How serious is the problem of fake degrees?

There are more than half a million PRs in the island plus many that have taken up citizenship. Assuming half of the PRs are FTs, ie professionals that are the equivalent of our PMETs, it means that there are easily 250k of them working here.

There have been complaints or rumours that are many FTs are here on fake degrees, unqualified or half qualified. There is no official statistics so far on the size of this problem and no one really knows how serious is this problem. What are the implications to the country if 10% of the FT qualifications are fakes? This does not take into account that many came from educational institutions where the quality/standard of education is sub par or even suspect.

The most obvious and painful problem is for such FTs to be employed at the expense of Sinkies, taking away Sinkies’ jobs. And many fakes could be the superiors of the Sinkies. And they are going to be paid more, to determine the fate of Sinkies and the performance of the organizations. Depending on the industries they are in, any mistake can be very serious and costly or deadly, eg in construction of buildings, housing and infrastructure, in medicine, in engineering, in food technology and science.

While this problem is festering and only passed around as rumours, not many seem to have surfaced and the cheats taken to task. Maybe it is all simply rumours and there is not much truth in it as the statistics said so. Maybe the numbers of offenders are not disclosed thus no one is panicking. Not seen, not heard, thus no problems.

How can such problems be tackled both at the organization and industry level and at the national level? Are there organizations that can check and verify the qualifications of FTs to minimize the problem, to give justice to Sinkies and the professions that hired them and the end products or services they rendered?

Temasek could end up as the biggest shareholder of Olam

Temasek owns 16.3% of Olam while Kewalram owns 20%. How is Temasek represented in the Olam Board and how much influence does it have with such a big share of the company relative to Kewalram? And Temasek could easily be the biggest shareholder of Olam after the bond issue. Kewalram, the mother company of Olam has said that it would take up its full entitlement of the bond/warrant issues. Temasek would take up its entitlement too, but also mop up everything that is not taken up by the market.

Kewalram would have to put up US$150m for the stake while Temasek’s stake is $120m. The whole issue is reportedly worth $1.25b. Theoretically it is possible for the balance, other than Kewalram’s stake, to fall onto Temasek’s lap or $1b worth of bond and warrants. That would be as good as Temasek owning anything more than Kewalram’s 20% stake. Shouldn’t this be a great opportunity for a cheap takeover of Olam and later sell it for a big profit? If it chooses to keep the company as a going concern, it can than appoint some Sinkies to manage the company as a private company. No need to privatise to be efficient and profitable.

The Sandy Hook School tragedy

The children died, shot many times by a young man with an assault rifle. The teachers also died, some bravely trying to save the children. The parents cried. The siblings and friends cried. The Americans in Newtown, Connecticut will never forget this dreadful day in their whole lives. Many dreams and happy relationships were savagely shattered in the most wicked way one can ever think of.

Could this tragedy be avoided? Could all the macho men who fought stubbornly to keep the rights to own firearms sleep well after Dec 14, 2012? The old wild, wild west of American history was a time of violence when law and order was difficult to maintain. Not that it is easier today, but when continuing with gun ownership the toll or tragedy could be that much more serious and widespread, is it time to rethink? Would Clint Eastwood still be the man that would shoot first and talk later still be role model of American manhood?

This is the sick ethos of the American society, that owning guns is a very respectable thing, the right to self defence, to face an aggressor squarely on the face and to an honourable face off. And shooting or going to war is an acceptable way to settle disputes.

In the wrong hands, the guns are very deadly and would show no mercy. Ask the Arabs in the Middle East, this sick American trigger happy behaviour had inflicted pains many times more than in Sandy Hook School, in bigger scale and with hundreds of thousands of unfortunate victims, young and old. And the children died, the innocents died, the olds died, and their families wept. Their cries of pain were never told in the American or western media. No one know or would understand, or would want to know or understand the pains the Americans are inflicting on the people of other countries, all because the Americans carry guns, big guns, very powerful guns, that the victims have no reply.

Would gun ownership be banned after this incident, or after many more similar ugly incidents that are going to happen, and many more children and teachers would have to die, and many parents and loved ones weeping their hearts out? Would the act of war, the belligerent policies of the Americans, be put to a stop for a world that is less violent, an American society that is safer for the children and the helpless at the mercy of crazy gunmen and crazy American politicians and soldiers?

Last week there was a lone man firing at kids. Tomorrow a crazy American Admiral could seize control of his fleet and fire at any country at his whims and fancy, drugged or insane, it is a hell that can break lose.

Laura Ong – The people are angry

In all my postings, one of my key principles is to avoid tarnishing anyone personally, and the least for indiscretion in their private lives. I avoided writing too much about the high profile X rated cases in the courts. I also schemed through briefly about the indiscretions of the two MPs except making some factual reports that were already in the media.

Many people have taken high moral grounds to dismiss these people in all manners and descriptions. Some had done it to score points, some with an agenda. Even the public had a great time humiliating, sneering and laughing at the people involved, as if they were all saints and angels. They were not merely giggling at the victims but enjoying every bit of it. You can see them and hear them everywhere.

I reluctantly dragged myself into this sordid affair as some called it, or more politely, improper conduct for one reason. The people are angry at the diatribes thrown at Laura Ong. It seems that it is all her fault, that she is the troublemaker, the bad one, and the other party is wholesome goodness and honourable.

How could people be so wrong and unjust to one party of an indiscretion between two consenting adults? How could one be dragged across the public square wearing a conical hat and another praised as good and respectable, full of integrity and full of sympathy and forgiveness?

I am not going to say too much about this. The commentaries in the media are more sordid than the affair itself, and the people berating them are worst. I am very proud of the bloggers in this blog who have not indulged in the same manner as the ruthless and unspeakable. Let the one who have not sinned be the first to cast the stone.

China’s stock markets are safe

While many countries have adopted the American model of financial system and stock market operations, China is still very conservative and guarded. It is very careful in how its stock markets and financial systems are operating and opening up gradually without exposing them to the high risks of American model markets.

Among the key features are no derivative tradings, no hedge funds, no computer or high frequency tradings. It even restricts the amount foreign funds are allowed to invest in Chinese stock markets. And it carefully chooses the type of foreign funds to invest in its markets, and preference is given to sovereign wealth funds and pension funds but NOT to hedge funds. Some may think that this will restrict its growth and the liquidity in its markets. But China is not the least worry and not in a hurry. It is not blindly greedy for foreign funds and willingly opening its legs widely to be screwed, or allowed the foreign funds a free hand to run circus and exploit/rob the innocent investors of their hard earned money. It must know that the foreign funds, particularly the hedge funds and computer/HFT operators are not there to do charity but to make money, plenty of money, to take advantage of the system, with no qualms or worries about ethics and moral goodness or the well being of the investors and the stock market.

The funds that are permitted to invest in Chinese markets are Qatar Investment Authority, Temasek Holdings, GIC, Norway’s Norges Bank and Abu Dhabi Investment Authority. Even then, the amount they could invest in China is restricted to about US$1b each. Qatar has a limit of US$5b. China is looking for long term investors and not speculators and gamblers and would not allow big funds to create havoc by controlling the market with their large war chests.

Some may be sneering that the Chinese markets are unsophisticated and will not grow at the speed of western modelled markets, but what is likely to happen is that the Chinese markets would still be around when the western modelled markets failed as a result of its casino nature, fraudulent systems and products. China must be very prudent and not to be conned by the big funds and their criminal practices like computer trading, HFT and derivatives to destroy its markets.

The days of western modelled markets are numbered and will fail disastrously.