Lecturing Social Media Analytics

I remember that year—it was 2009 when I first signed up for Facebook. Then, making random posts, comments, and tags, to having around 10 social profiles, didn't just happen overnight. It was fun to learn and grow with time.

In the last 19 years, I have used 3 feature phones ☎️ and 5 smartphones 📱, and created emails in Yahoo, Hotmail, and Gmail, which was an unexpected shift for me.

Now, I am lecturing on social media analytics, learning a lot about search engines and their algorithms, sharing insights on social media, and also pinpointing the importance of such platforms for small-to-multi-national companies to create brand value and expand their market presence.

Now that AI is embedded in their algorithms, the issue of #data_governance stands at the top of any country’s laws. DATA has become more popular, powerful, and influential for everyone involved in local-to-national-to-regional-to-global platforms.

I am overwhelmed with the scale of its existence and expansion. I feel like I am living in history. With my grandkids, I can share these stories non-stop for hours and hours, and they will listen to us with jaw-dropping amazement 🥳.

It's loud and clear that the new scope of opportunity is being a Social Media Analyst. However, what I enjoy most in the job is taking selfies with my students. They are future social media analysts 🎉.

Learn and Invest ASX: ASX Sectoral Classification

If you are looking for investment options in Australian financial market, you are in the right spot. Let's start with the major four options for every potential investors.

1. Stocks 

2. ETFs

3. LICs & 

4. Funds

For any of these investment ideas, click here. This article mainly focus on stock market. 

1. Stocks - Stocks are traded through the exchange called Australian Security Exchange (ASX).

The Australian share market is broken up into 11 Sectors, 24 Industry Groups, 69 Industries and 158 Sub-Industries. Here are the detail break-down of 11 sectors.

Largest sector is Materials that has 41.4% and the list companies listed sector is Ultilities with round 1%.

Australia's 11 GICS sectors each have a benchmark index that tracks the performance of ASX-listed companies in that sector.

You can observe the sectoral movement here. 

You have to chose your sector where you understand their language. You also need to think about diversifying your investment.

 

References

https://www.listcorp.com/asx/sectors/

https://www.marketindex.com.au/asx-sectors

https://www.morningstar.com.au/investments/ideas

China vs India: Who Will Be More Powerful by 2050?

As of 2025, China is ahead in economy, military, and technology, but India is rising rapidly with youth, democracy, and digital expansion. By 2050, they may compete for global leadership, especially in Asia.

Let’s compare them in 10 key areas with future projections:

---

1. 👥 Population & Demographics

Metric	China (2050)	India (2050)
Projected Pop.	~1.3 billion (↓)	~1.7 billion (↑)
Median Age	~50 years	~38 years
Workforce Size	Shrinking	Expanding

• India will be the world’s most populous country

• Younger population = more workers, more consumers, more innovation

✅ Winner: India

---

2. 💰 Economy (GDP)

Metric	China (2050)	India (2050)
Projected GDP	~$40–50 trillion	~$30–35 trillion
Global Rank	1st or 2nd	3rd or 4th
GDP per Capita	~$30,000+	~$18,000–20,000

• China will likely stay ahead in total size

• India’s growth rate may be faster (due to reforms, youth, tech)

• Per capita income gap may narrow but still favor China

✅ Winner: China (overall size)
✅ India wins on future growth momentum

---

3. 🛡 Military Strength

Metric	China	India
Military Spending	~$700B+ (est.)	~$300B (est.)
Personnel	~2 million	~1.5 million
Nuclear Capability	400–500 warheads	~150 warheads

• China will maintain a technological and budgetary lead

• India will close the gap, especially in regional dominance (Indian Ocean)

✅ Winner: China (overall)
✅ India (regional advantage in South Asia/Indian Ocean)

---

4. 🧠 Technology & Innovation

• China will continue leading in:

  • AI, 6G, electric vehicles, green tech, quantum computing

  • Tech giants: Huawei, Alibaba, BYD

• India will rise in:

  • Digital infrastructure (e.g., Aadhaar, UPI), software, space tech

  • Startups, biotech, fintech, and education (IITs, ISRO)

✅ China leads in hardware & innovation scale
✅ India leads in digital public goods and IT services

🟰 Tie (in different strengths)

---

5. 🌍 Global Influence & Diplomacy

• China:

  • Leader in BRICS, SCO, Belt and Road Initiative

  • Strong presence in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America

• India:

  • Trusted globally for non-alignment, democracy, and South-South cooperation

  • Key partner in QUAD, G20, and global peacekeeping

✅ Winner: China (in economic diplomacy)
✅ India gaining faster in soft diplomacy and trust

---

6. 🛰 Space & Cyber Capabilities

• China:

  • Own space station (Tiangong), lunar and Mars ambitions

• India:

  • Low-cost, high-impact missions (Chandrayaan, Aditya, Gaganyaan)

  • Emerging cybersecurity and satellite power

✅ Winner: China (scale)
✅ India (efficiency and innovation)

---

7. 💳 Trade & Manufacturing

Sector	China	India
Exports	World's largest exporter	Emerging exporter
Manufacturing	Global factory	Rising (Make in India)
Import Dependence	Low	Medium-high

• China will remain the world’s manufacturing hub

• India will grow as an alternative but may not overtake

✅ Winner: China

---

8. 🗳 Governance & Global Image

• China: One-party authoritarian, efficient but less trusted

• India: Largest democracy, chaotic but trusted globally

• India is admired for:

  • Open internet

  • Rule of law (though challenged at times)

  • Strong diaspora influence (CEOs of Google, Microsoft, etc.)

✅ Winner: India (global trust, democracy, soft power)

---

9. 🏗 Infrastructure

• China:

  • 40,000+ km of high-speed rail

  • Mega cities (Shenzhen, Shanghai)

  • Global infrastructure projects via BRI

• India:

  • Accelerating infrastructure push: roads, metros, energy

  • Focused on urban development, smart cities, and rural inclusion

✅ Winner: China (scale & quality)
✅ India (catching up fast)

---

10. 🌱 Sustainability & Climate Leadership

• China is the top polluter, but also the top investor in green tech

• India has lower per capita emissions, pushing solar energy (ISA) and sustainable farming

✅ China leads in green tech investment
✅ India leads in global climate diplomacy

🟰 Tie

---

🧾 Summary Table – China vs India in 2050

Factor	China 🇨🇳	India 🇮🇳	Winner
Population	Aging, shrinking	Young, growing	India
Economy (GDP)	$45–50T	$30–35T	China
Military Strength	Stronger overall	Regionally strong	China
Innovation	AI, EV, 6G	Software, digital infra	Tie
Global Influence	Infrastructure, trade	Diplomacy, trust	Tie
Space & Cyber	Big budget missions	Cost-efficient space	China (scale)
Democracy & Trust	Authoritarian	Open democracy	India
Infrastructure	Mega projects	Catching up	China

---

🧠 Final Verdict: Who Will Be More Powerful by 2050?

• China will likely remain ahead in total GDP, military power, and industrial scale

• India will be younger, more democratic, globally trusted, and a dynamic innovation partner

🌐 Geopolitical Outlook:

By 2050, the world may see:

• China as a strong industrial & tech superpower

• India as a trusted democratic counterbalance, especially in the Global South

---

🏁 In Conclusion:

🔹 China will remain more powerful in numbers and scale.
🔹 India will be more influential in ideas, values, and human capital.

China vs USA: Who Will Be the Most Powerful by 2050?

As of now (2025), the USA is the world's #1 superpower.

However, China is rising rapidly and challenging America. 

Let’s break down future projections across key areas to see who will likely lead the world by 2050.

---

1. 🌏 Population & Demographics

Metric	China (2050)	USA (2050)
Projected Pop.	~1.3 billion (↓)	~380 million (↑)
Median Age	~50 years	~42 years

• China's population will decline due to low birth rate and aging crisis.

• USA’s population will grow, fueled by immigration and higher birth rates.

• A younger population means more labor supply, innovation, and consumer activity.

✅ Advantage: USA

---

2. 💰 Economy (GDP)

Metric	China (2050)	USA (2050)
Projected GDP	$40–50 trillion (PPP-based)	$35–45 trillion
Global Rank	Likely #1 in PPP	Likely #2 in nominal GDP

• China may surpass the USA in size (PPP terms) but not in per capita income.

• USA will remain wealthier per person, and dominate financial systems (USD, Wall Street).

🟰 Tied: China in size, USA in wealth & stability

---

3. 🔬 Technology & Innovation

• China is investing aggressively in:

  • AI, quantum computing, semiconductors, 5G/6G

  • Tech giants (Huawei, Tencent, BYD) are going global.

• USA still leads in:

  • Software, semiconductors, space tech, R&D culture

  • Companies like Google, Apple, Tesla, NVIDIA dominate.

🎯 Key: China will catch up in hardware & AI, but USA may retain software + creative edge

🟰 Tie or Narrow Lead: USA

---

4. 🛡 Military Power

Metric	China (2050)	USA (2050)
Spending	~$700B+ (est.)	~$1 trillion (est.)
Global Bases	Dozens (future expansion)	750+ worldwide
Nuclear Arsenal	Catching up	Still largest & modernized

• USA will likely retain global dominance in power projection.

• China will become the #1 power in Asia-Pacific, but still behind in global reach.

✅ Advantage: USA

---

5. 🌐 Global Alliances & Diplomacy

• USA leads NATO, G7, QUAD, AUKUS, and has strong allies (Europe, Japan, India, Australia).

• China is leading BRICS, SCO, and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), influencing Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

🟰 Tie in spheres of influence — West vs Global South

---

6. 🛰 Space & Cyber Dominance

• China has:

  • Own space station (Tiangong), Mars rover, Moon base plans

• USA leads with:

  • NASA, SpaceX, private space economy, deep-space missions

✅ Advantage: USA, unless China overtakes in Moon/Mars race

---

7. 💳 Global Financial Power

• USA controls:

  • USD (world’s reserve currency), SWIFT, IMF, World Bank

• China promotes alternatives:

  • Digital Yuan, BRICS Bank, yuan-based trade

Unless there is a major global shift, USD dominance is likely to remain.

✅ Advantage: USA

---

8. 🌱 Soft Power: Culture, Media, Education

• USA exports culture: Hollywood, NBA, music, fashion, universities (Harvard, Stanford).

• China struggles with global image due to censorship, authoritarianism, and propaganda perceptions.

✅ Advantage: USA

---

9. 🏭 Manufacturing & Green Energy

• China is the world’s #1 manufacturer and green tech leader (solar, wind, EVs).

• USA is reshoring some industries, but still relies on Asian supply chains.

✅ Advantage: China (in manufacturing)

---

10. 📈 Resilience & System Strength

• USA:

  • Strong democracy, innovation ecosystem, flexible immigration

  • But faces polarization and inequality

• China:

  • Centralized control allows fast decisions

  • But risks from aging, debt, censorship, and slowing economy

✅ Long-term systemic advantage: USA

---

🧾 Summary Table – USA vs China (2050)

Category	USA 🇺🇸	China 🇨🇳	Winner
Population Growth	Stable, young	Shrinking, aging	USA
GDP (PPP)	~$40T	~$50T	China (size)
Military Reach	Global	Regional (Asia)	USA
Tech & Innovation	Software, space, biotech	AI, hardware, EVs	Tie
Global Alliances	Strong (G7, NATO)	Growing (BRICS, BRI)	Tie
Soft Power	Global pop culture	Limited	USA
Finance & Currency	USD dominance	Digital yuan (limited)	USA
Manufacturing	Advanced, shrinking	Largest in world	China

---

🧠 Final Verdict:

Who Will Be #1 in 2050?

🔹 Economically: China may be #1 in size, but USA will remain richer per capita.
🔹 Militarily & Diplomatically: USA will likely stay dominant.
🔹 Technologically: A tight race, but USA may keep the innovation edge.
🔹 Globally:

• China: Superpower of the Global South

• USA: Superpower of the liberal democratic world

---

✨ Conclusion:

By 2050, China and the USA may form a “bipolar world”, not one single superpower.

• China will challenge but not fully replace the USA.

• USA will adapt and retain leadership in innovation, alliances, and global governance.

Nepal’s Prime Ministers and their Alleged Corruption Scandals - Since 1990

1. Madhav Kumar Nepal 

Madhav Kumar Nepal was formally charged by the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) in June 2025 for his role in the Patanjali land scam. During his premiership, the government transferred over 100 ropanis of land to Patanjali Yogpeeth in Bara district, which was later resold, causing a state loss of over Rs. 185 million. The CIAA stated the cabinet decision violated Article 66 of the Corruption Prevention Act.

Additionally, Nepal has been implicated in the Lalita Niwas land grab case, where government land was fraudulently transferred to private hands. The Supreme Court ordered prosecution against both Madhav Nepal and Baburam Bhattarai.

Prime Ministerial Tenure 

2009–2011

• Sources: Kathmandu Post, June 5, 2025, The Diplomat, June 2025 and Ekantipur, February 14, 2025 (Nepali)

---

2. Baburam Bhattarai 

Bhattarai has been named in the same Lalita Niwas land scam. His cabinet, during his premiership, approved decisions that facilitated illegal land transfers to powerful individuals in Baluwatar. Though he has maintained the decisions were legal and collective, the Supreme Court in 2024 found grounds for further investigation and prosecution.

Prime Ministerial Tenure 

2011–2013

• Source: The Kathmandu Post, February 14, 2025

---

3. Sher Bahadur Deuba 

In 2005, the Royal Commission for Control of Corruption (RCCC) convicted Sher Bahadur Deuba for abuse of authority and financial irregularities in the Melamchi Water Supply Project, sentencing him to jail. However, the RCCC was later declared unconstitutional, and the conviction was annulled. He has also been accused of mismanagement in aircraft procurement, cooperative funds, and favoring close allies in fuel import deals, though formal charges were never pursued.

Prime Ministerial Tenure 
1995–1997, 
2001–2002, 
2004–2005, 
2017–2018, 
2021–2022.

• Source: Nepali Times, August 2005, and Transparency International Nepal Report, 2018

---

4. K.P. Sharma Oli 

K.P. Oli’s cabinet was involved in the controversial Giri Bandhu Tea Estate land swap. The cabinet changed land-use policy to allow private individuals to claim state land that had been under public trust. The Supreme Court in July 2024 invalidated this decision, calling it a misuse of power for private gain.

Prime Ministerial Tenure
2015–2016, 
2018–2021, 
2024 to Present

• Source: Setopati, July 2024 (Nepali) and Nepali Times, August 2024

---

5. Pushpa Kamal Dahal “Prachanda” 

After the 2006 Comprehensive Peace Accord, roughly 19,602 Maoist combatants were housed in cantonments with monthly allowances of NPR 5,000 until integration or retirement. Allegations arose that Maoist leaders—including Prachanda—inflated fighter numbers (e.g., stating 35,000 instead of 7,000, later “verifying” 20,000) and thus siphoned off funds through non-existent or ghost combatant.  This led to the misuse of billions of rupees through fake fighters. A complaint was filed in 2024, but no strong investigation has taken place yet. Prachanda denied the charges and said he is ready to go to jail if proven guilty. The case shows how corruption and lack of accountability remain big problems in Nepal’s politics..

Prime Ministerial Tenure
2008–2009, 
2016–2017, 
2022–2024

• Source: Al Jazeera, May 2023 and The Kathmandu Post, June 10, 2023

किन नेपाल विकासोन्मुख देश हो भने अस्ट्रेलिया विकशीत देश हो?

नेपालका भीडभाड भएका शहरहरू जहाँ हरेक कुनामा साना–साना व्यवसायहरू देखिन्छन् र अस्ट्रेलियाका शहरहरू जहाँ ठूलो मात्रामा सीमित पसलहरू छन्, यस्ता भिन्नता देख्दा हामी सोच्न सक्छौं — आखिर किन अस्ट्रेलिया विकसित देश हो भने नेपाल विकासोन्मुख? दुबै देशमा जनसंख्या र बजारको फरक अवस्था के हो? यी कुराहरू बुझ्नका लागि हामीले धेरै आयामहरूमा चर्चा गर्नुपर्ने हुन्छ।

भीडभाड र साना व्यवसाय: नेपालका बजार

नेपालका शहरहरू विशेष गरेर काठमाडौं, पोखरा, भरतपुर जस्ता शहरहरू निकै भीडभाड छन्। यहाँ जताततै साना पसल, चिया पसल, मोबाइल रिफ्युलिङ पसल, लुगा स–साना व्यापारीहरू छन्। एउटा गलीमा १० भन्दा बढी पसल पाउन सकिन्छ। साना व्यवसायहरूले थुप्रै मानिसलाई रोजगारी दिन्छन्। तर यी व्यवसायहरू प्रायः पारिवारिक वा साना स्तरका हुन्छन्। उदाहरणको लागि, काठमाडौंको भोटाहिटी, इन्द्रचोक, नयाँ बजार क्षेत्रहरूमा विभिन्न साना साना पसलहरू छन् जहाँ ग्राहकहरू दैनिक उपभोग्य वस्तु किन्छन्।

तर, यी साना व्यवसायहरूको समन्वय र व्यवस्थित योजना नहुँदा, सडकमा अव्यवस्था बढ्छ। यातायात जाम, ढिलाइ, र सेवा स्तरमा कमी आउँछ। धेरै पसलहरूले प्रतिस्पर्धा गर्दा मूल्य नियन्त्रण गाह्रो हुन्छ र व्यवसायिक प्रविधिको कमीका कारण विस्तार र समृद्धिमा बाधा पुग्छ।

अस्ट्रेलियाको व्यवस्थित बजार र कम पसल

अस्ट्रेलियामा भने सहरहरूमा साना पसलहरू त सीमित छन्, तर ठूलो स्तरमा व्यवस्थित शपिङ सेन्टर, सुपरमार्केट र ब्राण्डेड पसलहरू छन्। उदाहरणका लागि, सिड्नी वा मेलबर्नमा ‘Westfield’ जस्ता विशाल शपिङ सेन्टरहरू छन् जहाँ सबै किसिमका सामानहरू एकै स्थानमा उपलब्ध हुन्छन्। यहाँ एउटा सुपरमार्केटमा हजारौं सामानहरू सजिलै पाइन्छन्, र ग्राहकलाई सामान खोज्न सजिलो हुन्छ।

यसले बजारलाई व्यवस्थित बनाउँछ, यातायात सहज हुन्छ र व्यवसायले ठूलो उत्पादनशक्ति र सेवा गुणस्तर कायम गर्न सक्छ। साथै, अस्ट्रेलियाका साना व्यवसायहरूलाई शपिङ सेन्टरहरूले सहकार्यका लागि स्थान दिन्छन् जसले उनीहरूलाई व्यापक ग्राहकसम्म पुग्न मद्दत गर्दछ।

विकासमा अन्तर किन?

१. संरचनात्मक योजना र पूर्वाधार

अस्ट्रेलियाले आफ्नो शहर र बजार व्यवस्थापनमा लामो समयदेखि ठूलो लगानी गरेको छ। सडक, यातायात, बिजुली, इन्टरनेट जस्ता पूर्वाधारहरू दिगो र गुणस्तरीय छन्। उदाहरणका लागि, मेलबर्नको ‘City Loop’ ट्रेन प्रणाली र ‘Myki’ स्मार्ट कार्डले सार्वजनिक यातायातलाई सहज बनाएको छ।

नेपालमा भने पूर्वाधार कमजोर छ। सडक सञ्जाल अव्यवस्थित, ट्राफिक जाम र विजुली संकट प्रायः हुन्छ। उदाहरणका लागि, काठमाडौंको बालाजु क्षेत्रका व्यवसायहरूमा बिजुलीको अनियमितता र सडक अवरुद्ध हुने समस्याले व्यापारमा असर पुर्याउँछ।

२. प्रविधि र व्यवस्थापनमा फरक

अस्ट्रेलियाका व्यवसायहरूमा प्रविधिको व्यापक प्रयोग छ। स्वचालित क्यासियर, अनलाइन अर्डरिङ र वितरण प्रणालीले ग्राहक अनुभव सुधार गरेको छ। साना व्यवसायहरू पनि डिजिटल मार्केटिङ र अनलाइन भुक्तानी प्रयोग गर्छन्।

नेपालमा भने धेरै व्यवसाय अझै पारम्परिक तरिकाले सञ्चालन हुन्छन्। डिजिटल भुक्तानीको पहुँच कम छ र व्यवसाय विस्तारमा कठिनाइ छ। उदाहरणका लागि, काठमाडौंको बजारमा मोबाइल भुक्तानी गर्दै गर्दा प्रायः नेटवर्क समस्या आउँछ जसले ग्राहक असन्तुष्ट बनाउँछ।

३. शिक्षा र दक्ष जनशक्ति

अस्ट्रेलियामा उच्च शिक्षित जनशक्ति व्यवसायमा लाग्छन्। तिनले नयाँ सोच, व्यवस्थापन र प्रविधि अपनाउँछन्। नेपालमा भने शिक्षा प्रणाली अझै सुधारको प्रक्रियामा छ। दक्ष जनशक्तिको अभावले व्यवसायलाई प्रवर्धन र प्रतिस्पर्धामा बाधा पुर्याउँछ।

४. वित्तीय प्रणाली र लगानी

अस्ट्रेलियामा बैंक र वित्तीय संस्थाहरू व्यवस्थित छन् जसले साना व्यवसायलाई सजिलो ऋण सुविधा दिन्छ। यसले व्यवसाय विस्तार र नवप्रवर्तनमा मद्दत गर्छ। नेपालमा भने बैंकिङ प्रणालीमा कठिनाइ छ। साना व्यवसायहरूलाई ऋण उपलब्ध गराउन धेरै प्रक्रिया र ब्याजदर उच्च हुन्छ।

प्रभावशाली उदाहरणहरू

• नेपालको चिया पसल व्यवसाय: काठमाडौंका विभिन्न स्थानहरूमा साना चिया पसलहरू छन्। यी व्यवसायले स्थानीय स्तरमा रोजगारी दिन्छन् तर ती व्यवसायहरूमा प्रतिस्पर्धा अत्यधिक छ र मार्केटिङ वा प्रविधिको अभावले विस्तार गर्न गाह्रो हुन्छ।

• अस्ट्रेलियाको ‘Coles’ सुपरमार्केट: Coles जस्ता ठूलो सुपरमार्केटहरूले सम्पूर्ण क्याम्पस र उपत्यकालाई सेवा दिन्छन्। तिनीहरूले आपूर्तिकर्तासँग सहकार्य गरी सबै वस्तुहरू उचित मूल्यमा उपलब्ध गराउँछन् र ग्राहकलाई सुविधा दिन्छन्।

• नेपालको मोबाइल रिफ्युलिङ पसलहरू: साना साना मोबाइल रिफ्युलिङ पसलहरू शहरभरि छन्, तर तिनको व्यवस्थापन असंरचित छ। ग्राहकले बारम्बार ‘नेटवर्क समस्या’ वा ‘रिचार्जमा छुट नपाउनु’ जस्ता समस्या भोग्छन्।

• अस्ट्रेलियाको डिजिटल भुक्तानी प्रणाली: अस्ट्रेलियामा साना क्याफे र पसलहरूले ‘Apple Pay’, ‘Google Pay’ जस्ता डिजिटल भुक्तानी सहज रूपमा स्वीकार्छन्, जसले ग्राहकलाई सहजता र व्यवसायलाई छिटो कारोबार गर्न मद्दत गर्दछ।

नेपालले के सिक्न सक्छ?

• शहर योजना र पूर्वाधार सुधार: व्यवस्थित सडक, बिजुली र यातायात व्यवस्थापनले व्यवसायलाई सहज बनाउँछ।

• प्रविधिको उपयोग र डिजिटलकरण: साना व्यवसायहरूलाई अनलाइन भुक्तानी, डिजिटल मार्केटिङ र डाटा व्यवस्थापनमा लगानी गर्न प्रोत्साहित गर्नुपर्छ।

• शिक्षा र तालिम: दक्ष जनशक्ति उत्पादन गर्न व्यावसायिक शिक्षा र तालिममा जोड दिनुपर्छ।

• वित्तीय पहुँच सुधार: साना व्यवसायहरूलाई सजिलो ऋण र वित्तीय सेवा दिन बैंक र वित्तीय संस्थाहरूलाई सक्षम बनाउनुपर्छ।

---

निष्कर्ष

नेपालका भीडभाड भएका साना व्यवसायहरू देशको आर्थिक आधार हुन्। तर तिनीहरूलाई व्यवस्थित, प्रविधिमैत्री र सक्षम बनाउनु आवश्यक छ। अस्ट्रेलियाको विकसित अर्थतन्त्रले देखाउँछ कि व्यवस्थित बजार संरचना, प्रविधिको उपयोग, दक्ष जनशक्ति र राम्रो पूर्वाधार विकासमा मुख्य भूमिका खेल्छन्।

नेपालले यी पक्षहरू सुधार्दा आफ्नो विकासलाई छिटो गति दिन सक्छ। यसका लागि सरकार, निजी क्षेत्र र नागरिक समाजबीच समन्वय आवश्यक छ। सफल व्यवसायहरू निर्माण गर्न डिजिटल प्रविधि अपनाउने, बजार व्यवस्थापन गर्ने र लगानीलाई प्रोत्साहित गर्ने दिशा खुल्ला राख्नुपर्छ।

नेपालका व्यापारी र नीति निर्माता सबै मिलेर यस्तो वातावरण सिर्जना गर्न सक्ने विश्वासका साथ — सफल र समृद्ध नेपाल हाम्रो साझा सपना हो।

---

के यो ब्लग तपाईंलाई मन प¥यो? थप उदाहरण वा कुनै विषयमा विस्तार चाहनुहुन्छ भने भन्नुहोस्।

Theories of Public Expenditure: Paradigm Shifts from Classical Foundations to Modern Insights

Background

Public expenditure plays a fundamental role in economic development, governance, and social welfare. Over the years, economists and political scientists have developed several theories to explain government spending patterns. However, these theories have not remained static — they have undergone major paradigm shifts as new data, methodologies, and perspectives emerged.

This article traces the evolution of these theories, spotlighting the key shifts that transformed how we understand public expenditure.

---

1. The Classical Paradigm: Wagner’s Law (Late 19th Century)

Paradigm: Economic development leads to larger government.

• Adolph Wagner proposed that as economies industrialize and grow richer, government activities and expenditures naturally expand.

• Government spending shifts from traditional roles (defense, law enforcement) to welfare, infrastructure, education, and regulation.

Why it was revolutionary:
This was the first systematic theory linking economic growth with public expenditure growth, establishing a positive and almost automatic relationship.

Reference:

• Wagner, A. (1883). Economics of Public Finance.

---

2. The Displacement Effect: Peacock-Wiseman Hypothesis (Mid-20th Century)

Paradigm shift: From smooth growth to “step-like” jumps in expenditure.

• Peacock and Wiseman challenged the idea of gradual growth by showing that crises like wars or economic shocks cause abrupt increases in spending.

• Public tolerance for taxation spikes during crises, permanently shifting the expenditure baseline upward.

Significance:
This shifted the view from steady growth to recognizing political and social tolerance as key factors driving expenditure jumps, introducing a more realistic, dynamic pattern.

References:

• Peacock, A.T., & Wiseman, J. (1961). The Growth of Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom. Princeton University Press.

• Peacock, A.T., & Wiseman, J. (1967). The Growth of Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom (2nd ed.). Princeton University Press.

---

3. The Political Economy Turn (Late 20th Century)

Paradigm shift: Public expenditure is shaped by political incentives and institutions, not just economic growth.

• Theories like Public Choice introduced the idea that politicians and interest groups influence spending decisions for electoral gains or self-interest.

• Social Contract Theory framed expenditure as part of collective agreements to provide public goods that markets cannot efficiently supply.

Impact:
This broadened the analysis beyond pure economics, integrating political science and ethics to explain expenditure behavior.

References:

• Buchanan, J.M., & Tullock, G. (1962). The Calculus of Consent. University of Michigan Press.

• Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.

---

4. Endogeneity and Bidirectional Causality (1990s–2000s)

Paradigm shift: Questioning the direction of causality between economic growth and public expenditure.

• Contrary to Wagner’s one-way causality, research showed that public expenditure itself can stimulate economic growth.

• Governments are not passive followers of economic growth; their spending decisions actively influence development.

Why it matters:
This led to more nuanced models that treat growth and spending as mutually influencing variables, demanding careful empirical analysis.

References:

• Haug, A.A., & Sæther, E.A. (2018). The Wagner’s Law Debate: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Public Economics, 164, 41-51.

• Zhang, Y. (2015). Re-examining the Relationship between Economic Growth and Government Expenditure. Economic Modelling, 48, 60-68.

---

5. Institutions and Governance Focus (Early 2000s Onwards)

Paradigm shift: Institutional quality determines the efficiency and impact of public expenditure.

• Economists like Acemoglu, Johnson, and Robinson emphasized how governance, corruption control, and rule of law affect public spending outcomes.

• Weak institutions can lead to ineffective or excessive spending without growth benefits.

Significance:
This shifted attention to "how" governments spend, not just "how much," making governance reforms central to public expenditure debates.

References:

• Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J.A. (2001). The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation. American Economic Review, 91(5), 1369-1401.

• Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2010). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Issues. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 5430.

---

6. Fiscal Federalism and Decentralization (2000s–Present)

Paradigm shift: Decentralization changes expenditure patterns and accountability.

• Theories now recognize that shifting spending responsibilities to local governments affects efficiency, equity, and growth.

• Optimal public expenditure requires balancing central authority with local autonomy.

Impact:
This added complexity, recognizing multiple government layers influencing expenditure decisions.

References:

• Oates, W.E. (1999). An Essay on Fiscal Federalism. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(3), 1120-1149.

• Rodden, J. (2006). Hamilton’s Paradox: The Promise and Peril of Fiscal Federalism. Cambridge University Press.

---

7. Behavioral Economics and Experimental Approaches (2010s–Present)

Paradigm shift: Incorporating human psychology and social norms into public finance theory.

• Recognizes that taxpayer behavior and public acceptance depend on biases, trust, and social context.

• This helps explain variations in public support for taxation and expenditure policies.

Why it’s important:
Public finance policies now consider behavioral factors, improving design and communication strategies.

References:

• Besley, T., & Coate, S. (1997). An Economic Model of Representative Democracy. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(1), 85-114.

• Thaler, R.H., & Sunstein, C.R. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Yale University Press.

---

Summary Table of Paradigm Shifts in Public Expenditure Theories

Period	Paradigm Shift	Key Contributions
Late 19th Century	Economic growth drives government size (Wagner’s Law)	Government grows naturally with development
Mid-20th Century	Stepwise expenditure growth due to crises (Peacock-Wiseman)	Political tolerance shifts during crises
Late 20th Century	Political economy: politics shapes expenditure	Public Choice and Social Contract theories
1990s–2000s	Bidirectional causality between growth and spending	Government spending also fuels growth
Early 2000s onwards	Institutional quality determines expenditure impact	Governance reforms key to effective spending
2000s–Present	Decentralization changes expenditure dynamics	Fiscal federalism theory
2010s–Present	Behavioral economics integrates psychology	Explains taxpayer attitudes and support

---

Conclusion

Theories of public expenditure have evolved from simple economic growth models to rich, interdisciplinary frameworks that account for politics, institutions, and human behavior. Recognizing these paradigm shifts enables us to better analyze government spending and design policies that promote efficient and equitable public finance.

Thank You!

Note: This content is re-written of "Theories of Public Expenditure".

Why Nepal is Still Developing and What It Can Learn from Australia

 

---

Introduction

Nepal is a country full of resilience, cultural heritage, and natural beauty. Over the past few decades, it has made significant strides in health, education, and infrastructure. Yet, it still falls under the "developing" category. Why is that the case? And what can Nepal learn from developed countries like Australia to accelerate its journey toward inclusive growth?

This article examines Nepal’s development status by comparing it to Australia. Using clear data and visualizations, we explore where Nepal stands, what gaps exist, and how targeted improvements can help uplift millions of Nepalese lives. The goal is not to criticize but to provide insights for policymakers, educators, and citizens who want a better future for Nepal.

---

Data Collection and Analysis

The analysis uses reliable data from the World Bank, UNDP, and other international development agencies. Seven key indicators were chosen to evaluate a country's overall development level:

• GDP per capita (USD)

• Human Development Index (HDI) Rank

• Life Expectancy (years)

• Poverty Rate (%)

• Unemployment Rate (%)

• Access to Clean Water (%)

• Education Index (0-1)

Comparison Table: Nepal vs Australia

Indicator	Australia	Nepal
GDP per capita (USD)	67,500	1,400
HDI Rank (2023)	5	146
Life Expectancy (years)	83.0	71.2
Poverty Rate (%)	13.4	24.3
Unemployment Rate (%)	4.0	11.1
Access to Clean Water (%)	99.5	90.8
Education Index (0–1 scale)	0.929	0.567

This data highlights that while Nepal has made progress, significant challenges still remain.

---

Data Insight Analysis

1. Overall Development Gap

Nepal and Australia across the seven indicators clearly shows the performance gap.

Insights:

• Nepal's GDP per capita is only 2% of Australia’s.

• The HDI rank difference is massive: Australia ranks 5th globally; Nepal is 146th.

• Education and access to basic services like clean water remain key barriers.

2. GDP vs Life Expectancy

A scatter plot comparing GDP per capita and life expectancy illustrates how wealthier nations tend to have healthier populations.

Insights:

• Australia’s higher GDP translates into better healthcare, nutrition, and public health policies.

• Nepal’s growing GDP hasn't yet resulted in proportional improvements in life expectancy.

• Health investments and better public services are needed to close this gap.

3. Education and Infrastructure

A stacked bar graph displays Education Index and Access to Clean Water as foundational components of human development.

Insights:

• Nepal is progressing, but the pace is slow.

• Quality education and basic infrastructure are vital to lift people out of poverty and create jobs at home.

• Australia’s near-universal clean water access and high education scores are outcomes of long-term planning.

---

Conclusion: Why Nepal is Still Developing and What It Can Learn

Nepal remains a developing country due to a mix of economic, political, and infrastructural limitations:

• Low income levels and limited job creation.

• Poor public services in rural areas.

• Political instability that hinders long-term planning.

• Dependence on remittance, rather than domestic production.

However, Nepal has strengths it can build on: a young population, rich cultural capital, and strong community networks.

Lessons from Australia for Nepal

1. Strengthen Education Systems

   • Increase investment in schools and teachers.

   • Expand access to vocational and digital education.

2. Improve Healthcare Access

   • Focus on maternal and rural healthcare.

   • Create affordable and universal healthcare policies.

3. Build Reliable Infrastructure

   • Ensure clean water access for 100% of the population.

   • Invest in roads, internet, and energy in remote areas.

4. Foster Good Governance

   • Reduce corruption and increase transparency.

   • Implement long-term, citizen-focused policies.

5. Create Jobs at Home

   • Promote entrepreneurship and local industries.

   • Reduce overdependence on remittance.

Nepal is on the path to progress, but it must prioritize human development, not just economic statistics. If lessons from countries like Australia are adapted thoughtfully, Nepal can accelerate its transformation from a developing to a thriving nation.

The future of Nepal depends not just on how much the economy grows, but how much that growth improves the lives of its people.

Impact of Trade, Remittance and BOP on the Economic Growth of Nepal: An Autoregressive Distributed Lagged (ARDL) Bound Testing Model

 

Abstract

This article explores the impact of trade openness, remittance, and BOP on the real GDP in Nepal. This research uses the ARDL Bound Testing model, considering the secondary data collected from the Ministry of Finance, which ranges from 1990 to 2022. This research aims to identify the impact of the external sector on the country's economic growth. The result establishes that BOP has adverse short and long-term effects on the country's economic growth, which indicates the variable's sensitivity. The trade openness rate also has a negative impact; however, remittance positively affects the long run. Hence, the government of Nepal should focus more on rationalising the remittance for the country's economic growth. However, on the other hand, working on trade policy should be a broad discussion to mitigate the negative impact on the country's economic growth (Acharya, 2024).

Keywords: 

Real GPD, Remittance, Import, Export, BOP, ARDL model

Reference:

Acharya, S. (2024). Impact of trade, remittance and BOP on the economic growth of Nepal: an autoregressive Distributed Lagged (ARDL) bound testing model. Khwopa Journal, 6(2), 61–73. https://doi.org/10.3126/kjour.v6i2.73149

If You Bought $1K of Twitter Before Elon Musk Took Over, Here’s How Much You’d Have Today

 

John Csiszar
December 13, 2024 4 min read

hapabapa / Getty Images

Why Is X’s Valuation So Low?

What Is the Future Direction of X?

X, formerly known as Twitter, has hit a rough patch ever since the outspoken CEO of Tesla, Elon Musk, bought it for $44 billion in October 2022. 

 

While now a private company, the estimated valuation of X has fallen dramatically since Musk took over the helm. While Musk’s public profile has been boosted even more in recent months due to his close connection with President-elect Donald Trump and his appointment to the newly formed “Department of Government Efficiency,” the problems with X remain. 

 

Here’s a look at how much X’s valuation has fallen since Elon Musk took over, what may have caused the decline, and what the future may hold for the company.

X/Twitter’s Valuation Decline

Elon Musk paid $54.20 per share for Twitter when he completed his acquisition on Oct. 28, 2022. The total purchase price was approximately $44 billion. This transaction made X/Twitter a private company, meaning it cannot be valued on the public market by simply looking at its stock price and outstanding shares.

However, investment firms such as Fidelity are able to make informed estimates as to the value of private companies based on a number of factors, such as cash flow, growth, capital raises, comparable company valuation and so on.

As of October 2023, one year after Musk took the company private, Fidelity valued X at $19 billion, down from its acquisition value of $44 billion. By October 2024, Fidelity’s valuation had plummeted even more, all the way down to $9.4 billion. That represents a decline of almost exactly 50% to 50.5%, to be exact.

How Much Would You Have If You’d Invested $1,000 in Twitter?

If you bought Twitter before Musk took the company private, you’d actually be in good shape. As a private investor, you would have received $54.20 per share for your Twitter investment.

But assuming you were able to hold onto your shares, the $1,000 you originally invested would now be worth $495, having lost more than half their value.

The reasons for X’s tumble in valuation are multi-fold, with no single factor causing the drop. According to Kantar, at least part of the reason is likely fundamental.

The analytics company said that 26% of marketing firms planned to cut down their ad spending on X next year, more than on any other social media platform. Already, the company has lost hundreds of millions in advertising dollars in 2024 alone. X was also regarded as less trustworthy and innovative than YouTube, Instagram or TikTok.

The direction of the company has also concerned many investors, as Musk promptly laid off 50% of Twitter’s staff and re-opened the platform to controversial commentators like Alex Jones. Musk himself has made plenty of controversial comments, including some deemed antisemitic, which has further alienated some advertisers and investors.

Anecdotally, some worry that Musk’s hands are simply too full to devote as much attention to X as a CEO should. As Musk also runs Tesla, the Boring Company, and SpaceX — and is about to take the helm of the Department of Government Efficiency — some investors fear that X is getting the short end of the stick in terms of the billionaire’s attention.

For better or worse, Musk has announced that he intends to completely change the direction of X and make it much more than a simple social media platform.

To take advantage of the boom in fintech, Musk is attempting to turn X into a central hub for users’ financial needs, offering everything from Venmo-like payments to money management and general financial tools. Musk also intends to put his technological know-how into use by adding AI functionality to X.

Whether or not these efforts succeed is anyone’s guess at this point. But those investors still holding shares of X are hoping to recover from the more than 50% loss since Musk took over.

This article originally appeared on GOBankingRates.com: If You Bought $1K of Twitter Before Elon Musk Took Over, Here’s How Much You’d Have Today