More progressive news – The best stock market in the world

Hongkong has pipped New York for the top spot in IPOs listing for 2015. Not very sure where Singapore stood on this but we have heard that this is the best managed and regulated stock exchange in the world, or at least in Asia. And the SGX has been announcing increasing trading volumes for derivatives and its come is improving and making more millions, from trading bonds and other commodities.

These are healthy and positive news for the stock broking industry. Singapore has, in the last few years, transformed its stock broking industry into an industry of the future. Stock and stock prices have increasingly become irrelevant in the new business model. We used to have blue chips trading at $20 to $40, mid range stocks between $5 to $10, and cheap stocks between $1 to $2. Today our blue chips are trading at around $10, midrange around $1 to $3 and at the bottom, 1c to 2c or less than 1c. But this is changing fast as the new rules required the super penny stocks to consolidate, just like post CLOB Malaysian shares, 1000 shares became 10 or 1 share, to improve the prices to between 20c and 40c. It will look less ridiculous for the main board when the exercise is completed.

But these changes would mean nothing when trading activities is no longer there or needed. The exchange doesn’t even need investors or retail traders. The computers are doing all the trading and trading in derivatives. The net effect, there will be no need for stock listing. That speaks for the lack of IPOs in the SGX. There will be no need for traders and also no need for remisiers. Many have left the industry and many on the way. Broking houses are still doing roaring business without the need for remisiers and planning to retrench more in the new year. Some have started.

Have no fear, all these are just teething problems for an industry in transition to be better. In the new stock trading business, cannot call it stock broking business as there will be little broking activities left. The word stock would also become misleading if trading is all about derivatives. There will be no need for stocks, no need for traders, no need for remisiers, no need for broking houses. The industry will just have computers trading against each other on derivatives from anything they can write on.

The industry of 40,000 people would become very manpower efficient. The new business model would probably need less than 1000 people to provide the supporting roles mainly programmers and derivative writers and the rest run virtually by computers.

Singapore has embarked on the most innovative change in an old industry. Not sure what would be the new name for the stock exchange. Definitely there is no need for the word stock as stocks would be replaced by derivatives. Exchange may need to be changed too as it would no longer be an exchange but more like a computer game. I am sure the new name for this industry would be something fascinating and pleasing to the ear, futuristic like ‘You know ya’ or something like that.

This is progress. No other exchange could have thought of it. We are ahead of the world in transforming our stock exchange into something else, unheard of. That is how innovative we have become.

The silly Americans at it again

The Americans are warning Europe not to grant market economy status to China. The reason, the Chinese will flood the European market with cheap goods. And thiat is bad. The Europeans must pay for more expensive goods from the Americans or force the Chinese to sell them goods at higher prices. That is good.

Would the Europeans want to pay for more expensive goods or cheap goods from China? And by buying cheaper goods from China, the Chinese would be investing in a big way in Europe with more infrastructure development to the tune of S$465b. Now this again must be bad deal in the eyes of the Americans. But the Europeans need the investment to kick start and revive their slowing economy.

Whatever the Chinese are doing must be bad.  The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is bad as it would mean China would gain more influence in the Asia.  Giving cheap loans to help countries to develop their infrastructure is bad unless the money comes from the American controlled World Bank or Japanese controlled ADB. The One Belt One Road is bad as China would benefit and the rest lose out to China.  It is only good for China! Maybe the Americans should sell more weapons to the Europeans, at American prices of course. That must be good.

I was watching a documentary in Channel News Asia on the under nourished and starving children in the Philippines. More than 3m of Philippines’ children are suffering from malnutrition in the same scale as those in the Sahara and tropical region of Africa. And what did the Americans do to help the Philippines? Send them more weapons and warships. What about feeding the hungry and stunted children, to give them proper meals? No that is bad.

If the Philippines would behave better, China may send in ship loads of food for its hungry children and let them grow up as normal and healthy human beans with a full stomach. The children can wait, bickering with China and thumping chests and sailing in American warships are more important than feeding millions of hungry children.

Would Europe listen to the mischievous Americans, refuse China’s billions of dollars of investment and the benefits of buying cheap goods from China that the Americans said, are bad, real bad?

We are progressing, tomorrow will be better

Let me repeat the familiar story of the islander in an island far, far away. When the rich tourist on vacation in the island saw him wasting his time under the coconut tree having his siesta, he offered him his advice on how to grow rich and to retire happily with a lot of money and not having to work again. The islander asked the tourist for his age. The tourist was 65. The islanders told him at best he had 15 years to enjoy his life while the islander who was 30 and had 50 years to enjoy life under the clear blue sky, turquoise water and without a worry.

Why are Singaporeans working so hard for, to be rich, to have a good life, to enjoy life?  Our parents relatively were rich in their own ways, earning a couple of thousand dollars a month and living in semi Ds that cost maybe two years of income and a car to drive the family around to eat air. The children could happily hop on the family car and go dating with their friends. They had so much free space and free time then.

Today, a semi D would probably cost more than 30 years of a $100k annual income and a car would cost a hand or a leg. But the people are rich and happy and are told to aspire for better things in life. A 800 sq ft pigeon hole in the sky is very good living, quality living. And they should aspire to take public transport, to cycle or to walk, to adopt a healthy lifestyle while the multimillionaire would drive their limousines around expressways and the average Singaporeans should get use to taking public transport and get squeezed.

The govt is also helping and making life without cars easier with no car days in the city and building more bicycle lanes for the new and rich lifestyle of future Singaporeans.

Is this what is called progress? Are these the aspirations of our young? What would be the next phase of progress after acquiring all the good degrees when all the jobs are either taken over by foreigners or by robots and machine? A life of leisure in a tropical island without stress and wants, no job, no home and no income and no car? How to survive then? Got govt subsidies I think.

Let's celebrate car free day. And better get used to the idea that owning a car is at best a wet dream in the future for the average Singaporeans.

Sustainable growth is in dire need for China

By Chua Chin Leng (chinadaily.com.cn)Updated: 2015-12-24 15:33

After three decades of double-digit growth, China has embarked on new development track with moderate growth rate around 7 percent annually. Even at this conservative growth rate, the Chinese economy could double itself in seven years to a US$20 trillion economy. It could be regarded as miraculous growth for a huge economy.

China has arrived at a point where rapid economic growth becomes a big challenge and risk overheating. In fact it was the fear of overheating that prompted the Chinese government to rein in the high growth rate.

China has little to fear of external factors dragging down its economy that is built on a very broad base of economic activities, from agriculture to manufacturing, tourism and finance etc. China has a lot of rooms to grow, and to continue growing at the new normal of a mature or maturing economy at 5 percent to 7 percent is not an issue.

The big question is whether China wants to push so hard to continue with its past growth rate of more than 10% or to take a breather and grow at a more leisure pace of 7 percent?

The last three to four decades of heady growth naturally led to many inequalities and inefficiencies in the Chinese economy like unequal distribution of wealth, unequal rate of growth across region, unequal growth in different industries and priorities. The inequalities itself would present great challenges but also opportunities for the Chinese economy to continue to grow as it seeks to level up these inequalities, diversify its industrial and manufacturing base, bringing growth and development to less developed regions and industries.

The obvious and often touted strategy to sustain a high growth rate is to steer the export oriented economy to raising internal consumption of consumer goods and services. The sheer size of 1.3 billion consumers, far more than the combined market of the US and Europe, would keep the Chinese manufacturers and producers very busy for a long time to come. China can be a self sufficient and domestic driven economy with the advantage of size.

There are also many industries that are still growing, such as the defense industries, pharmaceuticals and the redevelopment of the central and western regions of China. There are also many new industries such as renewable energies that could become the new engines of growth to keep the economy happily rumbling, albeit at a more sustainable and respectable growth rate.

And the banking and finance industry is just opening up and with great potential to contribute a bigger share to the economy.

The issue of the Chinese economy is not about growth but about sustainable growth, about managing growth for the good of its people, better distribution of wealth to uplift the well being of the population, to spread growth to all corners of the country.

The break-neck speed of the past decades of double digit growth should be tempered with more control in the direction of growth, in being selective of the industries to grow, in capitalizing on the green revolution, to turn green and the use of green technology.

China should take this opportunity to transform the economy and country into a country of the new century with measured and manageable growth, with a clear purpose and direction.

The author is a political observer from Singapore.

The opinions expressed here are those of the writer and don't represent views of China Daily website.

Sultan of Johore – So much to learn from Singapore

An Agencies’ report on an interview with Sultan Ibrahim of Johore appeared on 28 Dec and the Sultan’s frank view on Najib and Singapore. After years of silence, out of the spotlight following Mahathir’s clipping of the wings of the royalties, the Royal House of Johore is stirring once again. The current Sultan and his son the Crown Prince have exuded a new sense of mission and confidence in what they think is good for Johore and Malaysia. There is a kind of balance and rationality in the things they said, free from the encumbrance of the past, of race and religion. Behind what they said is the focus on peace and stability and on development of the state and country and the good of the people regardless of race, language and religion. This is a common trait in the thinking and policies of Singapore leaders.

In the report, other than taking a position of being above politics and taking a non committal position in the power struggle in KL, the Sultan did not want to be seen to be taking sides. And in a major shift in thinking, the Sultan said he found it ‘hard to understand the rationale or irrationality of my Malaysian leader who wants Malaysia to quarrel with Singapore. There is so much we can learn from Singapore. They have done well, let’s be honest here…We don’t have to go on expensive study trips to Europe or the United States – just go across the causeway to Singapore; they have done so many things that are correct and efficient.’

This change of tone is unprecedented coming from the Malaysian leaders and coming from the Royal House of Johore.  The new leaders are starting to chart a course very different from the days of Mahathir when everything is about politics and muddled with a history of political baggages. Even Najib, though still playing with the politics of race and religion has departed from the policy of no need to learn English. He is talking about learning English as the international language of commerce.

The profound change is in the thinking of the Sultan of Johore that is very pragmatic and development biased. With his development priority in place, Johore is going to develop rapidly and runaway from the other Malaysian states unless his legs are tripped by the Federal govt in KL.

For a start the Johore state govt may want to engage some Singaporean state planners to assist in the redevelopment of Johore Bahru. We have plenty of experienced civil servants available to offer our expertise. And not to worry about the expensive trips Singapore is sending to the West to learn from them. I can bet they learn nothing much as we are much better organized and developed than the West in city planning and management other than one or two obvious areas that we are still scrambling for cover. Learn only the good stuff.

Actually Singapore is very worried that all the Malaysian states would put aside their obsession with politics and start to think progressively and objectively. Singapore would be in real trouble with a competitive and development minded Malaysian govt. We would not be able to compete with a new Malaysia withthe low productivity of today due to the foreigners here.

It is a frightening thought and a frightening reality. All the million dollar pay will be gone with the wind.