If bankers had been more honest

Recently, the UK's top financial regulator, Hector Sants quit. His final words had been he wished 'bankers had been more honest'.

This was while speaking to the Said Business School. Mr. Sants - who was the chief executive of the FSA from July 2007 to July 2012 and worked in Investment Banking for most of his life - clarified that he did not mean most bankers had deliberately lied to him. But he did say they were often 'self-delusional' about the risk they were taking.

Mr. Sants was part of a debate on trust in financial markets. He wanted to restore trust and see the abolition of what he called "revenue-related incentives" or pay for the bankers that was directly related to the revenue generated. This is to eliminate temptations to engage in bonus-generating deals that could  end up being toxic.

The new executive of Barclays, Anthony Jenkins, recently stated that staff would not be receiving bonuses depending on the volume of products. But even now, many bankers are still paid for their sales rather than customer relations.

Mr. Sants also asserted his desire for a new code of practice in the industry. 

Looper - a review

We all know Asimov, Phillip K. Dick, and Ray Bradbury. We also remember iconic pieces of work such as Lost, Doctor Who, and Battlestar Galactica. Why? Because they remind us why science fiction is great and is a great conversation topic around the water cooler.

Since the matrix, Looper is definitely one of the most unique and inspiring science fiction movie of the decade.

There are the usual science fiction characteristics, but is not set too far in the future that it is completely unbelievable. There is an element of time travel, though it is from a much later time than the film. Plus there are limited 'superpowers', namely a weak form of telekinesis.

The most prevalent plot line is an aging Bruce Willis sent back in time to be killed by his younger self, Joseph Gordon Levitt, though there is much more to the film. The chase and action while both actors play the same role is fun and interesting, all the while the description of deeper themes of selfishness, sacrifice, the 'right' choice, and the potential for good and evil keep us stimulated. 

The rapport between the actors is spectacular. It seemed like Willis and Levitt had been acting together for years, all the while the supporting case help the pair stand out and reveal their inherent qualities. Emily Blunt was the most surprising of them all, going through a Sarah Conner transformation in the first two terminators in one film. Her character is fierce, strong, loyal, and caring, and her on screen persona is second to none.

Most impressive was Levitt, who studied Willis and adopted his subtle movements, facial ticks, and expressions, and not to mention posture and walking style. The audience will definitely be convinced that the two are the same person, just a few decades apart. Once or twice you might even mistaken one for the other.

A star studded cast, deep and layered plot line, plus great action indicates a success at the box office. We are lucky to have had Rian Johnson bring it all together. The film can be a bit heavy and depressing with all its twists, but the director ensured that the pace was kept up and the mood bends just enough to leave the audience satisfied.

I do not want to risk having spoilers by discussing the film further. But you definitely have to watch it at least twice to get the full feeling. I believe that this film will be remembered as one of the all time greats. 

And the award goes to...Quantum Physics!

This year, the nobel prize for Physics has been awarded for research that is relevant, if not pertinent, for this day and age. This research could lead to a new generation of faster computers and highly accurate clocks, the bread and butter of society today.

French Physicist Serge Haroche and American David Wineland share the prize for their work - where the particles of light and matter behave in the strangest manner.

Imagine a scale beyond the naked eye, all the way down to the atomic level. Now consider the possibility that the rules of matter and light we grew up with just went out the window and the actions of the smallest particles are simply ludicrous - like existing in different states at the same time!

The quantum world has managed to spook greats like Albert Einstein. Until the 90s, looking at one of these particles changed the way it behaved and there was no way around this. But our two nobel laureates have found a way to isolate and study these particles - opening doors to entire new fields of research.

Computers based on quantum physics would change the industry forever. They would be faster, more efficient and could potentially change our lives the same way conventional computers did this century. This strange concept has already provided clocks a hundred times more accurate than the atomic clock - so accurate in fact that if one had started ticking at the Big Bang, we would have only lost 5 seconds.

And they call sci fi fans dreamers. 

Barbecoa - a review

Jamie Oliver got a new restaurant - Barbecoa. For those of you who haven't been there, its over at one new change by St. Paul's Cathedral. I recently went there with a friend, and I have to be honest, I have mixed opinions.

I went midweek for dinner, and there were several suits there sitting alongside me. They were probably from the offices nearby. It seems Jamie and Adam Perry managed to capture the share of the market they were after. But, professional critics didn't seem to like the place much. As we approach its one year anniversary, perhaps the chefs should sit down and take a look at the reviews.

Let's be honest, Jamie Oliver does have a name in the industry, hence the restaurant's popularity. But don't you think that this is completely opposite to the Jamie Oliver we know and love? I just think that the atmosphere at the restaurant is so 'premium' that it would send shivers down Jamie's spine if he ever sat in it. If I had strolled over in my jeans and t shirt, I would've definitely felt underdressed. Great view of St. Pauls, but the red velvet wrapped designer furniture, shiny brass, and double high ceilings were a tad bit intimidating. I got a great seat near the windows, but had to order a bottle of wine to not look out of place. Totally dug the whole 'taste the wine before I picked it' act. Although, I was ignored for 10 minutes after that, and had to wildly hail someone for attention.

But it's not all that bad. The meat came dripping in mouth watering juices, with a background track booming with primal energy, and the bread came impaled on a wooden board rather than the usual basket. After all this, anyone would appreciate the money they put into the place - the epitome of commercial success. But despite this, it was slightly artificial and awkward. For all the idealists out there, this is what soulless, money spinning commercialism looks like.

I understand the feelings people have regarding spending the money they earn slaving away at desks all day, and the need to wear formal clothing which grants them mysterious powers to influence the waiters serving them. Its an old stereotype that aids the snobbery of eating out, even though the concept has become far more egalitarian. But the dressing well part works (I have tested this). With casual clothes, the staff are patient, but often you get some glances from your well dressed neighbors. Everyone realizes you are a student once you order tap water instead of a real drink. And don't give me those doubtful looks, I know you all like to dress the part when eating out. I strongly feel that restaurants should never lose their pomposity, because it is about eating, but also celebration - it's part of the show.

I ordered one of the few chicken dishes on the menu. Was not over cooked, and the flavor sunk into the meat. Nothing special though, considering the exorbitant amount I paid for it. But it was definitely aesthetically pleasing.  Arranged in a fancy manner, with sides neatly placed around the meat. Was not too dry either. But like I said, nothing special in the flavor, a bit bland for my asian tongue. Ordered some duck fried chips. I felt even worse for those. They were slightly soggy and not at all what I expected. Let's not mention the price of all the food.

In my opinion, there is nothing special about the place. The intention of making a smokehouse rediscovering the art of the American barbeque is nothing new. Its an expensive steakhouse at best and the food is much too monotone for the price. Definitely not a date place. Not a place to escape the fast paced world. It has too much of an office feeling and that is the primary reason for the negative views I have here. If you can afford it, great, but it will not give you the meat sweats (go to Rodizio Preto on Leicester Square for that). There are far greater steakhouses. A strongly one time place for me.  

Obstacles to Global Recovery?

If you asked that question to the experts, they would say two things: another blip in the Euro-zone crisis, and the fear that the US budget policies will crash.

I've spoken to a few people about this, and most of them said that there is too much optimism regarding the Euro-zone and that governments have become complacent. And, if we direct our glance to the recent rise in long term Spanish borrowing costs, it seems global investors are starting to agree. I can safely say that there has been some complacency on the US side as well, with the central bank promising to spend an apparently unlimited amount of money to get unemployment down.

Some investors though, seemed elated by the Federal Reserve's announcement. They believe that the extra cash being pumped into the economy will insulate recovery against costs of more budget stagnation in Washington. But I think this is just a case of over optimism again.

Lets see what the budget stalemate holds: from recent events, US fiscal policy is to tighten by over $600bn by 2013 (4% of GDP) from the expiration of the old Bush tax cuts and new spending cuts. The Congressional budget believes this move will send the country back into recession in the first half of next year. A lot of well known economists seem to agree. Hopefully, the Democrats and Republicans will come to some kind of agreement to ease the blow. But let's wait till the tax cut expiration and spending cuts kick in.

The problem is, the President and the Congressional leaders are at such odd, that the US economy might have to go over the cliff before politicians actually do something about it. Not the best possible scenario. Don't forget, that the general elections are coming up soon, and I wonder whether that will change the dynamics between the two parties.

The thing about US Presidential elections is that they are like roller coaster rides. The electoral contest between President Obama and Romney is not as close as it used to be. Latest New York Times-CBS polls show Obama leads Romney in Ohio 53% to 43%. History has shown that no Republican has won the elections without Ohio. The President also seems to be ahead by 9% in Florida. Even if Obama wins and the Republicans still control the House of Representatives and Congress, pollsters say that their chances of taking Senate looks slim.

So come 20th January, the balance of power could remain the same.

The important question is will this budget dilemma remain? Some say no, because a Obama victory would mean support for his ways - even the Republicans would have to agree. Some say yes, because the Republicans may have a chip on their shoulder over Obama's accusations that Romney's cut in health spending would hurt senior citizens. The Democrats too would be quite brutish after their victory.

It all comes down to the elections. But if the Democrats lose, the future of this budget will depend on who the Congressional Republicans blame for failing to win: Obama or Romney.

The globalization of India

India has finally opened up its retail market to global supermarkets.

Many of you will remember how this plan last year was met with great opposition and had to be swept under the carpet. Now, firms such as Walmart and Tesco's will be able to buy up to a 51% stake in multi-brand retailers.

One has to understand Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's reasoning behind this. Not only will this bring growth into an ailing economy, but it will also generate much needed jobs. However, this was just one of the key reforms announced by the administration. Another would be the decision to allow foreign airlines to buy up to a 49% stake in local airlines to boost the failing aviation industry. This seemed a wise move after a 14% rise in diesel, much of which is subsidized by the government.

Last year, the opposition to this reform consisted primarily of tens of thousands of small businesses, who would be adversely affected by the presence of foreign business. The opposition party (Bharatia Janata party) called it 'a betrayal of democracy'. But Economists say this should be welcomed as it will change the way Indians shop and boost the economy.

Nonetheless, as with any foreign investment in India, there have been some conditions imposed on potential investors. An example would be that investors will have to invest at least $100 million in open outlets in towns with a minimum population of a million and source at least 30% of produce from India.

Multinational companies already have small outlets in India, but they have to deal with local stores. But this reform will allow them to sell directly to the public. The government hopes that this move will lower the price of products, improve the livelihood of farmers and ease supply side inflation.

Let's hope it all works out.

Nikola Tesla who?

Very few people know of Nikola Tesla.

He is not as well known as Einstein or Leonardo and definitely less famous than Stephen Hawking. I am even surprised to say that several assert he is less famous than his rival Thomas Edison.

The device you are reading this blog from was a direct result of his discoveries. His baby, the induction motor that interfaces with alternating current is a cornerstone of modern electrical systems. Mark Twain probably does it justice, by describing it as the 'most valuable patent since the telephone'.

The rivalry between George Westinghouse's support of AC and Edison's DC showed how correct Tesla was. Despite this, time has not been kind to Nikola.

Born in Croatia to Serbian parents, Tesla moved to New York in 1884. Some of his early work included radio controlled vehicles, wireless energy, and not to mention the first hydro-electric plant at the Niagara Falls. Despite this, he was often frowned upon due to his eccentricity, claims of alien contact, assertions linking celibacy to intelligence, and the fact that he was in love with a pigeon.

Recent history has shown that while Tesla is mostly forgotten, Edison was bathed in fame and fortune and is regarded as one of the greatest inventors of his time.

What many forget that while Edison's DC worked well for light bulbs, it could not transmit electricity for long distances. Westinghouse Corporation was a big fan of AC. By stepping the voltage up and down, it could be transmitted longer distances, with greater voltage and lower current. They had a problem with the motor, but Tesla solved that.

Eidson tried hard to portray this as dangerous - with public electrocutions of animals - and secretly funded the development of the electric chair to further elaborate his point. But this was not enough to deny what was clearly superior.

The UK's national grid - transmitting electricity at 400,000 volts - is a testament to Tesla's achievement.

In my opinion, Tesla was more of a thinker who cared more about concepts and ideas. Edison was the practical one, concerned with commercial potential and the trial and error method. But if Tesla was such a genius, why is he not remembered as well as Edison?

Take Sir Joseph Swann for example. He invented the light bulb in Newcastle around the same time as Edison, yet he did not get the credit. Why is that? Because in the society it is not enough to have ideas, one also has to be pragmatic. Engineer's had to know whether an idea was possible with the available technology. Tesla was a genius, without a doubt, but obsessively pursuing technology like wireless energy transfer at a time when it was clearly impossible does not give you credit. Edison was determined and forceful. He would pursue ideas that could be turned into products.

Einstein is remembered over Hendrik Lorentz. This is despite several scientists arguing that Einstein just completed several threads created by Lorentz.

Let's not forget that most of Tesla's achievements were intangible. This was unlike Edison's bulb, Ford's cars, or computing products from the likes of Gates and Jobs. Consumers could touch and see those. Tesla has the classic cult following - a unit of of the magnetic field, a crater on the moon, a power plant in Croatia, and a rock band named after him. 'Geeks' are his greatest worshippers.

He died penniless and mainstream recognition eludes him. But recently science historians have raised enough money to begin a museum to commemorate him. Hopefully, this will reignite some of the interest this great man deserves.