the stock market is on the run

the new year saw a revival of the dying stock market and running like a charging bull. this is contrary to what i have posted earlier, that the market is at the brink of a collapse. my rationale is a simple supply and demand equation. when the number of stocks, derivatives and other financial products keep increasing, and the number of investors and the value of their investments keep dwindling, the market will die a natural death through over supply and lack of demand. in the last few days we are seeing a surge of demand, with transaction value hitting more than a million daily. but this is nothing new as the same value were hit in nov but then disappeared again. the market is as real as it is unreal. the volume and value transacted are real. but they are fictitious in the sense that they are probably churned up by a few big fund managers or big players. and this churning will stop as abruptly as it started if there is no support from a wide base of investors. the value of a stock can be as low as the piece of paper it is printed on. it is a perceived value and the investors must be convinced that it is worth the money they put in. or often the reason is that the value is sustainable. this is only true when the funds continue to support the price and more investors join in the fray. the market makers must not pull out as fast as they push up the market. more genuine money from big funds must go into the market to provide the support it sorely needs. only then can the market's uptrend be maintained to draw back the investors. confidence in the market has to be built over a sustained period of time. just a flash in the pan surge can be dangerous if it is just a weak attempt to push up the market and support by talks only. the stock market is a very important institution in the whole economy. any mismanagement that leads to its death will have far greater consequences than one can imagine. we can only hope that people are seriously working to revive the market and nurse it to health. and the real demand in terms of investors and capital going into the market must be there. otherwise the bull will turn to bear faster than you think. so far the only major input into the market is the supply side, more stocks, derivatives, covered warrants, discount notes, equity linked notes etc. the demand side has been neglected. i see a little spark in attracting the muslim funds. at least it will boost up the demand side a little. let us pray that the stock market is in good hands.

who will be the decider to swing votes for the pap?

i was reading the straits times this morning and reporter lydia lim in her article suggested that the older and most affected group during the economic restructuring would be the one to swing the votes for the pap. she was referring to the unemployed and not too well educated populace who would probably be so won over by the coming handouts from the govt. this will be the biggest irony that can happen. the group that suffered the most and bore the brunt of all the high wage and high price and high fee policies of the govt, will now blindly vote for the govt all for a little handouts. maybe lydia is right. this group isn't that knowledgeable, unthinking, easily moved by an immediate gain. but would the lower income group, including these deprived senior citizens really come to terms with their existing condition, when they were hard pressed by all the increases except their income, to be swayed to vote for the pap? would the knowledge that not only their income did not increase, but basic cost has also gone up in every area and eats into their little income remain a sore point in their minds? would the realisation that they could not make ends meet and have to struggle daily to make every cent counts while people are all laughing to the banks make them feel any ire towards the govt? would the most affected group really turn out to be the strongest supporter of the govt. we would not know until after everything is over. at the moment it is all postulation and guessing.

charities are now big business

why are charities now a big business here? can we afford to do away with the commercialisation of charities? long long time ago, charities were collecting money in 5c and 10c. today that kind of collection is frown upon. wasteful, unsophisticated, untalented enterprise. what we shall do is commercialisation, beg in a big way, beg with style, employ super talents and superstars to do the job. never mind about money. pay them well or you get peanuts with monkeys. so we have today big charities as big business. the objectives are now different. pull out every trick in the marketing bag and get the money to come in. that is the objective. why can't charities survive with a few cents here and there? why must charities raised big money? why is money not enough in charities? why helping the helpless is now so expensive? why is there a need for such a massive effort to raise so much money? doing an ivf cost between $7,000 to $20,000. a new drug for heart patient cost $6,000 a month. it is called the behtahan therapy. oops it is called the bosentan therapy. a dialysis cost $180 per treatment and a patient needs to be treated about 8 to 10 times a month. let me see, about $1,500 to $1,800, in order to be alive. the advances in medical science, in medication, have kept many people alive. the high cost of medication and treatment have also kept many people alive. people need money to buy time to live. and these costs are so high. looks like there is no other alternative but to set up professional fund raising organisations.

chen shui bian and sun yat sen

i saw a big picture of chen shui bian taking a very respectful bow in front of a sun yat sen photo in taiwan, in the straits times today. i am just wondering when is chen shui bian going to make an announcement to remove all the pictures of sun yat sen from govt and official buildings? sun yat sen's stand is a united china as opposed to chen shui bian's two china and independent taiwan. is he doing a koizumi in taiwan? koizumi visited the yasukuni shrine and said he wanted to establish good relations with china and koreas, and will not go for a remilitarisation of japan. chen shui bian and koizumi have many things in common in terms of tactics and public gestures, and motives.

nkf patient not paying dialysis fee

the straits times editorial commented about this group of patients who refused to pay their dialysis fee as a sign of protest against the old nkf management. and they seen as disloyal to the establishment that helped them. what about the other side of the coin? being duped by the establishment and paid more than they should? but what is important is that the feelings of betrayal and anger are still very strong. they are not going to go away so easily. did i hear a report saying that the staff and patients wanted to move on?