This is the latest initiative from the city state that has yet to become a country. It is most appropriate and complementary to have a city giving out a city prize. This prize would eventually be as famous as the Nobel Peace Prize for recognizing talented people across the world for their contribution in city management. It would put the city state in the world map of recognizable names and another first for the city.
This is the kind of initiative and creativity that this city needs, not paying money to change a name and then have a change a mind and change back to the original name. Money must be well spent.
The famous Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, is in the city to receive the honour on behalf of New York City, or is it on behalf of himself. The publicity value to have Bloomberg here, and got printed all over American and other international papers is really worth it.
Below is a quote from the official website of the LKY World City Prize.
‘The Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize is a biennial international award that honours outstanding contributions towards the creation of vibrant, liveable and sustainable urban communities around the world. It recognises individuals and organisations responsible for urban initiatives that display foresight, good governance or innovation in tackling the many urban challenges faced by cities. …
The Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize Laureate will be presented with an award certificate, a gold medallion and a cash prize of S$300,000, sponsored by Keppel Corporation.’
Now which other third world country aspiring to be first world would want to create another prize in a similar vein? It is not easy to copy the act though. First they need to be first world and have the personality to lift the prize in high honour so that recipients will feel honoured to be honoured.
3/23/2012
North Korea is going to send a satellite to space
This kind of message used to be great news, great achievement, jubilation. It is a big leap forward for any country to achieve such a feat. The North Koreans should be praised for this ability. Asians should stand up and say Asians can.
What we are seeing are a few gangster nations accusing the North Koreans that it is testing its missile capability and the next stage will be to attack them and the world with nuclear weapons. Are these countries sick or mad? The number One sick nation, is the US, the country that is conducting wars everywhere. The number Two sick nation is Japan, the one that colonized and brutalized the Koreans and other Asian countries. We remember! The number Three sick nation is South Korea, conducting provocative military exercises with the US almost daily at the North Korean’s border, and of course the lackeys like the UK, Australia and some other countries.
Is there any other Asian country that thinks the North Koreans are planning to nuke it? I can think of one that will believe anything the Empire said. Would all the Asean countries stand up in horror and fear, and shout, down with North Korea? The North Koreans are planning to invade South East Asia.
Creepy isn’t it? Why can’t another country develop its rocket technology, send its own satellite to space, or send its own men to space? Why some war mongering countries are allowed to do that and point the fingers at countries that have never invaded another country?
The North Koreans are dangerous. They are planning to conquer the world like the Germans and the Japanese and the Americans. Ha ha ha. How believeable? The joke is on the unthinking believers. What has North Korea’s launching of its satellite got to do with the world? Oh, after this they are going to play a new computer game called Fireworks. They are going to light up the world for fun.
Quick, quick, duck, hide in the bomb shelter. The North Koreans are going to rain their bombs on us. For what?
What we are seeing are a few gangster nations accusing the North Koreans that it is testing its missile capability and the next stage will be to attack them and the world with nuclear weapons. Are these countries sick or mad? The number One sick nation, is the US, the country that is conducting wars everywhere. The number Two sick nation is Japan, the one that colonized and brutalized the Koreans and other Asian countries. We remember! The number Three sick nation is South Korea, conducting provocative military exercises with the US almost daily at the North Korean’s border, and of course the lackeys like the UK, Australia and some other countries.
Is there any other Asian country that thinks the North Koreans are planning to nuke it? I can think of one that will believe anything the Empire said. Would all the Asean countries stand up in horror and fear, and shout, down with North Korea? The North Koreans are planning to invade South East Asia.
Creepy isn’t it? Why can’t another country develop its rocket technology, send its own satellite to space, or send its own men to space? Why some war mongering countries are allowed to do that and point the fingers at countries that have never invaded another country?
The North Koreans are dangerous. They are planning to conquer the world like the Germans and the Japanese and the Americans. Ha ha ha. How believeable? The joke is on the unthinking believers. What has North Korea’s launching of its satellite got to do with the world? Oh, after this they are going to play a new computer game called Fireworks. They are going to light up the world for fun.
Quick, quick, duck, hide in the bomb shelter. The North Koreans are going to rain their bombs on us. For what?
Money is not an issue
There is an article by a Gordon Lee on his recommendations to improve the public transport system. His title is ‘Why fares should double and other ideas for a better transport system’. He also made a comment, ‘As many people noted, the main issue that commuters have with public transport is not price, but levels of service. Nevertheless, I will propose ways to keep public transport affordable.’ Okay, I think he thinks differently from many people, and price is important. I just don’t like it when he used the word affordable. Affordable is a four letter word. Affordable to A may not be affordable to B and C.
If he sticks to his title, then fares should be double and many problems will be solved. That I agree. More problems will be solved if fares is tripled or quadruple. Everyone or many people are only interested in the quality of service.
Sinkies are mostly cash rich if one is to read the front page headline of the Today paper yesterday. COEs of big cars hit or nearing the highs of 1994 when the stock market was having the once in 50 years bull run. Actually it was more a once in a life time bull run as the confluence of all the favourable factors is unlikely to be repeated.
COEs of big cars, ie 2000cc and above and the Open category went pass the $80,000 mark. And COE is only a certificate of entitlement to buy a car. This amount is more than enough to buy several cars in other first world countries. Here, you need to cough out another $100k or more before one can buy a 2000cc car. The COE for cars below 1,600cc is $56,000.
Singaporeans are stuffed with cash, cash rich. Big cars are really affordable, more affordable than smaller cars. When the alternative to own and drive around in private cars is so cheap, the price of public transport is definitely a steal and people can afford to pay more. I think many people would not mind paying $6 to $10 daily for public transport when ERP charges could be more than that to drive a car. And taxi fares are now getting nearer to London and New York, but still very cheap. This could be good reason for the cab companies to think of raising fares more often. Just do it every six months or a year and people will get use to it.
They can learn from the pricing of public flats, from $7,000 in the late 60s for a 3 rm flat to $300,000 today. Overtime people will get use to it and would not mind paying more and more.
Everything is still relative cheap to cash rich Singaporeans. And everything is affordable.
If he sticks to his title, then fares should be double and many problems will be solved. That I agree. More problems will be solved if fares is tripled or quadruple. Everyone or many people are only interested in the quality of service.
Sinkies are mostly cash rich if one is to read the front page headline of the Today paper yesterday. COEs of big cars hit or nearing the highs of 1994 when the stock market was having the once in 50 years bull run. Actually it was more a once in a life time bull run as the confluence of all the favourable factors is unlikely to be repeated.
COEs of big cars, ie 2000cc and above and the Open category went pass the $80,000 mark. And COE is only a certificate of entitlement to buy a car. This amount is more than enough to buy several cars in other first world countries. Here, you need to cough out another $100k or more before one can buy a 2000cc car. The COE for cars below 1,600cc is $56,000.
Singaporeans are stuffed with cash, cash rich. Big cars are really affordable, more affordable than smaller cars. When the alternative to own and drive around in private cars is so cheap, the price of public transport is definitely a steal and people can afford to pay more. I think many people would not mind paying $6 to $10 daily for public transport when ERP charges could be more than that to drive a car. And taxi fares are now getting nearer to London and New York, but still very cheap. This could be good reason for the cab companies to think of raising fares more often. Just do it every six months or a year and people will get use to it.
They can learn from the pricing of public flats, from $7,000 in the late 60s for a 3 rm flat to $300,000 today. Overtime people will get use to it and would not mind paying more and more.
Everything is still relative cheap to cash rich Singaporeans. And everything is affordable.
3/22/2012
Child snatching is here
PRC couple attempts to abduct local children in Ang Mo Kio Hub
inSing.com, 21 Mar 2012
A woman has complained on the internet that a Chinese national couple tried to abduct her child at Ang Mo Kio Hub.
Ms 'Allison Goon' shared her experience on her Facebook page, explaining that she was at the AMK Hub Fiesta on Sunday (18 Mar).
She had just fed her son and walked away to throw some rubbish when she turned back and found another woman taking her son away by his hand.
She shouted after her son and asked the woman why she was holding her son's hand.
The woman, who spoke with a China accent, replied that she had "the wrong child", then walked away with another man while pretending that nothing had happened.
All Singaporeans must raise this alarm to alert the daft to be more aware of the dangers around them. Child snatching is common in China and it is coming. Be aware and be very careful with your children. The public and the police must be more alert to prevent such incidents from happening.
Spread the word around. Better be safe than be sorry.
inSing.com, 21 Mar 2012
A woman has complained on the internet that a Chinese national couple tried to abduct her child at Ang Mo Kio Hub.
Ms 'Allison Goon' shared her experience on her Facebook page, explaining that she was at the AMK Hub Fiesta on Sunday (18 Mar).
She had just fed her son and walked away to throw some rubbish when she turned back and found another woman taking her son away by his hand.
She shouted after her son and asked the woman why she was holding her son's hand.
The woman, who spoke with a China accent, replied that she had "the wrong child", then walked away with another man while pretending that nothing had happened.
All Singaporeans must raise this alarm to alert the daft to be more aware of the dangers around them. Child snatching is common in China and it is coming. Be aware and be very careful with your children. The public and the police must be more alert to prevent such incidents from happening.
Spread the word around. Better be safe than be sorry.
Complicated or dangerous products
A Loke Siew Keong had written to the ST forum raising her concerns at the new requirement from MAS for remisiers and futures brokers to take and pass a Capital Markets and Financial Advisory Services Module 6A. The complexities of financial products especially derivatives and ‘other embedded terms and features’ are difficult to understand by retail investors and even financial advisers, including remisiers and future brokers. The problems do not lie in just understanding the products and derivatives but the high risk involved in wrongfully selling such products to clients who did not know what they were into. Serious consequences can result like the Lehman Bond and toxic notes incidents.
Attending and passing the module is one thing, understanding the complex products and risk is another on the part of the advisor and the buyer. Many of these high risks and complex products are simply not suitable to the ordinary retail investors and should not even be in the market.
The main issues thus is for the authority to first identify the risks of the products and their suitability for the local investors, retail or sophisticate investors. The latter can be further divided into highly intelligent or highly stupid investors but both are highly qualified to trade in such products as they are considered highly sophisticated. Goldman Sach and other big funds have plenty of such investors. And also they have highly trained and highly sophisticated advisors who specialized in such products.
It is necessary and simply being responsible to set these highly risky products aside and tagged them with warning labels like those on cigarettes, that they are not suitable for consumption by the ordinary guys. Only good for the sophisticated investors.
The second part is to allow the remisiers and future brokers to choose if they want to be in the party to advise and sell such high risk products. Many responsible remisiers and future brokers know how risky, treacherous and flawed are such products that they would not want to touch them with a thousand metre pole. They must be given the option to stay away from such dangerous products and need not try to be clever to pass an exam that would even floor CPA trained graduates. And passing a module is not going to make them any wiser.
There are many skill levels and professional training required to handle more difficult products and procedures in various profession. And those who are not up to it or who choose not to engage in dangerous games are only exercising their right and moral responsibility not to get involved or get their clients involved. They cannot be forced to take poison. It should be voluntary. Let the brave and clever take the plunge.
The best alternative is for them to go through an appreciation course if understanding of the financial market is important, without examination, unless they want to deal with such products. There are things that are good to know but not to be consumed. And the authority has to clearly redefine what is dangerous and what is not dangerous and not simply lump them together in one basket.
Many overseas products listed in foreign markets like stocks and shares are not dangerous, or at least the blue chips. As we open up our investors to the world, we are exposing them to more risks and uncertainties. The right to say no to high risks and complex products must lie not only with the investors but also the remisiers and future traders.
The whole concept of the requirement to pass Module 6A and the introduction of high risk products must be rethink through carefully. Many people do not have the appetite and the intellect to play with unknown dangers. Who is responsible to protect the ordinary investors from being exposed to poison and snake oil if they are not filtered out at the first pass? Is it a responsible thing to do to allow dangerous and high risk products into the market? Shall we sell poison by educating the buyers and sellers that it is poison and claim it is their fault if they are hurt?
Attending and passing the module is one thing, understanding the complex products and risk is another on the part of the advisor and the buyer. Many of these high risks and complex products are simply not suitable to the ordinary retail investors and should not even be in the market.
The main issues thus is for the authority to first identify the risks of the products and their suitability for the local investors, retail or sophisticate investors. The latter can be further divided into highly intelligent or highly stupid investors but both are highly qualified to trade in such products as they are considered highly sophisticated. Goldman Sach and other big funds have plenty of such investors. And also they have highly trained and highly sophisticated advisors who specialized in such products.
It is necessary and simply being responsible to set these highly risky products aside and tagged them with warning labels like those on cigarettes, that they are not suitable for consumption by the ordinary guys. Only good for the sophisticated investors.
The second part is to allow the remisiers and future brokers to choose if they want to be in the party to advise and sell such high risk products. Many responsible remisiers and future brokers know how risky, treacherous and flawed are such products that they would not want to touch them with a thousand metre pole. They must be given the option to stay away from such dangerous products and need not try to be clever to pass an exam that would even floor CPA trained graduates. And passing a module is not going to make them any wiser.
There are many skill levels and professional training required to handle more difficult products and procedures in various profession. And those who are not up to it or who choose not to engage in dangerous games are only exercising their right and moral responsibility not to get involved or get their clients involved. They cannot be forced to take poison. It should be voluntary. Let the brave and clever take the plunge.
The best alternative is for them to go through an appreciation course if understanding of the financial market is important, without examination, unless they want to deal with such products. There are things that are good to know but not to be consumed. And the authority has to clearly redefine what is dangerous and what is not dangerous and not simply lump them together in one basket.
Many overseas products listed in foreign markets like stocks and shares are not dangerous, or at least the blue chips. As we open up our investors to the world, we are exposing them to more risks and uncertainties. The right to say no to high risks and complex products must lie not only with the investors but also the remisiers and future traders.
The whole concept of the requirement to pass Module 6A and the introduction of high risk products must be rethink through carefully. Many people do not have the appetite and the intellect to play with unknown dangers. Who is responsible to protect the ordinary investors from being exposed to poison and snake oil if they are not filtered out at the first pass? Is it a responsible thing to do to allow dangerous and high risk products into the market? Shall we sell poison by educating the buyers and sellers that it is poison and claim it is their fault if they are hurt?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)