(And increase entropy along the way.)

The pot was placed on the cooking stove shortly after noon with the brief announcement by NZZ that at 2pm CEST the Swiss justice minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf will announce the decision regarding the U.S. request to extradite Polanski. Since, some French rejoice «Merci la Suisse! Bravo la Suisse!» while some U.S. comments iterate around anger, Washington is disappointed and I won’t comment the decision. You are entitled to your opinion.

As I wrote, it began shortly after noon. Later in the afternoon, NZZ reported “Der Regisseur ist wieder ein freier Mann” and various online news sites followed, including the NYT with the headline “Swiss Reject U.S. Request to Extradite Polanski” and commentary at a separate article. While reading through some comments I ended up thinking @nytimes should add an option ‘bullshit’ under “Report as Inappropriate.” (And I have nothing against what reads like a sound argument on why the ruling is wrong.)

It didn’t take long for ‘Roman Polanski’ to get to trending topic status on Twitter — stay there for the better part of six hours — and spammer to ride the wave and link to all kinds of dubious sites. The Swiss were confused with the Swedes, the cuckoo of the German clock was put to guillotine and Swiss law equated to Swiss cheese. Granted, at least the cheese is more accurate w.r.t. geographic context.

I think, the most hilarious gaffe was cooked by CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk) and CNN (@CNN), “The Worldwide Leader in News.” The former with the tweet “France will not extradite Roman Polanski to the U.S. to face child-sex charges. http://on.cnn.com/b9HxzP” — which later was replaced with “Correction: Switzerland will not …” — the latter with a retweet @cnnbrk without reading (emphasis added).

As per April 27, 2010, the long and short term Issuer Credit Rating for the Hellenic Republic are rated BB+ and B, respectively, by Standard & Poor’s. A more accurate description than ‘Junk’ status is “considered highest speculative grade by market participants” for BB+ and “more vulnerable to adverse business, financial and economic conditions but currently has the capacity to meet financial commitment” for B. While this might not sound like complete ‘Junk’ it doesn’t sound good, especially given that we are talking about sovereign debt rating. But then, one might wonder how valid S&P ratings are in first place.

I have never been to Greece for holidays and I never moved to Greece for work. Therefore, my knowledge about Greek government, its structure and functioning, the Greek economy and the people of the republic is to be considered zero. Further, I have not studied the recent events in depth. As such, I should perhaps not comment at all. That said, I would like to leave a thought. It is actually not specific to the Hellenic Republic.

I consider financial responsibility to be an imperative, for individuals, corporations, sovereigns, or supranational. An entity on the brink of default to me signals first and foremost failure to meet this responsibility. Actually, I consider default the last stage of not meeting financial responsibility. Not being able to zero debt monthly equals to not meeting the responsibility. Though, my view might be a bit too strict the apparently widespread nonchalance w.r.t. financial responsibility, starting at the level of individuals, is distressing.

You might argue that meeting financial responsibility requires different sacrifice by individuals living in different countries. True. A good example is a US student who struggles with tuition fees vs. a Finnish student with no such fees, a few hundred Euro each month pocket money issued by the government plus subsidized housing and lunch. Very different realities, indeed. Though, I still argue, it doesn’t actually matter. No matter how the conditions, it is your personal responsibility to meet financial liabilities, at least in an economy where this is theoretically possible.

From my perspective, going on strike because the seat belts might feel too tight under dire circumstances equals to not having understood that financial responsibility is an imperative. Whatever the reason for the circumstances, I think there is no other way out of debt than fasten the seat belts. Yes, possible misconduct at sovereign or corporation level eventually drips down to the individual level which might be unfair, awful, wrong, mad, inhumane, unethical, amoral, whatever. However one may feel, nothing changes at the basic reality, whether as individual or as individual citizen of a country.

Unless proven wrong, I don’t think bailing out corporations or governments is the right thing to do. It is not the responsibility of Germany or any other country to clean up the mess by pouring billions into a failed entity even if for decades countries have been housing funds of massive tax evasion, a practice that might not have been blocked but is decided and carried out by the tax evader who rests alone responsible for his or her actions. Pointing at Goldman Sachs for having the ultimate tricks to pull white rabbits out of black top hats might not be completely wrong but not complete either as the magician was most likely hired to perform the tricks.

Finally, I don’t think this is a Greek only problem but increasingly so an eurozone concern and from there, you bet, it becomes in a matter of minutes a global issue. (Just consider the DJIA today at the close: -213.04 (-1.90%).)

For the records. Though I had no exorbitant tuition fees, covering costs in Zurich required a yearly income of roughly $25k which implied one or more part-time jobs throughout the years leading to a delayed graduation by a few semesters to make sure I do not fall into debt. Currently, my wage is as low as 10 years ago and it was clear to me from day one that I had to scale back in everything to meet financial obligations. Of course, the real cost to society of my existence likely exceeds total balanced liabilities but one can only balance what is actually measured or measurable. As such, I consider a balance sheet to be positive when all liabilities are met, typically when there is no unpaid check left at the end of the month. With this I don’t want to claim I’m better. I was just lucky to have had an upbringing where financial responsibility and savings were almost sacred.

It was on Monday, but I expressed my first wish for a happy women’s day on Saturday. I happened to stand in a kitchen with an African woman. She was meticulously cleaning her dishes and everything she possibly got dirty as I had never witnessed before in this particular instance of kitchen. When she left, I said goodbye & happy women’s day on Monday. She had no idea a women’s day exists.

It came to me that I could wish every woman I know and I would meet on Monday, March 8th, a happy women’s day. Beside a well-meant wish, I must admit, I plotted a little experiment. How do women react to someone wishing them a happy women’s day? My next wish went to my mother on Sunday who replied she wouldn’t have recalled the day without me mentioning it. My first wish on Monday was to a woman from Spain who knew the day was sometime that week. And the day passed by me wishing a few times happy women’s day. Two reactions are memorable. A dutch woman replied “thanks, you are the first” — early afternoon, I wonder if I was the last as well. A Russian woman knew about the day and was sad in the evening as she didn’t get any flowers. Not seriously, I think.

For sure, I didn’t have a chance to perform a stratified statistical study but the experiment was interesting nonetheless. Aside from plain ignorance, I would summarize that the majority obviously didn’t seem to care about women’s day as much as I was expecting. On a side note. Did you know there is an International Men’s Day? Not followed by as many countries as women’s day, switching from February 23 in its early history to November 19 later, almost a century younger than women’s day, I can’t help but feel a little amused by such days which, at least for some, seem to have no space in personal calendars. But that’s just me (& now go and call me a jerk …)

But what about Pi-day and Pi-time? To celebrate the mathematical constant with the Greek letter π as its symbol and value 3.14 plus, computed, almost 2.7 trillion digits (as of January 2010) today, March 14 (3-14) some, perhaps the geeky more than the gender centric — not meaning to discriminate who is both geeky and gender centric — are likely to wear a Pi-shirt. Of course, one can extend the idea and introduce Pi-time on Pi-day, i.e. 3:14 on March 14; Dude, what time is? Dude, it’s pi time. And because in life the next link is typically only a small step away, today marks Albert Einstein‘s 131 birthday.

I graduated from the University of Zurich — which I recently discovered to be #2 in Environmental Economics, according to RePEc — with, therefore, university exams à la Suisse. (More accurately, I should probably say university exams à la Institut für Informatik.) What follows is a curiosity that adds to the recent one on Finnish grading.

There are at least two rather distinct differences in exams à la Suomalainen vs. à la Suisse. In Switzerland I was used to 90 minutes examinations; in Finland the standard seems to be four hours. In Switzerland, time is a scarce resource and one has to regurgitate as fast as possible the answers to a long list of detailed questions. In Finland, time is abundant, at least at first sight. The second, and more important, difference is the examination form. In Switzerland, at least in my experience, exams were composed of lots of questions, some multiple choice, and most required a few words or sentences for a complete answer. In Finland, the exams I had up to now all had four or five questions. The answer is an essay.

Now, at first the Finnish way seems to be all the more easy. Perhaps it is. However, I believe there is a huge difference. While the Swiss way is testing knowledge for depth, the Finnish way tests depth as well as breadth. While you need to know the details an essay also shows whether or not you connect the dots and understand how things relate.

I must say, I am still adapting to this form of examination after a career of exams à la Suisse and my current belief is that exams à la Suomalainen are at worst a curious variation but most likely a lot smarter.

I think, I’m probably correct in stating that most people I know across countries and continents on this day celebrate Valentine’s Day, provided the 14th of February is memorable in first place. In fact, most celebrate a particular embodiment of Valentine’s Day, namely, the flowers & chocolate giving among lovers — to the extent that some perceive the day of the red hearts as depressing.

Not in Finland. What Google translates with Valentine’s Day is, in Finnish, more accurately translated into Friend’s Day. In fact, the root of the Finnish word Ystävänpäivä is Ystävä which is translated in English into ‘friend’. (Päivä means ‘day’.) And so I experienced this week that what I have been taking for granted is one of those days during which Finnish people use to give postcards among friends.

Incidentally, I find the Finnish tradition of Ystävänpäivä so much more loving. Friend’s Day not only includes your lover but your past lover, your friends and families as well.

Therefore, a Wonderful Friend’s Day!

(Ihanaa Ystävänpäivää!)

I’m sure Mr. Schäuble is a reasonable man and I respect his opinion. Cross-border tax cheats as well as banks that resort to illegal practices are a problem that likely contributes to the financial destabilization of countries [1] and is probably pronounced in our ever more global world and in times of recession. However, I’m not sure if stating that “we will disestablish the bank secrecy in Europe” (Wolfgang Schäuble, interview with NZZ) is the most sensible approach.

What Mr. Schäuble does not appreciate is the core idea of the Swiss bank client confidentiality, namely, the freedom of financial privacy. Disestablishing the “bank secrecy” equals to giving up individual freedom and move power into the hands of a few, the likes of Mr. Schäuble or government at large, a dynamic that is inherently problematic. Homo sapiens with power has yet to evolve into knowing and wise.

Freedom never comes for free. With respect to bank client confidentiality, Swiss law sets decisional power into the hands of each individual. You, as holder of a Swiss bank account, are free and responsible to do the right thing, a privilege that comes with a price tag, i.e. to file a tax return faithfully knowing you could do differently. In the interview with NZZ, Mr. Schäuble argues that “he wants to assure the people of Germany that nobody can withdraw from tax liability.” I quote,

Er [Herr Schäuble] wolle vor allem den Menschen in Deutschland das Gefühl geben, dass sich niemand seiner Steuerpflicht entziehen könne. (NZZ)

Do we really trust an anonymous, transient, non-transparent, government made of people more than our neighbor or, for that matter, a random person, that it will not abuse of power? To me, Mr. Schäuble’s parental-like authority sounds more like the irate voice of a teacher who feels the urge to castigate students because (s)he has lost the attention of a few. My voice goes more along Pink Floyd’s lines “We don’t need no education//We don’t need no thought control,” Mr. Schäuble.

On the contrary, I wonder what speaks against introducing bank client confidentiality everywhere.

[1] Werner Vontobel und Viktor Parma. Schurkenstaat Schweiz?: Wie sich der größte Bankenstaat der Welt korrumpiert und andere Länder destabilisiert. C. Bertelsmann Verlag, Januar 2009, ISBN: 978-3-570-01083-9

From Finland, to post an A4 letter in a C6 envelope to Switzerland requires a stamp worth 0.80 euro. The same letter to the USA requires a stamp worth 0.80 euro, too.

For the sake of simplicity, I’ll discuss the peculiarity accounting only for one dimension of cost, i.e. the cost to offset carbon emissions caused by the letter traveling from one post office to the other. There are a number of so called CO2 calculators online that give you an estimate for the magnitude. For example, using myclimate and for a person, for a one way trip to the destination post office in Switzerland we would need to offset 0.476 t of CO2. Depending on the plan, myclimate suggests either CHF 18.00 or CHF 53.00.  For the destination post office in the USA (I know, a rather imprecise location yet precise enough for the point I would like to make) a person would need to offset 1.438 t of CO2, CHF 53.00 for the first plan, CHF 160.00 for the second. Of course, a C6 envelope is not a person but I suppose the principle holds. Thus, the same envelope needs to offset more CO2 over the longer distance. On a side note: If you believe the cost to offset CO2 is zero over any distance then the following makes, certainly, no sense.

To summarize, the cost to offset the CO2 for a C6 envelope is positively correlated with the distance, i.e. the more distant the post offices the higher the cost to offset induced CO2 emissions.

However, as we have seen above, as a customer I’m required to pay exactly the same price, i.e. 0.80 euro. Perhaps I’m paying too much to post the letter to Switzerland or maybe too little to post it to the USA. Howsoever, I think it is an example where costs are not fully internalized (at least not at the level of individual post stamps).

I might conclude that, as a customer, I’m not required to offset the damage I’m responsible for posting my letter. Rather, the cost is externalized and will most likely be accounted for somewhen in the future or somewhere on the planet, or a combination.

I think, the problem here is that external costs distort prices and tend to drive consumption. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying, we should all stop posting letters over great distances. I’m saying, we need to pay the full cost of the action. Failing to do so is, in my opinion, one of the root causes for an awful lot of what some currently believe are issues, from individual consumption to corporate pollution.

Sure, for a society with an economy that knows consumption as its blood, talking about cost internalization is probably unpopular as it most likely drives up the price of, well, almost everything. I sometimes wonder, regarding falling prices, how much is caused by increased efficiency (e.g. through competition) and how much by externalities. What if the share of the latter is greater than we are willing to admit?

A search for 350 on Twitter does show some activity but right now it doesn’t look like it is a trending topic. (Halloween and — ouch! — Windows 7 seem to be more trendy.) Though, this might well change over the next few hours as twitterers west of the Atlantic wake up.

I think, to me this event falls into the “make [...] history”-category of global events, e.g. Live Aid. Nice pictures, nice music, nice party, nice people, nice drinks, nice quotes but I wonder if there is anything beyond that.

Distressing, I believe, is the hope many have for global negotiations, the belief a bunch of people sitting around a table will do “the right thing.” This urge to march on the streets (or bring a 350 t-shirt up to the highest peaks) to let those “in power” know they need to take action and tell us what actions to take, troubles me, unless the purpose is to have fun. The “debate is over” but we fail to take individual action? A brief example, although simplistic; Where I currently life, I constantly have to switch off the lights in shared rooms.

I think, if we individually make independent, informed and rational decisions we will most likely head in a better direction than whatever direction is drafted by “global” negotiations. The question is, of course, how can we support independent, informed and rational individual decisions? What rational is, should not (and cannot) be decided and dictated by a few sitting at the table of global negotiations but, instead, should emerge from global knowledge. I would like my action to be rational also w.r.t people who are required to walk 20 miles a day to collect water.

It took me a few seconds to realize it. Where did I, we all, recently, get to constantly hear this word? The answer is obvious. Should it be that obvious?

Hope has a t-shirt, a poster, a font, a sticker, an artist. It echoes in Washington DC as a key word of an ingenious marketing strategy for a presidential campaign. Think about it for a second: Hope abused for … politics! I’m trying to convince myself this is hilarious though I’m afraid it might more likely be deeply troubling.

Somehow it feels like hope has been stolen, imprisoned behind iron bars in the cellar of a white house built by black slaves; the echo, its cry of fear to be on death row. No, it won’t die. It never will. Right now I’m just wondering whether its liberty will one day mark the free fall decline of its kidnapper.

Hope, defrauded, devalued?

On a side note, U.S. tells Poland it could host new interceptors. Update: There it goes the hope for hope’s artist.

(Yes, I’m increasingly skeptical.)