The global recession is opening up a big gap in output performance between the chemical industries of the developed and developing worlds, which will continue to widen over the next few years.

Chemical producers in the emerging economies of countries such as China, India and Brazil are using expanding domestic demand to grab a larger share of the global chemicals market.

China is already accounting for 17 per cent of the world’s chemical output,’ says Thomas. ‘The high growth in chemical production will continue in 2010 because of the large number of new chemical plants due to come on stream in the country during the year. Their output will slow down the big inflow of imports into China.’

Read more about this topic here at Chemistry World.

Imagine you were an early settler of what is now the United States. It seems likely you would have killed native Americans. After all, your parents killed them, your siblings killed them, your friends killed them, the leaders of the community killed them, the President killed them. Chances are, you would have killed them too, and you probably wouldn’t have seen anything wrong with this.

Indeed, it probably wouldn’t even have occurred to you to think about the morality of this. If you did, it would probably seem just. They were trying to kill you! And your family! Going after them was just self-defense! (It wasn’t, of course; you invaded their land.)

Or if you see nothing wrong with killing native Americans, take the example of slavery. Again, everyone had slaves and probably didn’t think too much about the morality of it. That was just the way the world was. If you were asked about the big moral questions you faced, you’d probably think of things like the proper time to pay back a loan, or lying to your wife, or maybe a child’s duty of obedience to their father.

Today, looking back on people who murder native American and keep slaves, those seem like comparatively small potatoes. Sure, we justify it by saying that they were just people of their time, but still… It’s hard to get over the fact that George Washington ordered his general to “lay waste all the settlements around…that the country may not be merely overrun, but destroyed.” (He also ordered that they not “listen to any overture of peace before the total ruin of their settlements is effected. Our future security will be in…the terror with which the severity of the chastisement they receive will inspire them.”) It somehow colors everything he says. Whatever he may have thought about loan repayment or lying, slavery was the big moral question of his time, and (in practice, at least) he got it wrong.

We don’t kill native Americans much these days and we don’t keep slaves, but it’s hard to believe that our era must be morally perfect. Surely if people back then could make such huge moral blunders, we could be making similar ones right now. And ethical philosophy is useless if it can’t help us avoid such huge mistakes.

Some people suggest that the way to do ethical philosophy is to listen to our intuitions. “I do not think our intuitions about cases are less reliable than those about principles,” Frances Kamm argues.

But of course our intuitions about cases are less reliable! If we could simply trust our intuitions, we wouldn’t need ethical philosophy at all. If something was wrong, we would just know it was wrong. There would be nothing philosophy could tell us.

Obviously this is absurd. Lots of people do things that seem clearly unethical while thinking they’re in the right. Perhaps Kamm thinks these mistakes are merely the result of temporary passions and that from her desk at Harvard she can consider such question with a more objective eye.

But, as I have shown, people’s intuitions about cases are systematically distorted. Sitting at a desk wasn’t enough to persuade George Washington to stop killing native Americans. His mistake wasn’t the result of some momentary passion, but of an entire culture that had normalized mass murder and a society that depended on it. To think that he would just suddenly sit down and go “Hmm, murdering Indians feels wrong to me” is ridiculous. The only way he would possibly conclude that is by taking seriously his principles.

I grew up eating animals. I saw nothing wrong with this. My parents ate them, my siblings ate them, my friends ate them, people on TV ate them, the President ate them. I doubt I stopped to think about the morality of eating animals any more than I stopped to think about the morality of brushing my teeth. If you asked me for my intuition, I would have said eating animals was just fine. It was only when I stopped eating animals that my intuitions began to change.

Always discovering something new and in this case, Encyclopedia of Small Business with a focus on globalization; basic but still interesting nonetheless.

Some people view globalization in positive terms, as a key force in promoting worldwide economic development. But others believe …

More here.

Photo (unrelated): Eartha, The World’s Largest Revolving and Rotating Globe

Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of many economies, including Ireland, and international business is an engine that seems to be running out of steam across all continents.

For example, take this excerpt:

‘‘SMEs are the backbone of this economy and it’s time the government sat up and took notice of this,” said Curran.

‘‘We need to look at improving the export policy of these businesses, but the cost of competitiveness and a reduction in rates and other charges – such as energy – must be addressed. SMEs have done all they possibly can to cut costs.

Further:

‘‘We are still reliant on the international economy, and I would be very worried about the first few months of next year. This has probably been the worst year for SMEs in 20 years.”

Read more at “SMEs Hanging On In Unforgiving Climate.”

Additional resources mentioned in article:

Irish Small and Medium Enterprises Association (ISME)

Not mentioned in the article but of interest:

ISME & FORD Guide to Surviving in a Downturn

Ford teamed up with ISME to produce a useful guide for small business in the current climate ‘Keeping the small business moving – A guide to surviving in a downturn’, it gives advice on cash flow, general cost reduction and marketing as they relate to smaller business.

ISME & FORD Guide to Surviving in a Downturn (PDF)

There’s been a lot of media attention lately focused on the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) Act and its regulation of how lenders issue and manage credit cards. However, it appears that the effect of the legislation will reach beyond credit cards to another popular form of plastic.

According to a recent story from CNNMoney.com, many banks may be turning their sights to debit cards as another revenue stream.

Starting in February, new rules will limit lenders’ ability to arbitrarily increase interest rates and other fees on credit cards. Furthermore, consumer credit issuers that change interest rates on cardholders will be required to review the increases at a later date, which could result in the lender having to reduce interest rates to a lower level.

As a result, many card companies are raising interest rates now to recoup anticipated losses when phase two of the Credit CARD Act takes effect. For example, Citibank recently sent letters out to customers informing them that interest on their cards will be switched to a variable rate, but will also include a minimum interest rate. The result is that many cardholders will see their current rates increase.

But, as CNNMoney reports, lenders and banks are also targeting rewards programs as a way to increase their profits in a tightening market. Citing The Nilson Report, CNNMoney stated that people will spend $1.64 trillion on debit cards in 2010, which is almost a two-thirds increase from 2006.

In other words, the amount of debit card spending presents an avenue for companies to make some money. The report noted that banks plan on tapping into the debit card market through loyalty programs, which have long been tied to credit cards.

Loyalty programs charge cardholders fees, which then translate into offers for rewards, like airline miles or points toward merchandise. However, consumers typically might have to spend a substantial amount on their credit card in addition to the fees before they see any return on their money.

Quoting from a study by the TowerGroup, the CNNMoney report noted that with a common airline rewards debit program, consumers would have to spend $33,333 with their debit card in order to earn $100 in airline credits.

“Every remaining nickel you spend will have to go on [your debit card], which is just not practical,” Brian Riley, research director of bank card services for TowerGroup, told CNNMoney.

As with any product or service, consumers need to make sure they comparison-shop when it comes to the offers made by banks. Consumers should be sure that any investment on their part is more than covered by the rewards they earn with their purchases.