By Kristen Townend
Over the past five years, Indonesia’s economy saw a constant decline. Exports fell, infrastructure spending was low, and the rising cost of imported materials made it difficult to boost competitive prices. Amid the record lows, many labeled China and Singapore the best prospects for future growth. However, Indonesia’s growth rate for the second quarter of 2016 exceeded expectations, and was its highest rate in ten quarters. The 5.18% economic growth figure surprised experts, who had predicted 5%. The ascent is forecasted to continue, allowing Indonesia to rival other Asian economies. Indonesia is growing increasingly stable despite the difficulties of other world economies. Loose monetary policies employed by major economies are not yielding expected results, and many developing countries are experiencing difficulties in breaking onto the international scene. Along with its turnaround growth rate, Indonesia boasts various valuable aspects for investors. The country has low inflation, and while inflation was above seven percent in mid-2015, in 2016 it has declined from around 4.5% to about 3.05%. Indonesia also has a high life expectancy and a growing population in which the average age is under 30. Future growth will be supported by the innovative youth of the country, and this youth factor is especially notable when compared to the aging populations of many other countries. The government has also approved tax reforms, bringing sizeable revenue from overseas through tax amnesty. Indonesia also appointed a new finance minister, who worked at the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Analysts still stress the need for increased private investment in Indonesia, as well as the maintenance of high household consumption. Though factors such as low commodity prices could keep growth at 5%, many are optimistic about Indonesia’s growth potential in Asia.
1 Comment
By Paul Mulholland and Kristen Borowski
LEFT The U.S. decision to abstain on the resolution was indeed wrong. It should have voted with the rest of the Security Council. Resolution 2334 was pushed primarily by New Zealand, a country with a closer military relationship to the U.S. than Israel. New Zealand is a member of the five eyes alliance, and is currently training Iraqi troops to fight ISIS; Israel is not. If this is simply an issue of siding with allies at any cost, it should be easy to vote with states such as France, Great Britain and New Zealand rather than Israel. Accusing Obama of being unsupportive of Israel is unusual, in light of the $3.8 billion in aid per year he agreed to give them, without conditions. Resolution 2334 is almost exactly the same as resolution 446 and is strikingly similar to several others permitted by past presidents. 2334 simply restates, again, that Israel’s illegal settlements on the occupied territories are in fact illegal settlements, and that annexing land from a future Palestinian state harms the potential existence of that state. The hysteria over the issue is primarily due to Israeli fear of becoming a pariah state and a sense from Netanyahu’s coalition that they have a divine right to the land in question. Secretary Kerry said following the vote that if Israel preferred a single state solution then it must choose between being a Jewish state and being a democracy. If Israel annexed the entire West Bank it would have a very large non-Jewish population. How could it remain a Jewish state and allow them all to vote? The only serious route for Israel is to permit a second state in Palestine, and that means doing what 2334 says. The real disgrace is that Obama waited so long. RIGHT The U.S. decision to abstain from voting on U.N. Resolution 2334 was wrong. The Obama administration has been particularly unsupportive of Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu in a time of high tension and insecurity in the Middle East. Defense of our ally, Israel, should be among America’s top priorities in the Middle East. This abstention does not occur in a vacuum of recent events. The Iran nuclear deal is another example of the Obama Administration’s neglect towards Israel. American-Israeli influence is being reduced to nothing where Iranian and ISIS influence are steadily rising. In his speech following the U.N. Resolution, Mr. Kerry spoke at length, promulgating a two-state solution, chastising Israel urging them to choose between being a Jewish state or a Democratic state, as he pontificated, “they have a choice...Israel can either be Jewish or Democratic—it cannot be both.” The recent Paris Middle East Conference echoed the two-state solution supported by Mr. Kerry. Israel was not represented at the conference. Instead of protecting Israel, our one real ally in the Middle East, the outgoing Obama administration chose to abandon them and abstain from voting. The incoming Trump Administration will have to clean up even more after the latest Obama/Kerry gaffe. Instead of being so harsh towards Israel, Mr. Kerry ought to have been as persistent towards Iran during the nuclear deal negotiations. With a new administration comes a new strategy of foreign policy in the Middle East. Hopefully that strategy will be positive instead of negative. By The Silent Critic
The Silent Critic has been criticized by some (likely those who have not done well in SC’s courses) for foisting financially-themed and intellectually-rewarding movies (The Big Short, Margin Call) on his readers. So in the spirit of fairness and a New Year, SC departs from the genre from which one may actually learn something and strays into escapist entertainment. What to watch instead? Cops and robbers, chase scenes, and the triumph of good over evil are the obvious answers! The movie Heist is the type of film from which one can learn precisely nothing but which can entertain for an hour and a half. Of course if one reads the reviews of professional critics, one will stay far, far away from this movie. But if we have learned anything from the recent political season it is how little the “professional critics” know about, well, almost everything, so bear with me. Jeffrey Dean Morgan (who?) plays Vaughn, an Alabama river boat casino dealer unable to pay for his daughter’s life-saving operation. Robert De Niro (who must have needed the money that this film didn’t make) plays the casino owner (Frank Pope) who, in an un-Pope-like response turns down Vaughn’s appeal for a loan for said life-saving operation. Vaughn’s co-worker Cox (Dave Bautista) suggests robbing the impregnable casino and the stage is set for another in a long line of good-guys-chasing-bad-guys movies (Morris Chestnut plays Dog, Pope’s maniacal thug enforcer, disguised as one of the “good guys”). The chase sequence that follows the robbery features a hijacked city bus, terrified riders, a desperate psychopath with a gun (Cox), SWAT teams and black-clad motorcycle riders...the usual suspects in other words. To round out the improbable cast of characters, Gina Carano plays a police detective who while conducting negotiations with the fugitive bus hijackers develops a relationship with Morgan (I kid you not), schemes with him to save both the bus riders and Morgan’s daughter, and ends up looking the other way at exactly the right moment at the hospital. The Pope (De Niro, not the real one) has a change of heart at the end and all turns out well, as it surely must. Are you familiar with the phrase, “suspension of disbelief?!” Consider watching this movie (what’s an hour and a half spread over the next 60-80 years of your lives?!) for the “rapacious-capitalist-finally-does-the-right-thing,” “the-evil-thug-gets-his,” and “the tear-jerker-ending” moments. The O’Henry twist(s) at the conclusion make this an almost memorable film. (You will need to look up what an O’Henry ending is...that’s the “intellectually-rewarding” part I said would be absent from this review.) Is this great cinema? No, it is not. Is this an entertaining way to spend time away from books, papers and exams? Yes, it is. By Alyssa J Freitas
Every single one of us engages in negotiations every day. Which roommate is going to get the bathroom first? What restaurant are you going to go to? And how about the movie you’re going to see beforehand? Whether we realize it or not, we are aiming to reach agreements and influence those around us constantly. With negotiation being such an integral part of our relationships, it only makes sense that the art be studied and evaluated so we can all learn how to improve and to get to yes in our daily and business lives. In Getting to Yes the authors, who are all master negotiators in their own right and Harvard alumni, take the reader through understanding the problems of negotiation, the most effective methods, and give practical examples and solutions for dealing with the toughest and most challenging negotiators. The main goal of the book is to show readers that relying on “principled negotiation” is the only way to have a productive and mutually beneficial negotiation. The idea of “principled negotiation” comes down to four key factors: people, interests, options, and criteria. The authors stress that focusing on the problem at hand, rather than becoming personal, is essential to moving a negotiation forward. They also point out that getting to the deeper interests of someone is far better than getting hung up on a “position,” or thinking that there is only one way to get your needs met. In that same vein, inventing many creative options is a great strategy to ensuring that you and the other party are moving forward together. Lastly, when evaluating and measuring ideas it is important to use objective criteria so both you and the other party feel equally invested. What makes this book standout as a helpful resource is the variety and depth of examples. From international crisis negotiations, all the way to a rent agreement, Getting to Yes teaches widely applicable principles and gives the reader practical ways to use them. In personal and professional life, negotiation is a powerful skill to have and anyone can benefit from reading and utilizing this advice. By Matt Gallello
While New Jersey has a quality education system, a high gross state product, and prime location between New York City and Philadelphia, the state’s financial footing has not been solid in recent years. The Great Recession exacerbated and exposed a multitude of fiscal problems our state currently faces, including high foreclosure rates, an underfunded pension system, and a transportation trust fund that nearly became depleted. Perhaps the most significant problems though are the current method of funding public school districts and high property taxes, and how growing obligations will only continue to hamper efforts to make positive strides in both areas. New Jersey’s FY 2017 budget is roughly $35 billion, with about $13.3 billion going toward education funding. State income taxes make up the majority of school aid. State aid is determined by various factors including each district’s number of special needs students and English as a Second Language (ESL) students and whether or not a district is an Abbott District. Abbott Districts were created after a State Supreme Court ruling determined that poorer districts in the state were entitled to school funding equal to their wealthier neighbors. Given the limited tax bases in many of these communities, state aid was drastically increased. Aid that once went to middle- and upper-class suburban towns began to shift toward poorer districts. Towns that lost aid had to fill the gap by dramatically increasing property taxes. Today, many New Jerseyans see about 50% of their property tax bills go toward funding their local school districts. In 2010, Governor Christie signed a bipartisan law capping local property tax levy increases at 2%, with a few exceptions. It is important to note that the cap applies to the collective tax levy of a government entity and not individual property tax bills. For example, if a school district’s total property tax revenues were $100 million this year, the amount the district could collect from property taxes next year would be capped at $102 million, 2% of the current levy. Increases in individual property taxes would then be based on property values. This law was intended to keep property tax increases to a minimum and force county governments, municipalities, and school boards to allocate their spending in more efficient ways. As Abbott Districts have continued to struggle and NJ’s property taxes have remained among the highest in the nation, state officials have begun to explore ways to improve education while reducing property tax bills. State Senate President Steve Sweeney believes state education funding should increase by $500 million and that each district should be getting an appropriate amount of funding in accordance with the current state funding formula. Recently, shifts in student population size have led some towns to receive much more or much less state aid than they are allocated under the current formula. Governor Chris Christie has proposed giving every district in the state $6,599 per pupil in aid, regardless of factors such as the number of students who are economically disadvantaged or have special needs. Under this plan, increases in aid would be required to go toward property tax relief. The issues of school funding and high property taxes are sure to be significant issues in this November’s election as voters will elect a new governor and all 120 seats in the state legislature are up for re-election. Correction: The property tax levy increase is 2%, not 102%. By Jonathan T. Sheridan
As the “typical” 40-hour work week inches towards 50 to 60 hours, Americans are sitting more than ever. This excessive amount of sitting has been linked to an array of health concerns ranging from chronic back pain to diabetes. Health-conscious America’s response? The standing desk. A standing desk is one that allows the user to stand while working on a computer. Advocates of the desk claim that the desk reduces back pain and improves energy. This summer while many TCNJ students interned sitting down, one was able to witness the standing desk revolution first hand. While analyzing financial statements at a public accounting firm this past summer, Senior Accounting Major Matt Charne was able to conduct some of his work at a standing desk. “I felt much more alert when I used a standing desk at work. Being able to stand keeps me from dozing off in my chair and allowed me to stretch my legs and get my blood flowing better. Besides, even if I got tired of standing, the desk can always move down into a regular sitting position.” As more and more firms move to open-floor layouts that encourage collaboration and community, the standing desk revolution may just be part of that movement. Matt explains his preference of the open space paired with standing desks over other arrangements. “The open office area was far preferable since it encouraged collaboration between co-workers and allowed me to feel more comfortable bringing questions to my supervisors, rather than feel like I was bothering them. Standing desks were a great addition to this layout as well. Something about them made people seem more relaxed in the work place, rather than being curled up in a chair pushed tight against a desk all day.” When asked if more offices should take the leap, Matt stated, “[they] should absolutely use standing desks…[standing desks] make employees feel more relaxed and simultaneously alert.” No matter your major or career choice, you just may cross paths with a standing desk soon. “This is beneficial to every firm, no matter the industry.” By Kristen Borowski
La La Land has taken Hollywood by storm. It is a modern-day reincarnation of the classic Hollywood musical—think Singin’ in the Rain. Sweeping the Golden Globes on January 8, the film has been nominated for 14 Academy Awards. We have much reason to be proud. La La Land’s director, Damien Chazelle, is a Princeton native and his mother is Celia Chazelle, a professor in the History Department here at The College of New Jersey. I sat down to speak with Dr. Chazelle about her award-winning son, his roots, and his future. At three years of age and before he could write, Damien was creating and sharing his stories. “He would draw pictures and show them to me, explaining his story to me,” Dr. Chazelle says. “They were like storyboards.” Later he would expand on his vision, directing neighborhood kids and creating little films. “Damien was always a hard worker—tenacious,” she says. “He was always focused on the visual and would take inspiration from directors—Akira Kurosawa was his favorite as a teenager, he also loved Martin Scorsese films.” His initial fascination started with Walt Disney’s animated films. “I would rent or buy the films—they were VHS tapes at the time—or take Damien to the theater to see them. He loved them.” Perhaps film-making and movies were in his blood. “It skipped a generation,” Dr. Chazelle laughs. “My father was an extra in films during the 1930s.” (One being the 1935 film David Copperfield, directed by George Cukor.) “My grandfather was an executive at Paramount pictures during the 1920s” she adds. “One of his friends was W.C. Fields,” referring to the renowned vaudevillian and comedian of the early twentieth century. While studying at Harvard, Damien met Justin Hurwitz, who composed the score of La La Land. They became good friends, both sharing a passion for Hollywood musicals. They collaborated on Damien’s senior project at Harvard, a story about a jazz trumpeter that became his first film, Guy and Madeline on a Park Bench. The recurring theme of jazz music continued with Chazelle’s 2014 film Whiplash, the story of a jazz drummer. Much of this story is based on Chazelle’s time in Princeton High School’s jazz band. The jazz story has culminated with La La Land and audiences are relishing the renaissance of this seemingly bygone style. Damien Chazelle’s upcoming film First Man is a biopic on Neil Armstrong, the first man on the moon. It stars Ryan Gosling and has yet to begin production. As for future musicals, I ask Dr. Chazelle whether Damien will return to the genre anytime soon. “Damien wants to work on different projects now,” she says, “but it’s always a possibility to come back to.” The 89th Academy Awards will take place on February 26. |