Paradise should not be like this. In paradise, one can expect everything to be nice and beautiful, with beautiful people, well dressed, affluent, well mannered, cultured, and full of social graces. No one would expect to step into paradise and be hounded everywhere by hungry ghosts.
The hungry ghost festival is no longer in the 7th moon of the lunar calendar but every weekend or public holiday. And the ghosts were hungry but not just for food. They were hungry for the fairer sex. I saw some of the photos posted in the net of the hungry ghosts in Sentosa Island and I am dismayed.
My beautiful island in the sun, the paradise on earth, the peace and tranquility, are shattered by rude and brazen male specimens of the human kind, intruding into the privacy of the holiday makers. They do not respect any rights of privacy to be left alone to enjoy the sun, sea and sand. They just plonked themselves in close quarters to the ladies in their bikinis and swimming suits. Their eyes zeroed into the semi naked bodies, salivating and mentally raping every female in sight. Are such harassment tolerable? The ladies may think they have came to paradise but hades is what they found.
Maybe it is the fault of the ladies. They should not be dressed that way to tempt the hungry ghosts. And if these specimens lose their senses and go wild, with mass rape in the heat of the moment, they should not be held responsible. The temptation of the apple in close range, so tantalizing, is just too irresistible. Mob behavior is unpredictable.
What is happening to my island paradise? A nightmare is waiting to happen. It is so menacing to see the females being surrounded by hoards of hungry male specimens with their animal urges ready to explode at any moment. It was only last year when a female dancer on stage was physically groped by the hungry ghosts for several minutes and all those presence just watched in bewilderment.
Heard they are stepping up patrols to guard against people committing suicide in Bedok Reservoir. Would they be increasing patrols or do something to prevent mob rioting for sex? It would not happen. Ok, but what about our tourist image as a paradise on earth, to bath and sun in peace and with a little privacy instead of being hounded by hungry ghosts? Are we turning our squeaky clean garden city image into a third world slum with the accompanying inhabitants and foul social norms? Tourists who enjoy visiting slums will choose countries where they can find slums. When they came to Singapore, the first world garden city, they don't expect to be greeted or swarmed by third world inhabitants and their nauseating and disgusting habits. It will be a shocking disappointment. Who would want to visit Europe to just see the slums of Asia and mingled with the hungry Asian hordes?
11/09/2011
11/08/2011
Reckless Meritocracy
‘In meritocracies, though, it’s the very intelligence of our leaders that creates the worst disasters. Convinced that their own skills are equal to any task or challenge, meritocrats take risks that lower wattage elites would never even contemplate, embark on more hubristic projects, and become infatuated with statistical models that hold out the promise of a perfectly rational and frictionless world.
Inevitably, pride goeth before a fall….It will do (the country) no good to replace the arrogant with the ignorant, the overconfident with the incompetent.
In place of reckless meritocrats, we don’t need feckless know nothings. We need intelligent leaders with a sense of their own limits, experienced people whose lives have taught them caution. We still need the best and brightest, but we need them to have somehow learnt humility along the way.’
Come come, I know what you are thinking. No. Not what you are thinking.
This is an extract of an article in mypaper today by an American called Ross Douthat and reprinted from The New York Times. The author was referring to Jon Corzine, who grew up in rural Singapore, oops, I mean Illinois, a farmer’s grandson, made it good in his studies and rose to become a politician. In his egoistic grandeur, he took big bets on other people’s money and hoping to make a killing and be celebrated as the new financial whiz kid. He failed and lost billions of his clients’ money in MF Global. The story is just beginning. How big is the hole is still unknown.
When God is not willing, no amount of talent or presumed talent can save the day. He was just a gambler. He dug his own hole and is falling into it.
Inevitably, pride goeth before a fall….It will do (the country) no good to replace the arrogant with the ignorant, the overconfident with the incompetent.
In place of reckless meritocrats, we don’t need feckless know nothings. We need intelligent leaders with a sense of their own limits, experienced people whose lives have taught them caution. We still need the best and brightest, but we need them to have somehow learnt humility along the way.’
Come come, I know what you are thinking. No. Not what you are thinking.
This is an extract of an article in mypaper today by an American called Ross Douthat and reprinted from The New York Times. The author was referring to Jon Corzine, who grew up in rural Singapore, oops, I mean Illinois, a farmer’s grandson, made it good in his studies and rose to become a politician. In his egoistic grandeur, he took big bets on other people’s money and hoping to make a killing and be celebrated as the new financial whiz kid. He failed and lost billions of his clients’ money in MF Global. The story is just beginning. How big is the hole is still unknown.
When God is not willing, no amount of talent or presumed talent can save the day. He was just a gambler. He dug his own hole and is falling into it.
CFDs are for sophisticated clients
With the MF Global bankruptcy turning into another lemon juice, more questions are being raised on CFDs in the media in the Sunday Times. When all the toxic notes and bonds were introduced to the market, they too were listed as sophisticated products, complex products for sophisticated clients. When the Lehman bonds have gone one step further and have been condemned as a con job in the US, when high risks housing mortgages were packaged and given triple AAA ratings to be sold to sophisticated investors, they also found the issuers betting against the failure of the bonds. The issuers thus made both ways, selling junks and if junks failed they would be paid by their insurers.
CFDs, like many derivatives, are highly geared instruments for trading in the market. And everyone knows that it is high risk and high return. Not only the sophisticated investors know of this risk, even the unsophisticated layman will know what they will be dabbling in.
For the less sophisticated investors, who are more prudent in their investment outlook, more are turning to the mundane and traditional stocks where the risk is lower. Simply, when one buys a stock, it is unlikely to lose everything unless the company goes bust or the management ran away. In trading derivatives, the margin is the capital in play and it is quite easy to lose everything in a short time.
Then again, lately stocks too have a very high tendency to go bust or with management running away and investors losing everything. Stocks too are not as safe as before the advent of derivatives. Many derivatives are stock based. What could happen is that the trading and fluctuating of stock prices are now tightly knitted with the prices of derivatives. Stock prices can also go on a wild ride when big derivative players have to cover their positions by manipulating stock prices. Though price manipulation is a breach of stock trading regulation, often it is very difficult to prove and to apprehend the manipulators. The latter have many sophisticated and complex ways of covering their tracks.
The seemingly innocent stocks are not that docile and safe anymore.
Does anyone spend a moment to think of what the word ‘sophisticated’ means in derivatives and stock trading? It is a sophisticated way to describe high risk gambling in the stock market. A sophisticated client is a client willing to take high risk, like a gambler. A sophisticated product or derivative is a high risk gambling product. Period.
High risk gambling belongs to the casino and not the stock market where the dynamics and conduct of business are different. Gambling is just gambling, take a bet, be fast, no need to worry about fundamentals, or no fundamentals at work. Buy white or red does not need analysts and their back breaking reports. Pressing the button of a jackpot machine only needs to look at the probability of winnings. A computer that can be attached to the machine will definitely increase the odds.
There is such a thing called blue chips in the stock market where the business and bottom line of the companies are more important in determining the price of the stocks than simply betting it up and down by algos in split seconds. Is the stock market turning into a casino or is it a mixture of both?
Perhaps the high risk derivatives should be assigned to a different platform, something like casino counters, and govern by the Casino Regulatory Authority. High risk gambling must be controlled under more stringent rules and regulations. Better still that they be delinked from the primary stock market. They can create derivatives from anything, not necessarily stocks in the stock markets, and this will spare the blue chips and good stocks from being murdered by the big derivative speculators.
And the word ‘sophisticated’ should be cast to the world of gambling and casinos.
CFDs, like many derivatives, are highly geared instruments for trading in the market. And everyone knows that it is high risk and high return. Not only the sophisticated investors know of this risk, even the unsophisticated layman will know what they will be dabbling in.
For the less sophisticated investors, who are more prudent in their investment outlook, more are turning to the mundane and traditional stocks where the risk is lower. Simply, when one buys a stock, it is unlikely to lose everything unless the company goes bust or the management ran away. In trading derivatives, the margin is the capital in play and it is quite easy to lose everything in a short time.
Then again, lately stocks too have a very high tendency to go bust or with management running away and investors losing everything. Stocks too are not as safe as before the advent of derivatives. Many derivatives are stock based. What could happen is that the trading and fluctuating of stock prices are now tightly knitted with the prices of derivatives. Stock prices can also go on a wild ride when big derivative players have to cover their positions by manipulating stock prices. Though price manipulation is a breach of stock trading regulation, often it is very difficult to prove and to apprehend the manipulators. The latter have many sophisticated and complex ways of covering their tracks.
The seemingly innocent stocks are not that docile and safe anymore.
Does anyone spend a moment to think of what the word ‘sophisticated’ means in derivatives and stock trading? It is a sophisticated way to describe high risk gambling in the stock market. A sophisticated client is a client willing to take high risk, like a gambler. A sophisticated product or derivative is a high risk gambling product. Period.
High risk gambling belongs to the casino and not the stock market where the dynamics and conduct of business are different. Gambling is just gambling, take a bet, be fast, no need to worry about fundamentals, or no fundamentals at work. Buy white or red does not need analysts and their back breaking reports. Pressing the button of a jackpot machine only needs to look at the probability of winnings. A computer that can be attached to the machine will definitely increase the odds.
There is such a thing called blue chips in the stock market where the business and bottom line of the companies are more important in determining the price of the stocks than simply betting it up and down by algos in split seconds. Is the stock market turning into a casino or is it a mixture of both?
Perhaps the high risk derivatives should be assigned to a different platform, something like casino counters, and govern by the Casino Regulatory Authority. High risk gambling must be controlled under more stringent rules and regulations. Better still that they be delinked from the primary stock market. They can create derivatives from anything, not necessarily stocks in the stock markets, and this will spare the blue chips and good stocks from being murdered by the big derivative speculators.
And the word ‘sophisticated’ should be cast to the world of gambling and casinos.
A summary of the discussion on housing policies
Some Singaporeans refused to see the real causes of the housing problems.
Some may not be able to understand.
Some bark up the wrong trees.
Some accepted that this is the way things should be and willing to live with it.
Some really think that it is the higher income Singaporeans trying to snatch the few public flats from the lower income Singaporeans.
Some believe that the higher income Singaporeans must spend all their money to buy private properties.
Some believe that it is their own fault for not being able to afford public flats.
Some think public flats are cheap, some think affordable.
Some think this is the best the govt can do to help them.
Some are very happy with the state of housing.
What will happen eventually is that all the public flats would be owner occupied by Singaporeans. All the PRs will sell them when the price is high enough, to return to their home countries to buy mansions. Singaporeans will be the final owners of all the highly priced public flats and live in them till the leases expired.
But there is no need to worry. Singaporeans are still rushing to buy properties at whatever prices because property prices can only go up. Those who are coughing out a million dollar for their properties expect the prices to go higher, and higher, and higher. Those who come in to buy from them also expect the prices to go higher and higher, and higher.
This is the level of consciousness of unthinking Singaporeans on what is happening around them. No wonder they need more foreigners to come and help them. No one even consider if the govt has built enough flats for citizens who need one, all the angst could have been gone, and no need to have all the clumsy and painful rules and regulations and all the staff to try to wrangle with them. And no need to wait for 3 to 4 years before a flat is ready.
Given the birth rate of 50,000 and assuming 40% will get married, that is 10,000 units of flats needed annually, and not counting the influx of foreigners in the hundreds of thousands.
Where is the problem or who is causing the problem? And daft Singaporeans are blaming each other for depriving another from buying a public flat.
Some may not be able to understand.
Some bark up the wrong trees.
Some accepted that this is the way things should be and willing to live with it.
Some really think that it is the higher income Singaporeans trying to snatch the few public flats from the lower income Singaporeans.
Some believe that the higher income Singaporeans must spend all their money to buy private properties.
Some believe that it is their own fault for not being able to afford public flats.
Some think public flats are cheap, some think affordable.
Some think this is the best the govt can do to help them.
Some are very happy with the state of housing.
What will happen eventually is that all the public flats would be owner occupied by Singaporeans. All the PRs will sell them when the price is high enough, to return to their home countries to buy mansions. Singaporeans will be the final owners of all the highly priced public flats and live in them till the leases expired.
But there is no need to worry. Singaporeans are still rushing to buy properties at whatever prices because property prices can only go up. Those who are coughing out a million dollar for their properties expect the prices to go higher, and higher, and higher. Those who come in to buy from them also expect the prices to go higher and higher, and higher.
This is the level of consciousness of unthinking Singaporeans on what is happening around them. No wonder they need more foreigners to come and help them. No one even consider if the govt has built enough flats for citizens who need one, all the angst could have been gone, and no need to have all the clumsy and painful rules and regulations and all the staff to try to wrangle with them. And no need to wait for 3 to 4 years before a flat is ready.
Given the birth rate of 50,000 and assuming 40% will get married, that is 10,000 units of flats needed annually, and not counting the influx of foreigners in the hundreds of thousands.
Where is the problem or who is causing the problem? And daft Singaporeans are blaming each other for depriving another from buying a public flat.
11/07/2011
Exasperation over stupid housing policies
An article by A Chan in the TOC is the manifestation of so much exasperation over stupid housing policies that have made our very own citizens feeling very frustrated, discriminated and angry with the govt that claimed to be looking after their interests, for their own good.
And many daft Singaporeans are arguing and pulling their hair over why this and why that, why not a bit more or a bit less? They forgot that the whole policy is flawed from its first premise. It was designed on the assumption that they cannot build enough flats for every citizen and therefore have to ration the flats, subsidised the lower income, and not allowing the higher income to buy public flats or compete with the lower income. This is the biggest bull and the biggest myth.
If the premise is that housing is a basic need and everyone needs a roof over his head, and it is the govt’s responsibility to provide this need, then all the silly rules and regulations will become irrelevant instantly.
Hsien Loong is asking the people to give suggestions, to change govt policies that are no longer relevant, or even stupid, then the housing policy is one that need to be buried and forgotten, and get a fresh new start.
Public housing is for the people, regardless of income level, just like NS is for every citizen regardless of his status or background. An NS man, rich or poor, pledges to defend this country and all. He needs at least a home to do that, to have something to protect in the first place.
And why the need to have all the salary ceilings with all the idiotic definitions? Count this don’t count that, commission counted, bonuses not counted. I have heard of cases when on study leave with no pay but a subsistence allowance for several years, HDB still insists on including the pay as the income. Technically, two incomes of $5k will be $10k. When one is on study leave without pay but a small subsistence allowance for several years, the income is really $5k plus the subsistence allowance which will not even touch $8k. But applicant disqualified.
Putting aside the issue of not building enough flats, all young couples need a flat to start their lives. For one reason or another, some delayed in getting married for many years and ended up in a situation when their incomes will exceed whatever ceiling is in place. Some joker blames the young for not planning their marriage and applying for a flat early. This is the most idiotic reasoning coming from the super talents. Not everyone can plan their marriages like planning to have breakfast.
If it is possible that every young couple can get hitched at 25 or the first few years on coming into the job market, then all the ceilings will no longer apply. It is only when they could not get hitch in time that this silly ruling will come in to affect their chances. And because of the unwillingness to build to meet the demands, many could not get their flats in time and by the time they were awarded one, their incomes could exceed the ceiling and be disqualified as well.
Back to my main point, the govt must build enough flats for all first timers regardless of their income level. This is a basic and primary need to start a family, to start a life. Failing to do this is a failure on the govt’s part to provide for the people. There could be some rules to keep public housing from being abused, like owners of private properties. Other than some major exclusions, all citizens must be entitled to buy their first flats and income should not be a determinant of their eligibility or the types of flats they can or cannot buy.
The govt’s key responsibility is to house its citizens. How much the citizens want to pay, what type of flats they need should be left to the discretion of the people. Maybe qualification against those who wants to buy beyond their means. Definitely not to force anyone to buy beyond their means.
Housing needs not be such a pain if the govt just build and this will remove all the frustrations that the people are facing because of the flawed assumptions in the housing policies. Or is this a sacred cow that cannot be slewed?
And many daft Singaporeans are arguing and pulling their hair over why this and why that, why not a bit more or a bit less? They forgot that the whole policy is flawed from its first premise. It was designed on the assumption that they cannot build enough flats for every citizen and therefore have to ration the flats, subsidised the lower income, and not allowing the higher income to buy public flats or compete with the lower income. This is the biggest bull and the biggest myth.
If the premise is that housing is a basic need and everyone needs a roof over his head, and it is the govt’s responsibility to provide this need, then all the silly rules and regulations will become irrelevant instantly.
Hsien Loong is asking the people to give suggestions, to change govt policies that are no longer relevant, or even stupid, then the housing policy is one that need to be buried and forgotten, and get a fresh new start.
Public housing is for the people, regardless of income level, just like NS is for every citizen regardless of his status or background. An NS man, rich or poor, pledges to defend this country and all. He needs at least a home to do that, to have something to protect in the first place.
And why the need to have all the salary ceilings with all the idiotic definitions? Count this don’t count that, commission counted, bonuses not counted. I have heard of cases when on study leave with no pay but a subsistence allowance for several years, HDB still insists on including the pay as the income. Technically, two incomes of $5k will be $10k. When one is on study leave without pay but a small subsistence allowance for several years, the income is really $5k plus the subsistence allowance which will not even touch $8k. But applicant disqualified.
Putting aside the issue of not building enough flats, all young couples need a flat to start their lives. For one reason or another, some delayed in getting married for many years and ended up in a situation when their incomes will exceed whatever ceiling is in place. Some joker blames the young for not planning their marriage and applying for a flat early. This is the most idiotic reasoning coming from the super talents. Not everyone can plan their marriages like planning to have breakfast.
If it is possible that every young couple can get hitched at 25 or the first few years on coming into the job market, then all the ceilings will no longer apply. It is only when they could not get hitch in time that this silly ruling will come in to affect their chances. And because of the unwillingness to build to meet the demands, many could not get their flats in time and by the time they were awarded one, their incomes could exceed the ceiling and be disqualified as well.
Back to my main point, the govt must build enough flats for all first timers regardless of their income level. This is a basic and primary need to start a family, to start a life. Failing to do this is a failure on the govt’s part to provide for the people. There could be some rules to keep public housing from being abused, like owners of private properties. Other than some major exclusions, all citizens must be entitled to buy their first flats and income should not be a determinant of their eligibility or the types of flats they can or cannot buy.
The govt’s key responsibility is to house its citizens. How much the citizens want to pay, what type of flats they need should be left to the discretion of the people. Maybe qualification against those who wants to buy beyond their means. Definitely not to force anyone to buy beyond their means.
Housing needs not be such a pain if the govt just build and this will remove all the frustrations that the people are facing because of the flawed assumptions in the housing policies. Or is this a sacred cow that cannot be slewed?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)