Journey in Life: 10/25/15

Search This Blog

Sunday, October 25, 2015

"Mutual assured destruction" nghĩa là gì?

The Cold War. Photo courtesy euno.

'Mutual assured destruction' đây là một khái niệm trong thuật đấu trí (game theory), nghĩa là song phương cùng hủy diệt; cùng tận diệt (a doctrine of military strategy and national security policy in which a full-scale use of high-yield weapons of mass destruction by two or more opposing sides would cause the complete annihilation of both the attacker and the defender).

Ví dụ
Did we ever think we would look back on the Cold War, with its mutual assured destruction, with nostalgia? That time has come.

Ultimately, strategists on both sides coalesced, at least tacitly, on the concept of a mutual assured destruction as the mechanism of nuclear peace.

Pope Francis condemned nuclear proliferation. But he went beyond this warning to critiquing the doctrine of “mutual assured destruction,” which some political scientists have argued maintains peace among nuclear-armed states.

Phạm Hạnh

Phát triển kinh tế Trung Hoa đụng tường

5 bí mật về Coca Cola mà không phải ai cũng biết

Presenting Coca-Cola's darkest secrets including it's alcohol and cocaine-infused origins, special government deals and a secret chemical processing plant, alleged attacks on union workers by paramilitary groups in Colombia, the secret origin of Fanta in Germany and a deadly Coke addiction.

Watch the video below:

Vì sao Trung Hoa và Ấn Độ phải đối mặt với khủng hoảng hôn nhân?

China and India - home to a third of humanity – both face a marriage crisis that will last for generations. A mere five years ago marriage patterns were normal in the two countries.

Now in China 50m ‘guanggun’ – ‘bare branches’ – look doomed to bachelor-dom, while in India 500 year-old laws are being revised to allow men to marry out of caste, village and state.

What has lead to this marriage squeeze?

First, millions women have gone “missing”.

A generation ago, a preference for sons and the greater availability of prenatal screening meant first Chinese couples, then Indian ones, started aborting female fetuses and only giving birth to boys. At its extreme, in parts of Asia, more than 120 boys were being born for every 100 girls. Now, the generation with distorted sex ratios at birth is reaching marriageable age.

The result is that single men far outnumber women.

If China had had a normal sex ratio at birth, its female population in 2010 would have been 720m. In fact, it was only 655m, compared with almost 705m men and boys—50m surplus husbands.

Fertility rates then accentuate this distortion.

When a country’s fertility rate is going down (as in India) younger cohorts of people will tend to be smaller than older ones. If men are older than women at marriage, as they usually are, there will be fewer potential brides than husbands because women will have been born later, when fertility is lower.

Then there is a queuing effect. Men who cannot find a wife right away go on looking, and competing with younger men. As a result, the number of unmarried men piles up, as in a queue. By 2060, there could be more than 160 Chinese and Indian men wanting to marry for every 100 women.

This is a ferocious squeeze in countries where marriage has always been a basic requirement for being a full member of society. It could be hugely harmful. Almost everywhere, large numbers of single men are associated with high rates of crime and violence. No one really knows how these two giant countries will react.

Dòng người di cư có thể cứu các thành phố sắp tàn như thế nào?

From Detroit to Philadelphia to Baltimore, policy makers in America’s old industrial metropolises are struggling with the same problem: how to reverse the fortunes of decaying cities. Decades of economic decline and suburbanisation have left their city centres depressed and dangerous. But immigrants – whether students, migrants or refugees – could provide the solution to the spiral of decay. How can immigrants help revitalise a city?

First, immigrants can help transform an area simply by being resident. Newcomers rent or buy property which would otherwise be derelict, buy goods and services and pay income taxes. In cities like Detroit where decades of pension liabilities accumulated when the population was much larger, increasing the population of taxpayers can staunch the flow of cuts to police, schools, infrastructure and other services which make a city worth living in.

Second, immigrants can differ from normal residents in ways which may benefit struggling cities in particular. Because they often can’t get mortgages they move to the toughest–and so cheapest–neighbourhoods, sprucing up houses that natives have left abandoned for years. They usually settle in places where they know family or friends–which means that when an immigrant cluster forms, it attracts new residents from elsewhere. With repopulation, crime often falls, because more people are on the streets to deter scavengers or drug dealers.

Third, because they may not be able to get more ordinary jobs, immigrants set up businesses that can help transform depressed areas. In Baltimore for example 7% of the population was born abroad but 21% of the city’s businesses are owned by foreigners. The districts where they live are often the only places where restaurants and grocery shops outnumber liquor stores and bail bond merchants. That can end up attracting well-heeled natives: one study suggests that for every 1,000 immigrants arriving in an district, 250 natives may follow. Baltimore and Philadelphia, two areas where there are a reasonable number of jobs, have seen neighbourhoods transformed.

But the policy of luring immigrants to cities in decline isn’t working everywhere. Detroit, despite attracting some new immigrants, struggles to keep them in the city. Cities still have to fix the problems that scare off locals and immigrants alike: Terrible schools, poor infrastructure, crime, and most of all, the lack of good jobs nearby. Immigrants can help revitalise a city, but they cannot do it on their own.

Popular Now