best reading material on the Division of Labor, Productivity and Prosperity of Labor on Reason for Liberty blog.
http://www.reasonforliberty.com/objectivism/division-of-labor-productivity-prosperity.html
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Friday, September 25, 2009
China's NASDAQ-styled Growth Enterprises Market (GEM)
The countdown has begun for the launch of China's Nasdaq-style stock market. China will launch its own NASDAQ-styled Growth Enterprises Market (GEM), at the end of October or early November. 108 enterprises have applied for listing.
The applicants are mainly concentrated in six major industries, such as new energy, new materials, electronic information, biomedicine, environmental protection and energy conservation, and modern services, in coastal and developed areas.
If everything goes according to plan, the GEM, which will be on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange and is aimed at funding technology- and innovation-driven start-ups, would open for business.
Down the line, supporters say the GEM could prove a rival to the likes of New York's Nasdaq Stock Market and London's Alternative Investment Market as a place for small Chinese companies to find backing, though precedents for such markets in Asia aren't too encouraging (Source, http://economistonline.blogspot.com/2009_09_01_archive.html).
Lets wait for few more days to watch awaited the launch of GEM.
The applicants are mainly concentrated in six major industries, such as new energy, new materials, electronic information, biomedicine, environmental protection and energy conservation, and modern services, in coastal and developed areas.
If everything goes according to plan, the GEM, which will be on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange and is aimed at funding technology- and innovation-driven start-ups, would open for business.
Down the line, supporters say the GEM could prove a rival to the likes of New York's Nasdaq Stock Market and London's Alternative Investment Market as a place for small Chinese companies to find backing, though precedents for such markets in Asia aren't too encouraging (Source, http://economistonline.blogspot.com/2009_09_01_archive.html).
Lets wait for few more days to watch awaited the launch of GEM.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
With Perot, Dell can get a chunk of IT's hottest market: health care
The article first appeared in Computerworld.
___________________________________________________________________________________
There are a lot of reasons why Dell Inc. agreed to buy Perot Systems Corp. for $3.9 billion, but Congress' vote earlier this year to appropriate billions of dollars to spread the use of electronic medical records may be a key one.
Perot, which says that about half of its $2.8 billion in annual revenue is derived from health care projects, is in a good position to gain a significant chunk of the $36 billion the federal government is poised to spend on IT related health care projects. Even before today's announcment that Dell plans to buy Perot, the PC maker and IT services firm had agreements in place develop platforms dedicated to electronic health care applications.
During a conference call with reporters today, Michael Dell, CEO and chairman of Dell, called the move "the right acquisition" for his company, and that the two Texas-based firms share several similar characteristics. "Our products, services and structures are overwhelmingly complementary," Dell said.
Ross Perot, the chairman emeritus of Perot, added, "We saw this as a cultural match, and we saw what we could do together, and I think that made it a lot easier to jump on Michael's vision to build Dell."
Perot founded Electronic Data Systems (EDS) in 1962 and sold it to General Motors Corp. in 1984 for $2.5 billion. EDS was spun off in 1996 as an independent firm and remained that way until it was acquired last year by Hewlett-Packard Co. for $13,9 billion. Ross Perot founded Perot Systems in 1988.
Harry Greenspun, chief medical officer for Perot Systems' health care group, told investors garthered at an industry conference this month that there's tremendous opportunity for companies like Perot in the health care market. "Most hospitals, most physicians' offices are very immature in their adoption in their technology," he said, according to an archived recording on Perot's web site.
Dell hopes to complete the deal by year's end, just after the federal fiscal year starts on Oct. 1, which is when federal spending on electronic records is set to begin in earnest. The demand for help in implementing new health care IT projects should come quickly -- Under the law, health care providers have to start upgrading e-health systems by 2015 or face federal penalties.
Dell and Perot are already jointly offering what Greenspan called a "dumb box" without ports or disk drives. The software-as-a-service (SaaS) system delivers electronic records to virtual desktops that charge customers on a subscription basis. "This is a different way of delivering this service," said Greenspun.
The purchase of Perot Systems will also give Dell some credibility among large users as a service provider, said Peter Bendor-Samuel, CEO of outsourcing consultancy Everest Group. "It both significantly improves their delivery capability and tremendously improves their credibility," he said.
Bendor-Samuel said improved revenue from health care projects should be a strong side effect of the merger, but contended that Dell's primary interest is gaining access to a broader base of enterprise customers. "It's great to be a dominant player in the fastest growing segment of the economy, but I view that as a nice thing to have," he said.
Dane Anderson, an analyst at Gartner Inc., believes that the deal shows only that Dell is finally embarking on a services strategy. Dell's support operation has traditionally focused on providing services to meet the needs of existing users. It has not offered the broader consulting and integration services provided by IT services firms like Perot Systems, he added..
"Really, where the opportunity is in the nearest term is to bring more capabilities to the table for that Dell installed based of clients," he said.
Anderson said that he doesn't expect Dell to quickly gain new services contracts due to the acquisition of Perot. Enterprise aren't likely to exit existing contracts with other services providers.
___________________________________________________________________________________
There are a lot of reasons why Dell Inc. agreed to buy Perot Systems Corp. for $3.9 billion, but Congress' vote earlier this year to appropriate billions of dollars to spread the use of electronic medical records may be a key one.
Perot, which says that about half of its $2.8 billion in annual revenue is derived from health care projects, is in a good position to gain a significant chunk of the $36 billion the federal government is poised to spend on IT related health care projects. Even before today's announcment that Dell plans to buy Perot, the PC maker and IT services firm had agreements in place develop platforms dedicated to electronic health care applications.
During a conference call with reporters today, Michael Dell, CEO and chairman of Dell, called the move "the right acquisition" for his company, and that the two Texas-based firms share several similar characteristics. "Our products, services and structures are overwhelmingly complementary," Dell said.
Ross Perot, the chairman emeritus of Perot, added, "We saw this as a cultural match, and we saw what we could do together, and I think that made it a lot easier to jump on Michael's vision to build Dell."
Perot founded Electronic Data Systems (EDS) in 1962 and sold it to General Motors Corp. in 1984 for $2.5 billion. EDS was spun off in 1996 as an independent firm and remained that way until it was acquired last year by Hewlett-Packard Co. for $13,9 billion. Ross Perot founded Perot Systems in 1988.
Harry Greenspun, chief medical officer for Perot Systems' health care group, told investors garthered at an industry conference this month that there's tremendous opportunity for companies like Perot in the health care market. "Most hospitals, most physicians' offices are very immature in their adoption in their technology," he said, according to an archived recording on Perot's web site.
Dell hopes to complete the deal by year's end, just after the federal fiscal year starts on Oct. 1, which is when federal spending on electronic records is set to begin in earnest. The demand for help in implementing new health care IT projects should come quickly -- Under the law, health care providers have to start upgrading e-health systems by 2015 or face federal penalties.
Dell and Perot are already jointly offering what Greenspan called a "dumb box" without ports or disk drives. The software-as-a-service (SaaS) system delivers electronic records to virtual desktops that charge customers on a subscription basis. "This is a different way of delivering this service," said Greenspun.
The purchase of Perot Systems will also give Dell some credibility among large users as a service provider, said Peter Bendor-Samuel, CEO of outsourcing consultancy Everest Group. "It both significantly improves their delivery capability and tremendously improves their credibility," he said.
Bendor-Samuel said improved revenue from health care projects should be a strong side effect of the merger, but contended that Dell's primary interest is gaining access to a broader base of enterprise customers. "It's great to be a dominant player in the fastest growing segment of the economy, but I view that as a nice thing to have," he said.
Dane Anderson, an analyst at Gartner Inc., believes that the deal shows only that Dell is finally embarking on a services strategy. Dell's support operation has traditionally focused on providing services to meet the needs of existing users. It has not offered the broader consulting and integration services provided by IT services firms like Perot Systems, he added..
"Really, where the opportunity is in the nearest term is to bring more capabilities to the table for that Dell installed based of clients," he said.
Anderson said that he doesn't expect Dell to quickly gain new services contracts due to the acquisition of Perot. Enterprise aren't likely to exit existing contracts with other services providers.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Starting afresh with new economics
Here is the article that talks about the economic crisis and economist, appeared in Fund Strategy.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The economic crisis of the past year has engendered a parallel crisis of economics. Economists from Nobel laureates downwards have engaged in soul searching about their profession.
Considering their record it is not surprising. Not only did they fail to predict the crisis but the vast majority argued that a Great Moderation had set in. By this they meant that the business cycle was likely to be muted as long as central banks and governments behaved prudently.
There was, as I discussed last week, a small minority of economists who argued that a crisis was imminent. But many of them were permanent doomsters while others had the causes of the crisis wrong.
Broadly speaking there are two reactions to the crisis of economics. One is to argue that the basic ideas of conventional economics are right, but its implementation should be improved. Another is that economics needs to move in a behavioural direction. Sometimes the two arguments are combined.
Those who take the first line argue that economists should take finance more seriously. They bemoan its lack of understanding of the financial markets. Others call for a more subtle understanding of risk.
Those who take the second line appear to be more radical. They argue that economics should throw out the assumption that individuals generally behave rationally. Instead they should build models based on psychological insights about how humans behave.
Neither set of criticisms is convincing. Arguably economic discussion is too obsessed with the financial markets. The crisis has largely been understood in relation to the behaviour of financial institutions while the weakness of the real economy is ignored.
Behavioural economics has also long been a mainstream approach. It got the ultimate official endorsement in 2002 when Daniel Kahneman and Vernon Smith, two exponents of the approach, were awarded the Nobel prize.
Yet behavioural economics also has serious weaknesses. Like mainstream economics it tends to attach too much importance to the financial markets. Economic crises should not simply be understood in relation to “irrational exuberance”.
Rather than tweak conventional economics it would be better to start afresh. Many insights from classical economists, such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo, remain valid, including their emphasis on the real economy and the need for economic growth.
Among the key features of the new economics more importance should be attached to production, an understanding of the indirect relationship between finance and the economy, and a more historically specific approach. Above all, economics should be seen as a system humans can reshape rather than as a natural science.
http://www.fundstrategy.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=193215&d=513&h=527&f=518
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The economic crisis of the past year has engendered a parallel crisis of economics. Economists from Nobel laureates downwards have engaged in soul searching about their profession.
Considering their record it is not surprising. Not only did they fail to predict the crisis but the vast majority argued that a Great Moderation had set in. By this they meant that the business cycle was likely to be muted as long as central banks and governments behaved prudently.
There was, as I discussed last week, a small minority of economists who argued that a crisis was imminent. But many of them were permanent doomsters while others had the causes of the crisis wrong.
Broadly speaking there are two reactions to the crisis of economics. One is to argue that the basic ideas of conventional economics are right, but its implementation should be improved. Another is that economics needs to move in a behavioural direction. Sometimes the two arguments are combined.
Those who take the first line argue that economists should take finance more seriously. They bemoan its lack of understanding of the financial markets. Others call for a more subtle understanding of risk.
Those who take the second line appear to be more radical. They argue that economics should throw out the assumption that individuals generally behave rationally. Instead they should build models based on psychological insights about how humans behave.
Neither set of criticisms is convincing. Arguably economic discussion is too obsessed with the financial markets. The crisis has largely been understood in relation to the behaviour of financial institutions while the weakness of the real economy is ignored.
Behavioural economics has also long been a mainstream approach. It got the ultimate official endorsement in 2002 when Daniel Kahneman and Vernon Smith, two exponents of the approach, were awarded the Nobel prize.
Yet behavioural economics also has serious weaknesses. Like mainstream economics it tends to attach too much importance to the financial markets. Economic crises should not simply be understood in relation to “irrational exuberance”.
Rather than tweak conventional economics it would be better to start afresh. Many insights from classical economists, such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo, remain valid, including their emphasis on the real economy and the need for economic growth.
Among the key features of the new economics more importance should be attached to production, an understanding of the indirect relationship between finance and the economy, and a more historically specific approach. Above all, economics should be seen as a system humans can reshape rather than as a natural science.
http://www.fundstrategy.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=193215&d=513&h=527&f=518
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)