories from her own study abroad experiences in India 23 years ago. “During the speech Ms. Chao made an inappropriate comment. Ms. Chao deeply regrets if her unfortunate remarks offended anyone, as that was certainly not her intent.” 

 Ahem, "if" offended anyone?  Why the "if" there?  Didn't the diplomat and the PR folks realize that the "if" only makes it worse?

For the record, I am a dark-skinned " Tamilian ... I think I am clean :)

Of course, we all make stupid comments. Some more than the others. Remember Joe Biden's comment about candidate Senator Obama and about Indians at 7-11?

Libya: War is hell. Er, "kinetic military action" is hell!

Back on March 18th, which seems like a long, long time ago:

President Obama told a bipartisan group of members of Congress today that he expects the U.S. would be actively involved in any military action against Libya for "days, not weeks," after which he said the U.S. would take more of a supporting role, sources tell ABC News.

I suppose it is too much to ask for a president who will not lie to, and mislead, the public!

Of course, we can always count the "days" from then until today and whenever this war, er, "kinetic military action" ends ...like the number of "days" we have been in Afghanistan. Or the number of "days" in Iraq.

And thus I start to re-read Catch-22 after a number of years, in order to commemorate the fifty years since it was first published.  I have with me a copy of the first edition, which I have borrowed from the library.

Breaking news: GOP supports Obama for 2012

America's Finest News Source has the scoop of the year:



GOP Supports Obama For 2012: 'We Need More Time To Completely Ruin His Life'

Rising college enrollment isn't as good as it seems

As with many of my opinion columns that have been published, this latest one too draws on quite a few of my blog posts.  Blogging has in many ways helped me with the learning about issues and, of course, writing about them as well.

The title of the post here is the title of the op-ed in the Statesman Journal (August 12, 2011)

Enrollment growth in Oregon's community colleges and universities is not necessarily a healthy sign as the Statesman Journal's report on July 31 implies.

Economic recessions are always correlated with increases in the number of students in higher education. During recessionary times, there is not much of a job creation and, therefore, the unemployed and underemployed labor tend to fall back on college education as a way to keep themselves busy and to improve their chances of meaningful employment as the economy recovers.

Economists tell us that the Great Recession ended in June 2009 with growth in the economy over consecutive quarters after an 18-month downturn. However, a significant number of Americans are yet to see that growth translated into jobs, which is the only way their own "personal recessions" will come to an end.

Thus, the lingering 9 percent-plus unemployment means that some of them take up college courses. Graduating high school seniors, on the other hand, realize the stiff competition even for the minimum wage jobs and, they too are more likely to try to beat the odds by signing up for college.

Therefore, the record enrollment level is far from any celebratory milestone, per se.

Instead, we ought to be acutely worried that joblessness might be driving quite a few Oregonians to college, even at the risk of being overqualified at the end.

This unemployment scenario turns even gloomier when I hear from students who completed their undergraduate degrees within the past few years but are yet to find any productive employment. Recently received emails included one from a former student who wants my advice on certificate programs that she could do in order to get an entry-level job.

Further, studies show that students who graduate during recessions almost always are never able to catch up with the earnings lost because of unemployment and underemployment.

Merely increasing the numbers of people going to college is, thus, no panacea for the short-term economic crisis, nor to necessarily provide society with a robust economic future.

To make things worse, public colleges and universities are also keen on maximizing enrollment, and even aggressively sell themselves not only within Oregon, but also in the other 49 states and the rest of the world. As the Pulitzer-winning David Leonhardt observed, a big problem with higher education was "the focus on enrollment rather than completion, the fact that colleges are not held to account for their failures."

Imagine if we ran hospitals based on the number of patients admitted and not on the more important metrics of survival and health of those admitted. We would be aghast, and rightfully so, at the failures in the medical system, more so when it is so darned expensive. Higher education is, unfortunately, not that different from an expensive health care industry where the patients are not being well served.

It is past the critical hour that we asked ourselves whether society ought to promote 16 years of education without understanding the marginal costs and benefits of a population supersaturated with undergraduates and doctorates

I wonder what the comments will be this time around--from my esteemed faculty colleagues that is :)

BTW, want an example of how colleges aggressively sell themselves their degree programs?  The following is an ad that appeared when I was reading a piece at Economix.  Higher education has become an industry that pushes college degrees like how spammers sell Viagra :)

How financial aid makes a ponzi of higher education?

Like many commentators, I have been worried for a while about the escalating student debt crisis, and the role that financial aid plays in the college enrollment ponzi scheme that benefits the higher education industry. 

A wonderful example: Here is an ad that popped up when I was reading and blogging:

Need I say more?

What about our SuperPAC? Rick Parry for President

Beware the spelling though :)

Quote of the day: on the scum of the earth. Who? Read on!

A phrase that really gets to me, for instance, would be one of those neoconservative references to Vietnam as a national tragedy, but only because we lost. That thought fills me with ire. To begin with, the person who says it is typically untouched by tragedy; like me, he has not lost a son or a job. In addition, the implication is that if we had won, the war would have been somehow less tragic. People with that mentality, I have to admit, impress me as being the scum of the earth.

 That is Joseph Heller, author of Catch-22 (ht)

Catch-22 is now fifty years old.  I have read a few essays in this context.  The best one of them all is this one by Ron Rosenbaum. 

In a way, it was a coincidence that those essays came up as I was wrapping up reading and blogging about A farewell to arms. 

"War is not won by victory. ... We think. We read. We are not peasants.  We are mechanics.  But even the peasants know better than to believe in a war.  Everybody hates this war."

"There is a class that controls a country that is stupid and does not realize anything and never can. That is why we have this war."

"Also they make money out of it."

A beauty at the checkout. No, not what you think!

I went to the nearby Goodwill Store to see if I might be able to pick up a used book or two for my summer readings.  I had to go in search because I have given up on Faulkner's As I lay dying.  The title of the book pretty much captures my feeling every single time I tried to read yet another page.

I lucked out; I spotted a copy of Roddy Doyle's Paddy Clarke Ha Ha Ha.  I have read a couple of his short stories in the New Yorker.  But that is not why I picked up the book.  A couple of years ago, when I was the director of the university's Honors Program, one of the students, "K," worked on a thesis in which she analyzed Doyle's novels.  It has been on my list since then.

I picked up two LP vinyls also--Doris Day, and the Carpenters.

I was scanning for more when the public address system blasted, "attention shoppers, the store will close in 15 minutes."

I lined up at a counter where the customers were finishing up. I was next.

The pregnant twenty-something totaled up and said "$2.73"

And after she handed me back the 27 cents change, she said "but, I didn't give your discount."

I was confused.  I get discounts at the Goodwill?  Is my suddenly less-affluent state beginning to show, like how her pregnancy was obvious?

She clarified for me.

"Your senior discount.  You are over 55, right?"

I burst out laughing.  "This is hilarious. I am not 55"

With the utmost sincerity, she asked "so how old are you then?"

"Way less than 55. I am just 47."

"You have all this white hair all over. That is why"

"I started graying early in life.  This is so funny."

"It is funny all right" she said.

In my mind, I feel I am just about 30.

The time meter says I am 47.

This clerk thinks I am at least 55.

My students think I am ancient.

I suppose time is relative.

But, ... but, ....

55 ??? :)

Higher education: heal thyself ... or else?

A year ago, I blogged about the critique of higher education by Professors Hacker and Dreifus.  In the post, I noted how the university where I work made it to their list of the good ones, and also the irony of faculty and administrators alike explicitly disassociating from Hacker and Dreifus.  Oh, good times those were!

Now, it is time for the release of the paperback edition.  Timed with that, Hacker and Dreifus have authored this commentary in the Chronicle, where they write:

Whether one feels that a little or a lot needs fixing, what is missing are signs that colleges and universities see themselves as part of the problem. That is what's most disheartening of all, because if today's higher-education leaders won't take steps on their own, they shouldn't be surprised when outside forces step in—and that won't augur well for academic freedom. The responsibility is theirs to take.

As one who has also been saying this for years, I doubt whether colleges and universities will ever take that first step of admitting that they themselves are the biggest part of the problem.  Naturally, the pressure will come from the outside--and it will come really, really, soon, in the form of various restrictions on funding.  After all, money talks and everything else walks!

I don't ever expect colleges and universities to clean up the mess by themselves.   Unfortunately, it will then be maniacs like the Tea Party folks who will then force us to throw the proverbial baby and the bathwater.

Anyway, what do I get in return for my approach to this academic profession that I absolutely cherish?

In the latest annual evaluation report of my service, the Division Chair notes in effect that I am not a collegial team player.  I then had to file a rejoinder to protest his remark!

Am reminded of the advice that a friend/ senior colleague gave me back in California: faculty do not like anybody who threatens the status quo that works well for them, and all the more so if the dissenter from the ranks is a non-White.  He knew it firsthand and, he too, was from India :)

Oh, BTW, the bizarre reaction from my colleagues was echoed elsewhere too; Hacker and Dreifus write:

At one point, we praised Earlham College for putting students first and playing down research; the college's reaction was immediate and incensed. 

Muahahaha :)

The "India" connection to the S&P downgrade :)

No, it is not about me :)

The Wall Street Journal had this:

Have you met Deven Sharma, president of the credit rating firm Standard & Poor’s, which stripped the U.S. of its top-notch triple-A credit rating?

Deven Sharma? An Indian name?  Which is when my mind echoed Johnny Carson's "I did not know that!"

The WSJ adds:

The Man Who Downgraded America: Get to know Deven Sharma, president of the credit rating firm Standard & Poor’s, which stripped the U.S. of its top-notch triple-A credit rating on Friday. Sharma didn’t come to S&P with a background on ratings or credit markets, but he had worked on S&P’s strategy for several years since taking on the ratings company as a client in his previous role at consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. The promotion of Sharma, who was  born in India 55 years ago, was taken as an indication that S&P would continue to emphasize growing its business outside the U.S.

I was sure that my favorite newspaper in India will have something on this Indian connection; of course:

He holds a bachelor's degree from the Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, a master's degree from the University of Wisconsin and a doctoral degree in Business Management from Ohio State University.

He did his schooling in Jharkhand's Dhanbad district. 

A long way from Bihar and Jharkhand, which are some of the poorest states in India, if not the two poorest states!

The paper then reminds us of another Indian connection during at the onset of the financial crisis:

Mr. Sharma is part of an expanding league of Indian-origin persons heading global financial institutions.

Incidentally, another Indian-born executive Vikram Pandit was at the helm of the efforts to steer global banking giant Citigroup out of the financial crisis of 2008.

Hmmm ... I am not sure if I ought to celebrate such Indian connections :)

Here is Sharma explaining the decision to downgrade:

Stupidest op-ed of the day: Lessons from India: Blame students, not teachers

It was one of those mornings when I wondered if my life will be more, or less, exciting if my vocation and my hobby alike were not as focused as they are on various public policy issues, which make a news junkie of me.

No, I am not referring to the stock market free fall.

My news addiction means that I catch up with a few local papers, including the Oregonian, which is where I came across this op-ed on the lessons to learn about schooling--from India.

Naturally, I had to read it.

And then got so pissed off with the op-ed--I was reminded of an earlier post on my displeasure at politicians hyping up the "competition" from India.

I have emailed the following to the editor, and am hoping it will be published.

While I appreciate Tracy Groom’s overall objective in her op-ed (August 8^th) to improve the learning conditions in schools here in Oregon, there is very little for me to agree with her observations on India’s education system.

In the first place, comparisons of the US with India conveniently overlook the fundamental point—most of India is poor.  America’s poorest are, on average, richer than India’s upper-middle class.

Wealth is concentrated in major metropolitan areas.  Thus, cities like New Delhi, where Ms. Groom spent a semester as a Fulbright exchange teacher, often have some of the best schools also.  Typically, schools in such cities have English as the medium of instruction and the students also come from literate families—often highly educated too.  Thus, Ms. Groom’s observations about India’s educational system are highly skewed, at best. 

Even in schools in urban areas, students are often forced to become experts at rote memorization because most of the education in India is less about fostering the ability to think and is more about teaching to the tests.  But then these are the better schools, so to say. 

As one ventures out to the rural areas, conditions deteriorate rapidly.  Many rural schools lack even proper buildings. Students rarely have textbooks and rely on whatever the teachers might ask them to do in the classrooms. Most teachers are horribly ill-qualified and, according to news reports, quite a few of them collect their paychecks even without reporting to work!

If all these fail to dampen the natural curiosities of children, then there is always the possibility of punishment—from forcing students to stand outside under the blistering tropical sun, to beatings.  This is no trivial matter even in India, which is why the Indian government has addressed "corporal punishment" in the “Right to Education Act” that was recently passed. 

There are many more problems that plague India’s education system.  Even a relatively minor observation that Ms. Groom makes about students not needing tutoring services is atrociously incorrect—most parents in India have no choice but to spend a lot of money on private tutors for their children because of the lack of quality teaching at schools, and because of the intense pressure to score well in the all important tests. 

While I could point out a lot more that is incorrect in Ms. Groom’s op-ed, I would instead conclude on the note that many of the elite schools in India’s cities systematically work to introduce American-style education that encourages students to discover their strengths and weaknesses through discussions and learning by doing. 

We need to ensure that Oregon’s schools provide the best environment for the children to be all they can be. But, let us not slide down to towards the lowest common denominator, and that too based on highly uninformed and incorrect judgments on a more “successful” system in a remarkably poor India.  Tracy Groom’s op-ed does a great disservice to India and the US by projecting incorrect impressions about  teachers, students, and parents on the other side of the planet.

A focus on enrollment quickly leads to cooking up the numbers!

Only a couple of days back I posted here my concerns over public colleges and universities being keen on enrollment growth.

And, what do I read today?  The president of a public university has been fired for errors in the enrollment numbers reported:

An internal audit by the university system that was made public last week blamed Mr. McCallum for inflated enrollment numbers, which were posted not only in university documents but also in official reports to the U.S. Department of Education

Seriously, even a drunk monkey could have predicted such developments!  (editor: are you drunk now?)

It is like the old Soviet system--keep reporting good numbers all the time.  Often this led to awards and honors.  In the worst case, you get caught, which is better than not having a job because you are reporting bad numbers!

Universities, which one might think are the arbiters of truth, are now increasingly in the business of self-promotion, which often leads to bullshit, lies, and criminal acts like the North Dakota incident.

Running a university as a business with a focus on enrollment and financial bottom-line also means that we end up in situations like this: neither the university president nor the system's chancellor has any professional academic background, which one would think is fundamental requirement to lead in higher education.  Oh well, ... can't do a damn thing about these, eh!

Yes, we "can"

I owe a lot to R.K. Laxman and his cartoons for what has thus far been a life-long ultra-fascination for editorial cartoons :)

Why is India like Warren Buffett?

Who woulda thunk it, eh!

In the context of the S&P downgrade of the US' creditworthiness:

the Indian exposure is equivalent to an estimated USD 40 billion worth treasury bonds held by one single entity, Warren Buffett-led Berkshire Hathaway.

The US dollar being an international currency and a safe haven means that India, too, holds T-bills:

As one of the 15-largest foreign creditors to the U.S., India’s exposure to the United States’ ballooning debts is estimated at USD 41 billion — higher than the money America owes to countries like France and Australia.

One crazy, modern world we live in!

I suppose this is the equivalent of people saving their hard-earned money in a bank, only to realize later that there was something seriously wrong with the bank.  But, by the time they figure it out, there is no way to withdraw the money too.

Meanwhile, emergency meetings have been scheduled to prevent any nasty contagion from the combined US/Euro issues.

On the other side of the issue, turns out that S&P itself has erred in its computations?

The reality seems to be that S&P made a very embarrassing error in the numbers that it initially sent to the Treasury – one that could have made a substantive difference to its downgrade decision.
The administration’s counterattack, however, is a convenient distraction from the harsh criticism of the political process that was at the heart of S&P’s decision.
The initial numbers that S&P sent to the Treasury at 1.45pm on Friday were based on the “Alternative Fiscal Scenario” prepared by the Congressional Budget Office. That assumes that discretionary federal spending will grow in line with the economy. S&P then subtracted the roughly $900bn in savings created by the debt ceiling deal to estimate net debt.
However, the CBO had calculated the $900bn savings from a different baseline, which assumed that spending would grow in line with inflation. Calculated from the higher alternative scenario, the budget savings would be closer to $3,000bn. Adjusting for this would mean that net public debt only rose to 79 per cent of gross domestic product in 2015 instead of the 81 per cent in S&P’s initial estimate.

Sure enough, Paul Krugman has written about this:

The point here is not so much the $2 trillion, which makes very little difference to real US fiscal prospects; it’s the fact that S&P stands revealed as not understanding basic analysis of budget estimates.

Rajiv Sethi says we simply ought to say F*&% You to the credit agencies (ht):

Perhaps the time has come to consider a complete overhaul of this dysfunctional system. Withdraw the special designation accorded to the major agencies, so that they compete on a level playing field with new entrants. If they really do have the expertise to make assessments of credit risk that are more accurate than the market, let them build reputation and find clients willing to pay for their pronouncements. Make capital requirements for financial institutions independent of ratings, thus stripping the agencies of their monopoly power and guaranteed sources of income. And in the meantime, greet their pronouncements on sovereign debt not with an anxious wringing of hands, but with a collective yawn.

Funny, though, that the F-you arguments were far from this loud here in the US when the credit agencies went around downgrading sovereign governments elsewhere, and even though those governments were complaining about S&P and the like :)

All these remind me of the old quote attributed to Casey Stengel: "Can't anybody here play this game?"


Seriously, were things always like this?  What a fine mess!