ValueBuddies.com : Value Investing Forum - Singapore, Hong Kong, U.S.

People wonder why HK loses to Singapore. minimum wage is one of the reason, IMO.

HK lost its competitivity long time ago.

(29-09-2013, 08:11 PM)donmihaihai Wrote: [ -> ]SMRT is getting interesting. Wisdom of the crowd is saying don't touch it. Well in investing staying with the crowd might not work.

Let's get back on SMRT.

IMO, SMRT is getting interesting, but it is still not the time to put in money yet.

The capital and fair structure, once finalized, might decide whether the SMRT is a money spinner, or a lousy company.

(not vested)

(29-09-2013, 09:58 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ]

(29-09-2013, 08:11 PM)donmihaihai Wrote: [ -> ]SMRT is getting interesting. Wisdom of the crowd is saying don't touch it. Well in investing staying with the crowd might not work.

Let's get back on SMRT.

IMO, SMRT is getting interesting, but it is still not the time to put in money yet.

The capital and fair structure, once finalized, might decide whether the SMRT is a money spinner, or a lousy company.

(not vested)

i think capital and fare structure will only be really finalised after GE 2016. Anything now is interim measure only.
Please i am concern more about investing in SMRT.
But for SMRT this stock you can't don't talk about how to buy or sell or hold without talking about associated politics. IMHO.

(29-09-2013, 11:30 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]defense and police are not socialism benefit. Before there is socialism or capitalism, there has been defense and police. It's a function of government.

socialism benefit is such as unemployment benefit, retirement benefit, healthcare benefit, etc.

In Singapore, there is almost none. Singapore is the best capitalist in the world. That's why Singapore, such a small country can produce a lot of wonders.

As for the riches vs the poors. I have seen the riches work more than one job before they become rich. But a lot of the poors don't even try to work a few jobs to improve their lives. So should the riches help the poors in that sense?

Of course the rich should help the poor. This is why there is a progressive tax system and the rich are taxed more. This is why human history and civilisation is about coming together to form societies and cooperate for the greater good. By doing so the strong is allowed to stand out and the group can achieve more benefiting every member in the group. In return the strong must not hoard or take a disproportionate share of the fruits of labour. Only then can the group cooperate in harmony and continue to allow the strong to lead and get first share of the rewards. It is foolish and ignorant to think that leaders in societies, be it in government or private sector, succeeded entirely through their own merit and hard work. That would be hubris because it is society at large that first created the condition and environment for him to excel. And therefore he owes it to society to give back more.

Btw what wonders that singapore produced are you talking about?

---

(29-09-2013, 09:41 PM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]People wonder why HK loses to Singapore. minimum wage is one of the reason, IMO.

HK lost its competitivity long time ago.

Not really, it depends on the metrics used. If you look at the Global Competitiveness Report published by the World Economic Forum, then yes, Singapore ranks higher than HK, but Switzerland is always top. But if you go by the one published by IMD, the international business school in Lausanne Switzerland, then HK is ahead of Singapore with USA being top.

I dont think the poor here are incapable or releuctant to improve themselves. Hypothetically, imagine in China where labours are cheap. Then the govt of China go to another country (say Indonesia) and imports many many Indonesia FTs and work in China with half the salary, and displace the many China workers. So are we gonna say the China workers are not trying to improve themselves and dont want to upgrade?

About SMRT, if anyone own this stock then he better follow the things happening around sg closely. I am fortunate to have sold off all my smrt stks when i see the trains broke down one after another. I do feel that its not the time yet for smrt.

(29-09-2013, 11:42 AM)Greenrookie Wrote: [ -> ]

(29-09-2013, 11:30 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]defense and police are not socialism benefit. Before there is socialism or capitalism, there has been defense and police. It's a function of government.

socialism benefit is such as unemployment benefit, retirement benefit, healthcare benefit, etc.

In Singapore, there is almost none. Singapore is the best capitalist in the world. That's why Singapore, such a small country can produce a lot of wonders.

As for the riches vs the poors. I have seen the riches work more than one job before they become rich. But a lot of the poors don't even try to work a few jobs to improve their lives. So should the riches help the poors in that sense?

Perhaps we should help all the poor, if they doesn't want to help themselves, at least we have tried. The playing field will never be level but it should not be such a handicapped that a system become closed. I am not taking about entitlement type of help like free tuition, but perhaps shelter from abusive or dyfnctional families must be available and easily known to all, and such services reach out to the vulnerable by the grassroots. Similar while I don't believe in unemployment benefits, we should reach out to ppl who want to work but are disabled or discriminate against. We should not stop extending help simply because they might be some underserving of our help.

(29-09-2013, 11:50 PM)kichialo Wrote: [ -> ]

(29-09-2013, 11:30 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]defense and police are not socialism benefit. Before there is socialism or capitalism, there has been defense and police. It's a function of government.

socialism benefit is such as unemployment benefit, retirement benefit, healthcare benefit, etc.

In Singapore, there is almost none. Singapore is the best capitalist in the world. That's why Singapore, such a small country can produce a lot of wonders.

As for the riches vs the poors. I have seen the riches work more than one job before they become rich. But a lot of the poors don't even try to work a few jobs to improve their lives. So should the riches help the poors in that sense?

Of course the rich should help the poor. This is why there is a progressive tax system and the rich are taxed more. This is why human history and civilisation is about coming together to form societies and cooperate for the greater good. By doing so the strong is allowed to stand out and the group can achieve more benefiting every member in the group. In return the strong must not hoard or take a disproportionate share of the fruits of labour. Only then can the group cooperate in harmony and continue to allow the strong to lead and get first share of the rewards. It is foolish and ignorant to think that leaders in societies, be it in government or private sector, succeeded entirely through their own merit and hard work. That would be hubris because it is society at large that first created the condition and environment for him to excel. And therefore he owes it to society to give back more.

As highlighted, function of govt is socialist. Socialism in nature didn't start from Karl Marx. Communism did.

When we focus on greater good and aggreagte wealth where EVERYONE benefits, then we are on the same platform. When we start to talk about lazy people vs hardworking ones, then we are not talking about the same thing. In aggregate I believe people will work if given right incentive and opportunity.

Difference between India and China is China's middle class rose because of distribution of wealth in terms of incentives, infrastructure, govt support, better policy making, lower inflation etc. Indonesia looks to be very promising as well under SBY vs the elite groups back in Suharto era. When people realise the so called enlightened self-interest of the greater good, then society progresses. It never works when an elite or aristocratic class, capitalist or otherwise, makes policies for their own benefit rather than greater good.

---

(29-09-2013, 11:51 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]the real vulnerable ones are mostly taken care of by the society already. The rest, I would say, not.

In real life, I have not seen a man who wants to work, but can't find a job. Most complaints are about dream job, not job.

Well, every one wants to have a dream job, why should only the poors ask for it?

Try India, china cities or just nearby Indonesia. Heck ask the Greeks to get a job rather than go overseas for a job, or watch the movie Pursuit of Happyness when he almost went into a poverty trap spiral. It's not just about your capability. It's about opportunities.

Buffett said clearly that he is thankful he is born in US where his asset allocation skills are needed. If he is born in some african country, he would have died.

Michael Lewis said about the same:
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archi.../87/54K53/

People overestimate their capabilities and underestimate others' contributions: from our parents, friends to credible government and opportunities

---

(29-09-2013, 02:21 PM)cyclone Wrote: [ -> ]I think the recent discussions are far off-topic already. Aren't they ? Please stay on track. Thanks.

So sorry to digress but since SMRT fate would actually be pretty determined by what kind of ideology the govt adopts, it is actually somehwat related. Just as Delgro vs the $1b govt bus investment.

We can't deny govt will have huge impact on these transport companies, especially in light of the recent maintenance/strike problems

a bit off the topic. I would say defense and police are social functions, but I would not say it as socialism unless we are talking about totally different socialism.

from this wiki entry, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism, I would say before socialism, even back in Roman empire, there was defense and police. I see defense and police as function of states or governments. It does not matter what kinds of political/economical ideology it is, defense and police exist simply because there is a government.

come back to SMRT topic. I wonder how long populist policy can last before damages are permanently done on SMRT.

(30-09-2013, 02:41 PM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]a bit off the topic. I would say defense and police are social functions, but I would not say it as socialism unless we are talking about totally different socialism.

from this wiki entry, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism, I would say before socialism, even back in Roman empire, there was defense and police. I see defense and police as function of states or governments. It does not matter what kinds of political/economical ideology it is, defense and police exit simply because there is a government.

come back to SMRT topic. I wonder how long populist policy can last before damages are permanently done on SMRT.

don't worry freedom, smrt has low fix cost. i doubt these policy can hurt smrt. perhaps, in short run the profit margin may be lower.

In today's news.

Train operators fined $1.1m for delays and lapses in safety


SMRT and SBS Transit have been fined a total of $1.1 million for a series of train delays and safety lapses in the last 10 months.

SMRT will have to shell out $860,000 for the following lapses: a trackside fire at Newton station on Feb 13; failing to launch the correct trains for service on the Bukit Panjang LRT network on July 4; failing to repair a corroded rail along the Circle Line on time; and exposing workers to the risk of electrocution at the Ulu Pandan depot between November and December last year.

The other public transport operator SBS Transit will be fined $250,000 for taking too long - 21/2 hours instead of 30 minutes - to evacuate 250 passengers stuck in a stalled train along the North-East Line (NEL) in June after the operator failed to move the stalled train to Hougang station for a detrainment process.

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) said it will not penalise SBS Transit for the Jan 11 NEL breakdown that was caused by corroded U-bolts that caused the overhead cantilever arm to sag. The regulator said the it may not have been possible to detect the defects visually and SBS Transit had maintained the U-bolts according to manufacturer's requirements. The fines will be donated to the Public Transport Fund to help needy families with their transport fares.

(02-10-2013, 08:21 AM)NTL Wrote: [ -> ]In today's news.

Train operators fined $1.1m for delays and lapses in safety


SMRT and SBS Transit have been fined a total of $1.1 million for a series of train delays and safety lapses in the last 10 months.

SMRT will have to shell out $860,000 for the following lapses: a trackside fire at Newton station on Feb 13; failing to launch the correct trains for service on the Bukit Panjang LRT network on July 4; failing to repair a corroded rail along the Circle Line on time; and exposing workers to the risk of electrocution at the Ulu Pandan depot between November and December last year.

The other public transport operator SBS Transit will be fined $250,000 for taking too long - 21/2 hours instead of 30 minutes - to evacuate 250 passengers stuck in a stalled train along the North-East Line (NEL) in June after the operator failed to move the stalled train to Hougang station for a detrainment process.

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) said it will not penalise SBS Transit for the Jan 11 NEL breakdown that was caused by corroded U-bolts that caused the overhead cantilever arm to sag. The regulator said the it may not have been possible to detect the defects visually and SBS Transit had maintained the U-bolts according to manufacturer's requirements.

Quote:The fines will be donated to the Public Transport Fund to help needy families with their transport fares.

Is this the first time? What about the past fines? To me it is like you take your LHS pocket money and put it into your RHS pocket; if in the past those fine money were not donated.
Ha! Ha!