I am a millionaire because...

Oh no, wait! I think it makes sense that its not me I'm talking about. If I had such a fat bank balance, people would actually be listening to me, and my blog would be getting a lot more hits than it currently does. But now that you are here, there's no reason to be disappointed either. A few days back, I came across this blog by Singapore's youngest millionaire, Adam Khoo (readers who speak urdu are request not to chuckle, because I did!), and I thought it worth sharing with you all here.

Are You Living Like a Prostitute?

While I do not endorse miserliness, I believe we should not be driven to utter madness simply by varying M in the equation. Money is not the end. It is simply the means to our livelihood. It is only human to spoil ourselves every once in a while, but beyond that, it makes no sense to spend just for the sake of spending, and just because we can.

Also, if you succeed in ways Adam Khoo has, there is no reason to be afraid of a progressive system of taxation. The glass should always be half full. It is not wise to focus on more money going to taxation or the poor; rather, it is much more important to ask 'why'? Answer: Because you've got more! 

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik

Obama's Victory Speech

It was a well-written, well-delivered speech. Here are the links for those who missed it:

Full Video and Text

In Pictures

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik

Barack Hussein Obama

Everybody who writes anything, anywhere, is at this moment, commenting on the newly elected president of the United States of America. When America votes, the world watches with keen interest and (now) fear, thanks to one Texan warlord. (Err...his congratulatory note to his successor: "What an awesome night for you, your family and your supporters. You are about to go on one of the great journeys of life. Congratulations and go enjoy yourself.'' The entertainment just doesn't end, does it!).

In the wee hours of his campaigning, I, along with so many other Pakistanis, was not too keen on endorsing Obama (never McCain - he is Republican!) given his tough rhetoric against Pakistan: against our territorial integrity. One would wonder if he too would be chanting the Bush mantra.

Thankfully, however, in his celebratory speech in Chicago (minutes ago), he did not for once utter the word "terrorism". Bush has said it all too much; it has become painfully irritating now.

I'm happy to have witnessed history being made. A black president in the White House. Please don't ask me to say 'African-American', because this is the time to say 'black'. It is beautiful that Obama doesn't use the race card, but this is the time to congratulate our dark-skinned brothers and sisters. Historically, they've seen hell on earth: in the US, in Britain, in South Africa, in Australia...hell, every which way you tread! Now to have one of them elected as the most powerful leader on earth is an achievement. Not too long ago, in 2005, a poem - nominated a winner, was circulated on the web, said to have been written by an African kid - mimicked the collective pain of the 'black'. I leave you with it:

When I born, I Black,

When I grow up, I Black,

When I go in Sun, I Black,

When I scared, I Black,

When I sick, I Black,

And when I die, I still Black…

And

you White fellow,

When you born, you Pink,

When you grow up, you White,

When you go in Sun, you Red,

When you cold, you Blue,

When you scared, you Yellow,

When you sick, you Green,

And when you die, you Gray…

And you call me colored?

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik

Celebrity Endorsements

One knows for a fact that little kids are impressionable. Very much so. Then, one day, they grow up. Or do they?

Going by the mind-boggling figures companies spend on celebrity endorsements, the answer is: No. Indian movie stars take upto (and more than) Rs. 3 crores per endorsement. Big companies and big banners are - well - big because they're not stupid, and if their research tells them that attaching a face to their brand boosts their sales, then they must. But one wonders why that is. Are we, adults, not intelligent enough to recognize the good and dependable attributes of a product, that we need the great walk of fame to take us to the right thing! Or are we not cultured and creative enough to realise our own aesthetics?

I am willing to give to the idea of celebrity endorsements only in so much as product recall is concerned, but no more. What about you?

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik

The Raunch Factor

The Rand Corporation has recently come out with a study, linking sex on TV with teenage pregnancies. Congratulations! You're not quite there, but it is a start at least. The research suggests that with TV shows glamourising sex and not necessarily focussing on the consequences, teenagers are encouraged more and more, to indulge.

The same, albeit with concerns of morality rather than practicality (which is, but an inevitable off-shoot), has been the mantra of the religious ("the right", matey!): That our interactions with the opposite gender should have some limitations. That our exposure to all things carnal should be snubbed (marital "woe's" not included), not just monitored.

Maybe it is time that we told the "enlightened" to be open-minded. Come on, let's face it. These are just entertainment shows. What harm could they possibly do, than to relax the mind, body and soul.

Of course, the study has attracted the media's attention because they now need to suggest people to teach their teenaged children a thing or two about safe sex, and to watch these shows with them, so as to make it a healthy experience. It is still not a debate on what is morally right and what is not. But like I said, it is a start at least!

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik

Socialism for the Rich

For all my life, I've heard the West plead the case of capitalism. Everybody was riding high on tides and claiming superiority of philosophy and culture. Success was measured in terms of the moola in one's bank accounts. Ruthlessness towards the poor (offering them "generous" loans on exorbitant interest rates, to help them drown in dependency till eternity) was considered a part of the system. If they had the brains and the ability, they'd rise deservedly. Too bad, if not. And if the rich were getting richer, it was because of their potential and taxation couldn't be further from unfairness.

My thoughts: what an ego-centric and selfish world to live in. Unfortunately for us all, we are learning this lesson the hard way now. And how convenient of everybody who is anybody today, to suggest regulation in the economy, when all major institutions and functionaries are in seriously muddy waters. Here's an illustration of that. Andrew Graham, an Oxford Economist suggests:

...financial regulation has to be approached with a completely different mindset

from that for the rest of the economy. Elsewhere, competition can be a

substitute for regulation. In banking, the opposite applies: the greater the

competition, the greater the need for regulation and/or supervision. (Guardian, UK)

Okay!!! So long as socialism is for the rich, it is the best system. But God forbid, more goes to the welfare of the poor, it becomes treacherous!

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik

Recommended readings:

1. Socialism for the Rich: Bailing Out the Bankers and Builders
2. The U.S. Economy Is Socialism for the Rich

My Archetype is a Stereotype

Try as we may, stereotypes don’t leave our side. We are nurtured, both consciously and sub-consciously, as to who is what, and who means what.

One night, while flipping through TV channels, my sleepless eyes found me a route to an interesting 80's flick, called "Soul Man". What it depicted was something that we all, at some point in life or for others, at most points in time, tend to employ in our dealings with others: entertaining stereotypes.

Soul Man depicted a young white man admitted to Harvard Law School and yet, finding himself at loggerheads due to dearth of funding. Unwilling to let go off his ambitions to be a Harvard Law Graduate, he excessively takes in bronzing pills, in order to pass as a Black, and thus, qualify for the only available scholarship. The one non-academic eligibility criterion: just be black! What follows is a director and writer's attempt to reveal the immediate implications of being a black man in America. If you've seen sliding doors, you'll be able to figure out the black-and-white scenario this film hopes to convey. You can be in the same situation, with the same credentials, ceteris paribus except that you're black in one frame and white in the other. The former makes you end up in jail for no fault of yours, it makes coaches fight for you to be in their basketball team without any trials, it makes white parents see you as boys out to get their daughters stoned, it makes white children see you as rappers and blues singers, period, and it gets your white American landlords on their toes to catch you killing a fly, in order to send in an evacuation order in the name of animal rights! You make the same guy white, and no jails and evacuation orders could ever come into play.

Upon getting caught, the black professor is pleased to see the young man having learnt what it means to be black in America.

"No," he says. "I haven't. If I don't like it, I can opt out anytime. It's not the same!"

Disclaimer: The above is not meant to be offensive to any people. I'm just using the movie to highlight our unfair and presumptuous attitudes towards people, based on their colour, religion, nationality etc.

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik