₦airaland Forum

^-- Lol wow. Is that for real? How is it possible to make hair look like that? It looks like part of a sweater or something in the background

^-- Somehow the idea is that you can get crude for your refinery at below-market prices. Or that the Nigerian FG will make up the difference between the N65 you are supposed to sell locally and the N130 it can get abroad. . .

[quote author=Jenifa_ link=topic=665782.msg8322983#msg8322983 date=1305421990]nicely put.
I have natural hair and I KNOW for a fact that most black guys do not like it. all my hair compliments come from white and hispanic guys. the only time I get hair compliments from black guys is when I have extensions/weave in.

this thread is a big joke.[/quote]What does your hair look like? Link to a picture of someone who has a similar hairstyle?

That is a pretty great video.

@zstranger:

1. edo.girl's point though actually is pretty good. Distance from Ado-Ekiti to Ibadan is about 90 miles. At say $5 million/mile to extend the track, we are looking at $450 million. So what if it turns out that this cost is NOT justifiable from a business perspective? And what if it never ends up being economical? Even in the next 50 or 100 years? It is quite possible that this is the case (though even if this is true, it won't be a huge drain, just a minor drain.)

What do we do then? Should Ekiti State then consign itself to being a rural agricultural state? So that even if electricity becomes widely available in Nigeria, it can never attract businessmen who want to invest in manufacturing and industry? Despite manufacturing beng the best way to uplift people out of poverty and into a solidly middle-class lifestyle (look at what manufacturing has done for the poor in Chinese, or for the poor in America during the early 20th century)?

Anyway, as you can probably tell, economical or no, I'm pro improved transportation. I don't mind Ekiti State deciding to view this as a public good, in the same way it views healthcare, education, and water all as public goods (educating poor rural kids also isn't economical or profitable, yet Ekiti State does it regardless.)

When Honda decides it wants to locate a factory in Yorubaland, I want my state to be able to launch a credible bid for that factory. I don't want us to be ruled out simply because we didn't want to invest in transportation.

In summary for me, economical or no, at least for my own Ekiti State, we MUST find a way to get rail (ok, I'm exaggerating here a bit, if it is projected that after the rail is completed Ekiti State needs to spend $100 million a year to subsidize it, then perhaps we'll just have to accept being a farming state for the foreseeable future. But I doubt that it is that far away from viability.)

2. Heh, I said that to praise her; very rarely have I seen someone on this forum do as well against me as she did. Praising her doesn't diminish me in any way.

3.  You are right about Nigerians and their general distrust of debt. They have good reasons for it btw. . . generally most military rulers in the military era and governors in this new era haven't been very responsible with their borrowing. I think debt is necessary to advance in life, personally. You've got to acquire capital somehow in order to execute projects. . . a cash only mentality makes society weaker rather than stronger, imo.


EDIT: Btw, I know this response might seem a bit hypocritical, especially given my anti-subsidy stance earlier. To some extent, I'm being a bit arbitrary here in saying that it is OK for Ekiti State to if necessary subsidize rail, yet I'm against petrol subsidies. However, if you (A) value manufacturing jobs as much as I do and believe in its impact as much as I do and (B) believe that rural states investing in raising their competitiveness can have vast dividends, then hopefully you see why I'm making this exception.

Main thing I've learned from the past few posts is that either my intuition about how economics works is terrible, or for some reason this intuition just isn't applicable to the Nigerian setting.

Either way, I should probably comment less on Nigerian policy I guess.

Though I wonder why Aganga seems to be against this subsidy too. He is a legit economist type, yet seems to be reasoning in the same (wrong?) way that I'm thinking about things

@buzugee: I'm not the one being emotional here. Agreed, this isn't brain surgery. But it is kind of cool. . . just as Koreans will find a black guy who speaks Korean fluently also pretty cool.

Regarding me having an inferiority complex. . . if anything, I suffer from arrogance.

It is what it is. . . I'm done with this. If you don't get it now, you won't at all.

Keep hollering "slave mentality."

Very defeatist and anti-progress worldview

[quote author=L. KRavitz link=topic=666080.msg8322614#msg8322614 date=1305416815]I really dont see what the fuss is about this girl. There are milions of africans that speak european and other languages and the locals dont have this shock and awe effect y,all displaying here.[/quote]That is exactly the point. Millions of Africans speak European languages. . . so isn't anything surprising.

However, millions of blacks (whites) do not speak Korean (Yoruba). So it makes sense that in Korea (Yorubaland) people would have a "shock and awe" effect if they see someone speaking fluently.

Hell, in the video sef, the two guys were surprised that she spoke to them in Yoruba! So htf are you pretending there is nothing surprising here? That pretending shows an inferiority complex.

abadaba:
Monkey, shut up, is that what you learnt in school, to fuel chaos between two nairalanders instead of making peace.

Who are you calling a monkey, Andre Uweh? There is much worse I can call you.

You are a coward, for one, doing your dirt under a different user id.

Be very careful who you choose to insult, cockroach.

Is "slave mentality" just code for "I'm deeply insecure about white people, and thus must attack anyone praising any individual white person for doing something objectively laudable as a slave"?

^-- I don't think she has a problem with the idea of borrowing money to fund a project?

More thorough response in a bit

Damn. Rhino goes hard, lol. . . naming one of them Dede1

That is some pretty dumb stuff to die over.

RIP though

^-- Alright. Maybe you are right.

It just doesn't make sense to me. I don't see how something (bread in this case) can increase more in price than the thing that caused the price to change (petrol.)

How can petrol increase by 10% and bread increase by more than that? Even if bread were made 100% out of oil ("bread" were just another name for petrol, let's say), then it cannot increase by more than this 10%. At least, that is the way I think about things.

But maybe Nigeria doesn't work like that.

N65->N75 petrol is roughly 15% increase.

Even if 95% of the cost of making bread were petrol-related, presumably its price cannot increase by more than 15% either.

And I doubt that even up to 30% of the cost of making bread is petrol related, let alone 95%.

So I guess for some reason I don't understand, you are saying N65->N75 petrol might lead to price of bread doubling? Or increasing by 50%? Or some number well above 15%?

I don't understand at all what is going on, then.

tpia had me rolling with "instant marriage"

ola olabiy:
Prices of goods are directly related to that of petrol.

If there is a marginal increase in what you pay for petrol, the exponential effect of that on the economy will be so telling on everyone.


Foodstuff prices will rise at an  exponential rate.

Eh. Is that how the economy works? 1% increase in price of oil => exponential effect elsewhere in the economy? I've not read anything supporting this idea before in my life. . . is a new concept to me. I sort of imagined 1% increase in price of oil => linear effects elsewhere. If 20% of my costs of producing good X are oil related, and oil increases in price by 10%, then my total cost of producing good X has gone up by 2%. . . something linear in that marginal increase, not exponential.

If I may ask Ekt, why does he think the US govt likes to put pressure on OPEC to regulate prices of crude oil? Because it negatively affects their economy anytime there is a marginal increase.

Why do they work so hard to ensure stable supply, as well?

Primary beneficiaries of OPEC are the members, I thought? If they just competed against each other rather than acting as a monopoly, much higher oil supply and thus lower oil prices, no? So OPEC wins, US and other oil-consuming countries lose. Is this wrong?

If you intend to remove this subsidy, how do you lessen the sudden shock of it in a country like Nigeria where they don't have social security?

I've already talked pretty extensively about what I'd do with the $4.2 billion, no? I think more value to the poor can be provided than what it is currently being spent on.

kandiikane:
@ekt, oh was that it? I thought I was going to have a party or something.

Put up a youtube video of you speaking yoruba and we'll throw that party