Signup
LoginRecent Posts by maurizio13
-
-
Originally posted by GHoST_18:
no everyone can apply 1...selective invitation 1...
no need to submit CPF statements....
submit your paper certs is good enough...
but if u r not a scholar then dun waste ppl's time...
Aiya, so long as the person come out from the hole of the person lying in hospital now, confirm a life of luxury. Too bad I didn't come out from that hole.
-
-
-
Originally posted by Mospeada:
the only group of pple need not worry will be the pple upstair....afterall monies will still flow thru to their pocket....
Their salaries approved by the head god.
Whoever said Iron Ricebowl was passe was wrong, Singapore has Platinum Ricebowl.
Edited by maurizio13 10 Oct `08, 9:22AM
-
-
-
Originally posted by redDUST:
the sage of omaha won't even flinch over what happened last nite. he's not in it for yesterday or next month, or even next year.edit: just as he didn't jumped for joy when he made a >US$700m gain within hours of investing in GS.
So is ST Telemedia with Global Crossing.
Like they say in economics, in the long run we'd all be dead.
There is always a time for everything, while you may not have the perfect timing, it won't mean certain death but just a lesser existence.
My take is, he made a premature entry, but it's still a fair bet, much better odds then when Temasek invested in Merrill Lynch in December 2007.
Edited by maurizio13 10 Oct `08, 9:10AM
-
-
-
Originally posted by airgrinder:
My friend was screaming at you when she read this post of yours. "Who are u to question Buffett's decision! Do you even invests for a living yet!" Haha =)
Precisely being a shrewd investor, I sure he understand the odds of success sufficiently to invest in Goldman, rather than politically motivation.
Today the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) dropped to a 5 year low of 8,579 from it's once lofty perch of 12,000. When Warren Buffett invested in Goldman Sachs, the DJIA was above 11,000, now it's only 8,579.
So what does your friend think of Warren Buffett investment decision now?
-
-
-
Dow plunges 679 to fall to lowest level in 5 years
Thursday October 9, 7:27 pm ET
By Tim Paradis, AP Business Writer Dow plunges 679 points to trade below 9,000 for the first time in 5 years in afternoon sell-offNEW YORK (AP) -- Stocks plunged Thursday, sending the Dow Jones industrial average down 679 points -- more than 7 percent -- to its lowest level in five years. Stocks took a nosedive after a major credit-rating agency said it might cut its rating on General Motors and Ford, further rattling investors already fretting over the impact of tight credit on the economy.The Standard & Poor's 500 index also fell more than 7 percent.The declines came on the one-year anniversary of the closing highs of the Dow and the S&P. The Dow has lost 5,585 points, or 39.4 percent, since closing at 14,164.53 on Oct. 9, 2007. It's the worst run for the Dow since the nearly two-year bear market that ended in December 1974 when the Dow lost 45 percent. The S&P 500, meanwhile, is off 655 points, or 41.9 percent, since recording its high of 1,565.15.
U.S. stock market paper losses totaled $872 billion Thursday and the value of shares over all has tumbled a stunning $8.33 trillion since last year's high. That's based on figures measured by the Dow Jones Wilshire 5000 Composite Index, which tracks 5,000 U.S.-based companies' stocks and represents almost all stocks traded in America.
Thursday's sell-off came as Standard & Poor's Ratings Services put General Motors Corp. and its finance affiliate GMAC LLC under review to see if its rating should be cut. The action means there is a 50 percent chance that S&P will lower GM's and GMAC's ratings in the next three months. GM has been struggling with weak car sales in North America.
S&P also put Ford Motor Co. on credit watch negative. The ratings agency said that GM and Ford have adequate liquidity now, but that could change in 2009.
GM, one of the 30 stocks that make up the Dow industrials, fell $2.15, or 31 percent, to $4.76, while Ford fell 58 cents, or 22 percent, to $2.08.
"The story is getting to be like that movie 'Groundhog Day,'" said Arthur Hogan, chief market analyst at Jefferies & Co. He pointed to the still-frozen credit markets, and Libor, the bank-to-bank lending rate that remains stubbornly high despite interest rate cuts this week by the Federal Reserve and other major central banks.
"Until that starts coming down, you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone getting excited about stocks," Hogan said. "Everything we're seeing is historic. The problem is historic, the solutions are historic, and unfortunately, the sell-off is historic. It's not the kind of history you want to be making."
The Dow ended the day at its lows, finishing down 678.91, or 7.3 percent, at 8,579.19. The blue chips hadn't closed below 9,000 since June 30, 2003, and haven't closed at this level since May 21, 2003.
The Dow's tumble in the last seven sessions is its steepest ever in terms of points and the worst percentage decline since a downturn ending Oct. 26, 1987, when the Dow lost 23.8 percent. That sell-off included Black Monday, the Oct. 19, 1987 market crash that saw the Dow fall nearly 23 percent in a single day.
Broader stock indicators also tumbled Thursday. The S&P 500 fell 75.02, or 7.6 percent, to 909.92, while the Nasdaq composite index fell 95.21, or 5.5 percent, to 1,645.12.
The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies fell 47.37, or 8.7 percent, to 499.20.
A wave of fear about the economy sent stocks lower in the final two hours of trading after a volatile morning in which major indicators like the Dow and the S&P 500 index bobbed up and down. The Nasdaq, with a bevy of tech stocks, spent much of the session higher but eventually declined as the sell-off intensified. Still, its losses were less severe because of the relatively modest drops in names like Intel Corp. and Microsoft Corp.
On the New York Stock Exchange, declining issues came to nearly 3,000, while fewer than 250 advanced.
The sluggishness in the credit markets that triggered much of the heavy selling in markets around the world since mid-September appeared little changed Thursday following days of efforts by the Federal Reserve and other central banks to resuscitate lending.
Libor, the bank lending benchmark, for three-month dollar loans rose to 4.75 percent from 4.52 percent on Wednesday. That signals that banks remain hesitant to make loans for fear they won't be paid back.
The Fed and other leading central banks this week lowered key interest rates to help unclog the credit markets and promote lending to help the global economy. While a rate cut can take up to a year to work its way through the economy, the move was aimed as a boost to investor sentiment.
"We're stuck in a morass and I think it's going to take quite some time to come out of it," said Stephen Carl, principal and head of equity trading at The Williams Capital Group.
Demand remained high for short-term Treasurys, a refuge for investors willing to trade modest returns to protect their money. The yield on the three-month Treasury bill, which moves opposite its price, fell to 0.58 percent from 0.63 percent late Wednesday. Longer-term debt prices fell, with the yield on the 10-year note rising to 3.79 percent from 3.65 percent late Wednesday.
Investors across markets were mulling a plan being considered by the Bush administration to invest in hobbled U.S. banks as a way to stabilize the financial sector. The $700 billion rescue package signed into law last week allows the Treasury Department to inject fresh capital into financial institutions and obtain ownership shares in return.
Britain rolled out a similar plan, though no U.K. bank has received any investments. In Iceland, the government now has control of the country's three major banks as it struggles to contain the troubles there.
Wall Street is also looking for any effects of short selling now that a three-week ban imposed by regulators has expired. Short selling is a technique in which investors borrow shares in a company from a broker and sell them, hoping to buy them back later at a lower price. Essentially, it's a bet that a stock's price will fall. Short sellers can lose money if they have to repurchase the stock after it has risen.
Some analysts believe the unprecedented ban on short selling -- an effort to bolster investor confidence -- did more harm than good at a time of historic market volatility. They contend that short sellers help the market rally by covering their bets and creating demand for stocks.
"I think the market's way oversold. But I can't stand in the way of this falling knife -- I'd get sliced open," said Phil Orlando, chief equity market strategist at Federated Investors. "Investors are just saying, get me out at any price."
He also said that with the short-selling rule back in play, hedge funds might be shorting again to make up for their forced liquidations.
Energy names were among the biggest decliners as the price of oil fell and investors worried about a slowing economy. Exxon Mobil Corp. fell $9, or 12 percent, to $68, while Chevron Corp. fell $9.10, or 12 percent, to $64.
Light, sweet crude fell $1.81 to settle at $86.62 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, the lowest closing price since October last year.
Health insurer WellPoint Inc. fell $3.94, or 9.7 percent, to $36.50, while insurer and investment manager Lincoln National Corp. fell $9.66, or 35 percent, to $18.31.
The tech sector saw less selling than other parts of the market after IBM Corp. affirmed its forecast.
IBM fell $1.55, or 1.7 percent, to $89. Meanwhile, Intel fell 65 cents, or 4 percent, to $15.60 and Microsoft fell 71 cents, or 3.1 percent, to $22.30.
Consolidated trading volume on the NYSE came to 8.14 billion consolidated shares compared with 8.54 billion traded Wednesday.
In Asia, Japan's Nikkei 225 closed down 0.50 percent while the Hang Seng added 3.31 percent. In Europe, Britain's FTSE-100 fell 1.21 percent, Germany's DAX fell 2.53 percent, and France's CAC-40 declined 1.55 percent.
Edited by maurizio13 10 Oct `08, 7:39AM
-
-
-
Originally posted by xXBlack_RebelXx:
I see where your coming from. But I think it takes a great leader to bring a nation like what it was to this level. I am not well versed in politics and history to argue with you.And unfortunately I don't think theres a better man for the job. And given the way how juvenile the opposition supporters like this speak
sorry but my vote is still with the PAP.
Great Leader? That's highly questionable, authoritative despot is a more befitting persona. Hong Kong didn't have any such despot or great leader, yet it's achievements surpassed Singapore.
In my opinion, LKY did more harm to the future generations than good.
-
-
-
Singapore already had all the inherent attributes to be successful, just like Hong Kong, LKY was just a facilitator whose presence made little or no consequence. Hong Kong was under the British and didn't have a LKY, look where it is today.
Why do you think Sir Stamford Raffles chose to purchase Singapore instead of the thousand of islands in Asia?
Singapore was in a strategic shipping hub, paired with a hardworking Indian & Chinese workforce, the results are astounding.
-
-
-
Originally posted by Chris88110:
Alright i give up. No point arguing with you. You always answer only one of my points, the rest are ignored
I am not arguing with you, I was merely pointing your errors, those I don't point out means I am just indifferent.You said the Hong Kong government don't give a shit about her citizens, which I totally disagree. I think they care about their citizens more than the Singapore government.
In Singapore, the government only cares about their salaries, how to fleece more from the sheeps, keep friends and relatives in high positions in GLCs and GICs.
Edited by maurizio13 09 Oct `08, 8:48PM
-
-
-
I suppose our government gives a damn about her citizens?
FYI, the current Hong Kong government budget. All these perks come without having to increase any GST, ERP, Electricity, Property Tax (NAV), etc.
For Singapore, when they give you $200, they will find ways to squeeze out $400 from you.
Improving People's Livelihood and Supporting Disadvantaged Groups
To allocate $4.3
billion to inject into each domestic electricity account a subsidy
of $1,800.
To inject $1 billion into the Samaritan Fund
so as to relieve the financial burden on needy patients.
To support and take care of the elderly in
need:
– To earmark $200 million to help elderly people without family support improve their home environment;
– To earmark $1 billion as a subsidy for the elderly in need to carry out maintenance or safety improvement works for their self-occupied properties;
– To conduct studies on how best to improve the Old Age Allowance Scheme and to reach a decision by the end of this year. The Government will provide each Old Age Allowance recipient with a one-off grant of $3,000;
– To increase funding by $60 million to provide additional places in day care centres, subvented homes and residential care homes for the elderly.
To provide families and children with additional
support:
– To provide funding of $45 million over the next three years to strengthen day foster care services and promote child care services;
– To provide additional funding of $40 million to strengthen support to victims of domestic violence and families in need.
To support disabled people:
– To provide additional funding of $100 million to offer 300 more pre-school training places, 450 more day training places and 490 more subvented residential places;
– To make an additional provision of $35 million to establish 16 community support centres to strengthen services and support for disabled people as well as their family members and caretakers. To make provision of $1 billion in the
next three years to create 3 000 three-year jobs for young
people.
To set up four support services centres to provide
interpretation services and language courses for members of ethnic
minorities.
To adjust the CSSA payment rates in accordance
with the existing mechanism ahead of the normal schedule this
year.
To provide one additional month of standard rate
CSSA payments for CSSA recipients and one additional month of
allowance for recipients of Disability Allowance. This proposal
will involve an expenditure of about $1.2 billion.
To earmark $1 billion to pay for one-month's rent
for lower income families living in public housing estates.Leaving Wealth with the People and Sharing the Fruits of Prosperity
To lower the standard rate of salaries tax
and personal assessment tax by one percentage point to 15%. This is
reversion to the 2002-03 level and will cost the Government $960
million a year.
To offer a one-off rebate of 75% of salaries tax
and tax under personal assessment assessed for 2007-08, subject to
a ceiling of $25,000. This will cost the Government $12.4
billion.
To raise the basic personal allowance and single
parent allowance from $100,000 to $108,000 and to increase the
married person's allowance from $200,000 to $216,000. All the major
allowances will revert to their 2002-03 levels. The child
allowance, allowance for dependent parent/ grandparent will be even
higher than the 2002-03 levels. All these will cost the Government
$1.31 billion. To widen tax bands from $35,000 to
$40,000, making them wider than those in 2002-03. This will cost
the Government $1 billion. To lower the profits tax rate by one
percentage point to 16.5%. This will cost the Government $4.4
billion a year.
To offer a one-off rebate of 75% of profits
tax for 2007-08, subject to a ceiling of $25,000. This will cost
the Government $1.73 billion.
To waive business registration fees for
2008-09. This will cost the Government $1.6 billion.
To offer a one-off rebate of 75% of property
tax for 2007-08, subject to a ceiling of $25,000. This will cost
the Government $680 million.
To waive rates for 2008-09, subject to a
ceiling of $5,000 per quarter for each rateable tenement. This will
cost the Government $11.2 billion.
Providing for the Future
To earmark $8.5 billion to provide people
earning not more than $10,000 a month with a one-off injection of
$6,000 into their MPF accounts.
To earmark $50 billion from the fiscal
reserves to promote healthcare reform.Edited by maurizio13 09 Oct `08, 8:37PM
-
-
-
Originally posted by Starseven:
Yes their public money is being misappropriated. But at least someone IS checking.Is anyone checking over here?
Yes there is!!!
Old man Lee checks on Younger Lee, then Younger Lee checks Wifey, Wifey checks on the 2nd Younger Lee.
Whoever said we don't have system of checks and balances are wrong.
Our system is 100% effective, there has been no cases of corruption since that HDB guy CW Teh committed suicide.
BTW, this system of checks and balances is similar to Chen Shui Bian before he was ousted as President.
Edited by maurizio13 09 Oct `08, 8:06PM
-
-
-
The impetus to commit crime is weighed against the benefits of escape and punishment of capture, if punishment is very high, it acts as a deterrent to commit crime as compared to a country or system that values civil liberties.
Compare a system which values civil liberties with jail sentences of 1 year for theft as compared to a system with 10 years jail for theft, both countries having same efficiency in the police force. Citizens of which country would be more liable to commit crime? If the former country wishes to decrease the level of crime, all it needs to do is impose 20 years jail term for theft and consequently crime rates will fall.
An error committed at the spur of the moment should not in anyway condemn a person to perpetual damnation, if the person knows the error of his ways. We are not perfect beings as such we are prone to errors and mistakes, it's only when we learn from our mistakes that we become better persons.
Obviously this concept of civil liberties has obscured many Singaporeans with a limited view of the world, as such, to them a draconian form of punishment is the only way to go. Don't we need to discover the plight and intentions of the criminal and apply a little compassion for our fellow human beings. Thievery could be due to financial circumstances, afterall who would commit such acts unless driven to the edge.
If you don't know already, Singapore has one of the largest prison inmate population in the world, comparable to prison inmates in the USA. Why is that so? Is it due to the lengthy jail sentence by the courts?
I agree crime rates are lower in Singapore, but it's only slightly better than Hong Kong, both being small cities, makes better comparison. But compare the level of civil liberties, I think Hong Kong will outrank Singapore, though being a satelite of the Communist China, but it has a long historical British past, unlike Singapore, where human rights and civil liberties were demolished by LKY to further his personal political machinations.
In authoritarian, totalitarian regimes, the deterrent is much higher than in any Western country and crime rates are indeed lower.
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/467691
Edited by maurizio13 09 Oct `08, 7:31PM
-
