Ross Ashcroft said this in his documentary called The Four Horsemen,
‘When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together
in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal
system that authorises it and a moral code that glorifies it’.
Some of you may miss the significance of this statement on the state of
decadence. It is a truism that transcends time, society, culture and
ideology. Remember what happened to the Animal Farm in the final
chapters? I had a rude reminder of this kind of mindset last night over
Channel News Asia in the programme SG+ hosted by Melanie Oliveiro. It
was all about the idealism of a young socialist and the thinking of a
decadent establishment. The topic was about the widening income gap
between the rich and poor and the standard replies of the decadent mind
to brush aside the youthful ideas of socialism.
Every misgiving was quickly brushed away by shallow excuses. The points
that the income gap should be closed and the rich taxed more were
casually rebutted by well rehearsed replies of a new moral code. The
growing income gap is a normal thing in capitalism, must be accepted and
nothing should be done to curb it. We must not kill the initiative and
entrepreneurial spirit of the rich. Let them grow richer. We don’t want
to be all poorer like in communism.
Did anyone suggest to kill their entrepreneurial skill? Did anyone want
to tax them to run away? Did anyone want everyone to be poor communist?
Actually this is an outdated mindset. You need to be communist to be
rich. The new rich are the communist. Ask the comrades visiting the
shopping paradise of the world’s fashion capitals and they will tell you
they are communist. The capitalists are living in debt except for the
super rich.
We can help the poor by education and a level playing field. We should
not bring back estate duties. There is nothing wrong with the rich
passing their wealth to their children. We will help the poor to be
rich, would that not be better? Why rob the rich to give it to the poor?
The polite socialist corrected this by saying, no, it is not so silly
to just take from the rich to give to the poor. Why make such a silly
argument like daft children? The taxes could, yes, go to help the poor
in education and assistance schemes to make them help themselves.
There are rich not because they were entrepreneurial and investing in
industries and taking big risk. There are many that turned rich by
collecting salaries and passive incomes for doing nothing or doing very
little. But this part must not be spoken. The new moral code is to
facilitate some people to get rich by association without much
contribution, or just by bullshiting.
And everything is legally right, supported by a new legal system. The
Americans went much further by allowing the banks to gamble their
clients’ money or gamble against their clients, totally legal. Their
laws have been changed and new laws passed to allow such crimes to
become not crimes. Their stock exchanges were supposed to operate under a
fair system and a level playing field but no more. The unfairness and
unlevel playing field were not spoken, nobody wants to know or talk
about it. When crimes are no longer crimes, the decadence has reached
its peak.
It is only a matter of time when the system is brought down on its knee
and the perpetrators be put behind bars. A new social moral code and
legal system that are more equitable would be brought in to replace the
decadence legal system and moral code the rich elite have created for
themselves, to protect their vested interests.
You guys should watch the repeat broadcast of this programme these few
days or view it at CNA’s archive to know what I mean. It is a classic
production. The rich elite will justify their wealth and their robbery
by false and shallow pretences, sophistry that only they believe in.
3/06/2014
Open letter to MAS's Consultation Paper
Below is my letter to MAS in response to their open call for feedback from stakeholders in the stock broking industry.
PM Lee Hsien Loong
DPM/Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam
The MD MAS R Menon
CEO SGX Magnus Bocker
5 Mar 14
The Stock Market is NOT fine. It is no longer a level playing field and has been redesigned for unfair trading in favour of computer trading. (This two line statement is a summary of this paper)
This is an open letter to the above gentlemen and will also be posted in my blog, www.mysingaporenews.blogspot.sg/.
The Stock Market is not fine contrary to what was stated in the discussion paper issued jointly by the MAS and SGX. The condition of the stock market is dire, in a state of denial and slipping into a coma. Yes, the trading volume gives an impression that it is healthy and active. The revenue and profit of the SGX suggested that all is fine and presumably the market will continue to function in this manner for a long time to come, with the SGX chalking up good revenue and profit as it gets along. It is NOT. There are hardly any retail traders in the market. Why?
The Stock Market is not only the SGX. It has other players and stakeholders. And all is not fine except for the SGX and the computer traders. Some of the front line soldiers, the remisiers, are earning less than what a cleaner or security guard is getting. Younger remisiers have already left the industry or seeking employment. Only those that could not find alternative employment are sticking it out and waiting for the broking houses to ask them to leave.
The retail traders have fled from the market.
With this pathetic level of commission, the broking houses too would not be able to sustain their operations at the current scale and would soon have to downsize and retrench staff. The supporting staff will have to go and overhead cuts. Some may want to get out of the business too.
For companies listing in the SGX, soon they will realise that it is a waste of time when the value of their shares are near to worthless. It is a joke that the prices of stocks in the main board of a regional financial centre with big ambition can be less than 5 cents or even worse, less than 1 cent. And this is not an exception.
What is happening to the Stock Market? What are the causes that led to this dismal state of affair? Some stakeholders will still swear that it is fine. They will not want to see the elephant in the class room. What is that?
The culprit that is causing the demise of the Stock Market is not contra trading as they would want you to believe. Excessive contra trading and speculations need to be moderated but not to be wiped out. They are the soul and spirit of a small market. Without contra trading and speculations you will have a market the size of a pea.
The Stock Market today is not the traditional stock market that we knew before. All the principles and fundamentals of a traditional stock market have been violated and cast away. The Stock Market we have today is nothing but a casino in disguise but without the strict regime, regulations and controls of a casino.
The SGX has been reorganised and redesigned to allow computer traders using high speed sophisticated computer systems to trade against unsophisticated investors or even big funds still trading on fundamentals and believing that they are investing in the long term. Rules and processes have been changed to facilitate computer trading to be more effective and efficient, taking full advantage of computer power, time and speed, and financial resources to cream the market, to trade against investors without the benefits of these computers. Continuous trading with no lunch breaks, small board lot size, minimum bid size, script borrowing, keying in of short positions, etc etc were all created to favour computer trading against other traders.
High speed computers of computer traders are plugged into the SGX system to have access to information of other traders and their positions and simply trading against them with no regards to the fundamentals of the stocks. Computers trade for profit by buying and selling against the rest of the investors, often depressing prices of stocks against their real values. They have cleaned up the traders, big and small, and not many are left with money to lose.
Put it simply, computer trading is unfair trading, unfair advantage. It violates all the fundamentals, principles and regulations of the SGX to provide a level playing field and fair trading to all the players. How could this be allowed by the SGX? This is criminal.
I am not making any suggestion or recommendation as to how to save the Stock Market. The solutions are obvious but no one wants to see or do the right thing. The invitation for the public, the uncles and aunties for their recommendations to improve market activities, but creating an unfair and uneven playing field, reflects two things. One, they do not see anything wrong with the current system. Two, they are not serious.
The problems in the industry and the Stock Market are very serious and highly technical. You need experts and professionals who can understand what is happening and the complexities of the market mechanism to know what is wrong and what are needed to put things right.
If you get the picture, and see the problem and want to do something about it, it is best to set up a COI of experts who not only know what they are doing but have the heft and confidence to change what really need to be changed. You would need people like Paul Volcker or some real foreign talents who are critics of the existing flawed stock market system to tell the truth about the unfairness of the system. The advocates of the system will not volunteer to tell you what is wrong with the market and the system. They will say it is fine. This is how far I am prepared to comment.
For a ‘nobody’ to make suggestions is not only rude but a waste of time when the believers and converts of the current system could simply throw the paper into the waste bin. You need a COI of professionals to make real changes, failing which you can wait to bury the Stock Market in a year to two.
If you have bothered to read this far, there is some hope that the stock market industry can be saved. And I thank you for your patience and trouble to hear me out.
Thank you.
Kopi level - Green
PM Lee Hsien Loong
DPM/Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam
The MD MAS R Menon
CEO SGX Magnus Bocker
5 Mar 14
The Stock Market is NOT fine. It is no longer a level playing field and has been redesigned for unfair trading in favour of computer trading. (This two line statement is a summary of this paper)
This is an open letter to the above gentlemen and will also be posted in my blog, www.mysingaporenews.blogspot.sg/.
The Stock Market is not fine contrary to what was stated in the discussion paper issued jointly by the MAS and SGX. The condition of the stock market is dire, in a state of denial and slipping into a coma. Yes, the trading volume gives an impression that it is healthy and active. The revenue and profit of the SGX suggested that all is fine and presumably the market will continue to function in this manner for a long time to come, with the SGX chalking up good revenue and profit as it gets along. It is NOT. There are hardly any retail traders in the market. Why?
The Stock Market is not only the SGX. It has other players and stakeholders. And all is not fine except for the SGX and the computer traders. Some of the front line soldiers, the remisiers, are earning less than what a cleaner or security guard is getting. Younger remisiers have already left the industry or seeking employment. Only those that could not find alternative employment are sticking it out and waiting for the broking houses to ask them to leave.
The retail traders have fled from the market.
With this pathetic level of commission, the broking houses too would not be able to sustain their operations at the current scale and would soon have to downsize and retrench staff. The supporting staff will have to go and overhead cuts. Some may want to get out of the business too.
For companies listing in the SGX, soon they will realise that it is a waste of time when the value of their shares are near to worthless. It is a joke that the prices of stocks in the main board of a regional financial centre with big ambition can be less than 5 cents or even worse, less than 1 cent. And this is not an exception.
What is happening to the Stock Market? What are the causes that led to this dismal state of affair? Some stakeholders will still swear that it is fine. They will not want to see the elephant in the class room. What is that?
The culprit that is causing the demise of the Stock Market is not contra trading as they would want you to believe. Excessive contra trading and speculations need to be moderated but not to be wiped out. They are the soul and spirit of a small market. Without contra trading and speculations you will have a market the size of a pea.
The Stock Market today is not the traditional stock market that we knew before. All the principles and fundamentals of a traditional stock market have been violated and cast away. The Stock Market we have today is nothing but a casino in disguise but without the strict regime, regulations and controls of a casino.
The SGX has been reorganised and redesigned to allow computer traders using high speed sophisticated computer systems to trade against unsophisticated investors or even big funds still trading on fundamentals and believing that they are investing in the long term. Rules and processes have been changed to facilitate computer trading to be more effective and efficient, taking full advantage of computer power, time and speed, and financial resources to cream the market, to trade against investors without the benefits of these computers. Continuous trading with no lunch breaks, small board lot size, minimum bid size, script borrowing, keying in of short positions, etc etc were all created to favour computer trading against other traders.
High speed computers of computer traders are plugged into the SGX system to have access to information of other traders and their positions and simply trading against them with no regards to the fundamentals of the stocks. Computers trade for profit by buying and selling against the rest of the investors, often depressing prices of stocks against their real values. They have cleaned up the traders, big and small, and not many are left with money to lose.
Put it simply, computer trading is unfair trading, unfair advantage. It violates all the fundamentals, principles and regulations of the SGX to provide a level playing field and fair trading to all the players. How could this be allowed by the SGX? This is criminal.
I am not making any suggestion or recommendation as to how to save the Stock Market. The solutions are obvious but no one wants to see or do the right thing. The invitation for the public, the uncles and aunties for their recommendations to improve market activities, but creating an unfair and uneven playing field, reflects two things. One, they do not see anything wrong with the current system. Two, they are not serious.
The problems in the industry and the Stock Market are very serious and highly technical. You need experts and professionals who can understand what is happening and the complexities of the market mechanism to know what is wrong and what are needed to put things right.
If you get the picture, and see the problem and want to do something about it, it is best to set up a COI of experts who not only know what they are doing but have the heft and confidence to change what really need to be changed. You would need people like Paul Volcker or some real foreign talents who are critics of the existing flawed stock market system to tell the truth about the unfairness of the system. The advocates of the system will not volunteer to tell you what is wrong with the market and the system. They will say it is fine. This is how far I am prepared to comment.
For a ‘nobody’ to make suggestions is not only rude but a waste of time when the believers and converts of the current system could simply throw the paper into the waste bin. You need a COI of professionals to make real changes, failing which you can wait to bury the Stock Market in a year to two.
If you have bothered to read this far, there is some hope that the stock market industry can be saved. And I thank you for your patience and trouble to hear me out.
Thank you.
Kopi level - Green
3/05/2014
Why Russia invades Ukraine?
The ouster of pro Russian Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was
unacceptable to Putin. He cannot accept the loss of another pro Russian
state to the hands of the USA. Putin needed a good excuse to move in to
keep Ukraine under the sphere of Russia.
His excuse was simply to protect the ethnic Russians in Ukraine, comprising 50% of Ukraine’s population. This may or may not be a legitimate reason but a good enough reason for a powerful state to use as an excuse to invade another nation.
We have a large foreign population among us, all in hundreds of thousands from the PRC Chinese, India Indians, Malaysians, Indonesians and the Pinoys from the trigger happy and most powerful Asean country, the Philippines. Any of these countries, if powerful enough, could use the excuse of protecting their citizens here to invade us.
We are lucky that this would not happen. Not that they cannot find an excuse. We have the most powerful military force in the region and we can take on anyone. And we also have the backing of the Number One superpower, the USA behind us. So we are safe as long as the Americans don’t have a reason to want to invade us. Anyway, they are already here, so there is really no need to do so.
The only time when we have to worry about the Americans is when we become too close to China or Russia. Then the Americans could use the same excuse, to protect their citizens and also their investments here to invade us.
In the game of big power politics, we can become a pawn to any of them. The current geopolitical equation may make some think that an invasion is very unlikely, just like the invasion by the Japanese from Northeast Asia, so far away, and not really that powerful compares to the big powers today.
We are very safe, even with so many foreign nationalities living here. Our presumption is that it is exactly because they are here that their countries will not invade and destroy their investments here. Makes sense right? No? It gives them more reasons to covet the island, a prime asset without anyone interested in wanting ownership. In fact it seems that the owners are so willing to share, to give it away.
Let me quote Bilahari Kausikan in his article in the ST today. 'Do not just listen to the sweet words of foreigners, however pleasing to the ear. We must calculate our own interests as clinically as we can and not let anyone beguile us into believing they know better.'
His excuse was simply to protect the ethnic Russians in Ukraine, comprising 50% of Ukraine’s population. This may or may not be a legitimate reason but a good enough reason for a powerful state to use as an excuse to invade another nation.
We have a large foreign population among us, all in hundreds of thousands from the PRC Chinese, India Indians, Malaysians, Indonesians and the Pinoys from the trigger happy and most powerful Asean country, the Philippines. Any of these countries, if powerful enough, could use the excuse of protecting their citizens here to invade us.
We are lucky that this would not happen. Not that they cannot find an excuse. We have the most powerful military force in the region and we can take on anyone. And we also have the backing of the Number One superpower, the USA behind us. So we are safe as long as the Americans don’t have a reason to want to invade us. Anyway, they are already here, so there is really no need to do so.
The only time when we have to worry about the Americans is when we become too close to China or Russia. Then the Americans could use the same excuse, to protect their citizens and also their investments here to invade us.
In the game of big power politics, we can become a pawn to any of them. The current geopolitical equation may make some think that an invasion is very unlikely, just like the invasion by the Japanese from Northeast Asia, so far away, and not really that powerful compares to the big powers today.
We are very safe, even with so many foreign nationalities living here. Our presumption is that it is exactly because they are here that their countries will not invade and destroy their investments here. Makes sense right? No? It gives them more reasons to covet the island, a prime asset without anyone interested in wanting ownership. In fact it seems that the owners are so willing to share, to give it away.
Let me quote Bilahari Kausikan in his article in the ST today. 'Do not just listen to the sweet words of foreigners, however pleasing to the ear. We must calculate our own interests as clinically as we can and not let anyone beguile us into believing they know better.'
More coverage on the Little India COI?
We have had several days of furious reporting on the proceedings and
revelations of the Little India riot by the COI. The committee had a
field day expressing great admirations to individual bravery and
frowning at some acts of ‘cowardice’, not sure if this is an appropriate
word to use. And there were suggestions of what would or could be done
better. It was all about how the rioting could not have happened if the
accident was properly handled, nipped in the bud by properly trained
personnel who somehow failed to do so. There were so many
disappointments on how the men in blue handled the incidents. And one
striking moot point was the choice of not firing a warning shot that
could have made a great difference.
Then the reporting in the media stopped. No more coverage. No more revelations of bravery and shortcomings and misgivings. What happens? No more COI, or is there an adjournment and we would hear more of juicy details later on? I am really looking forward to the interesting revelations and commentaries from the eye witnesses and the experts. And I must say I am not disappointed.
There was an adjournment and the COI continued with more aggressive bouts of verbal tussle between the committee and the witnesses. Yesterday was more between former Commissioner Tee Tua Bah and current DAC Lu Yeow Lin, a contest between the veterans who have been there, seen it and done it, full of valour and experience on one side, and top scholars, full of talent, meticulous and well honed technical skills and with modern management skill and expertise on the other side.
The veterans believed in actions, go in and get the job done quickly. Think later or think quickly. The new technocrats, careful, measured, situation appreciation, considered the lives of bystanders, officers and not wanting to aggravate a bad situation. It was all cool, calculative and thoughtful decision making. The veterans did not favour such an approach. Too slow and could even be the cause of emboldening the rioters. The new talents disagreed.
How would the situation be like should the veterans be in charge is a iffy thing. It could lead to even bigger riot or the rioters could scamper and all arrested on the spot with minimum fuzz.
The outcome could actually be extrapolated from the assumptions of the rioters. One view is that the rioters are like innocent and nice school children. If this is so, the aggressive and swift ‘nip in the bud’ approach of the veterans would surely do the job. Actually, if the rioters were like school children, they could send in a team of police women, as long as they are tougher than the female bus attendant, would do the trick. Just give the rioters a few pushes and they will all fall on the ground.
On the contrary, if the rioters were wild and untamed beasts, like how they beat up the bus attendant and driver and some policemen, and burning of police vehicles, a rough handling could actually go the way as described by the new talents, bigger riot and burning of Little India.
Between the veterans and the new talents, who is wiser? Which approach is the better one? Can we develop a computer game to offer the different possibilities and scenarios and see how they run out?
What do you think?
Then the reporting in the media stopped. No more coverage. No more revelations of bravery and shortcomings and misgivings. What happens? No more COI, or is there an adjournment and we would hear more of juicy details later on? I am really looking forward to the interesting revelations and commentaries from the eye witnesses and the experts. And I must say I am not disappointed.
There was an adjournment and the COI continued with more aggressive bouts of verbal tussle between the committee and the witnesses. Yesterday was more between former Commissioner Tee Tua Bah and current DAC Lu Yeow Lin, a contest between the veterans who have been there, seen it and done it, full of valour and experience on one side, and top scholars, full of talent, meticulous and well honed technical skills and with modern management skill and expertise on the other side.
The veterans believed in actions, go in and get the job done quickly. Think later or think quickly. The new technocrats, careful, measured, situation appreciation, considered the lives of bystanders, officers and not wanting to aggravate a bad situation. It was all cool, calculative and thoughtful decision making. The veterans did not favour such an approach. Too slow and could even be the cause of emboldening the rioters. The new talents disagreed.
How would the situation be like should the veterans be in charge is a iffy thing. It could lead to even bigger riot or the rioters could scamper and all arrested on the spot with minimum fuzz.
The outcome could actually be extrapolated from the assumptions of the rioters. One view is that the rioters are like innocent and nice school children. If this is so, the aggressive and swift ‘nip in the bud’ approach of the veterans would surely do the job. Actually, if the rioters were like school children, they could send in a team of police women, as long as they are tougher than the female bus attendant, would do the trick. Just give the rioters a few pushes and they will all fall on the ground.
On the contrary, if the rioters were wild and untamed beasts, like how they beat up the bus attendant and driver and some policemen, and burning of police vehicles, a rough handling could actually go the way as described by the new talents, bigger riot and burning of Little India.
Between the veterans and the new talents, who is wiser? Which approach is the better one? Can we develop a computer game to offer the different possibilities and scenarios and see how they run out?
What do you think?
World’s most expensive city!
We are the most expensive country in the world to live in. And we are
trying to attract our citizens overseas to return to sink root here. I
am wondering aloud if this is another wayang or for real. We are so
expensive in two big ticket items, housing and cars. How are we going to
tell our Singaporeans to come back home to live and work here when they
have to pay a ransom just to get a roof over their head and a decent
car to enjoy the good life? Or maybe the target group is the low earners
that are eligible to buy HDB.
How are they going to tell them that when they returned, because of their higher incomes, they cannot buy public flats but pay a few millions to buy private properties?
These overseas Sinkies are living in big houses, landed properties that cost less a HDB flat and owning cars that cost a fraction of a small Japanese car here. They could afford two or more cars in where they are living. Why would they want to trade their good life to live in the world’s most expensive city and pay a bomb for a tiny flat and a tiny car?
Are you people real? Are you people thinking? Are you people asking too much from the overseas Sinkies? Are you nuts? Or do you think they are nuts? Or maybe they are so excited to want to live in the world’s most expensive city.
A country that refuses to sell public housing to its own citizens for whatever silly reasons when housing prices are sky high is a SICK country run by sick people. Period.
Kopi level - Yellow
How are they going to tell them that when they returned, because of their higher incomes, they cannot buy public flats but pay a few millions to buy private properties?
These overseas Sinkies are living in big houses, landed properties that cost less a HDB flat and owning cars that cost a fraction of a small Japanese car here. They could afford two or more cars in where they are living. Why would they want to trade their good life to live in the world’s most expensive city and pay a bomb for a tiny flat and a tiny car?
Are you people real? Are you people thinking? Are you people asking too much from the overseas Sinkies? Are you nuts? Or do you think they are nuts? Or maybe they are so excited to want to live in the world’s most expensive city.
A country that refuses to sell public housing to its own citizens for whatever silly reasons when housing prices are sky high is a SICK country run by sick people. Period.
Kopi level - Yellow
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)