30-03-2013, 11:06 AM
(29-03-2013, 08:19 PM)Muck Wrote:(29-03-2013, 07:51 PM)Contrarian Wrote: > so cited the possibility of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) introducing a risk weighting floor - regulating the amount of capital that must be held against
> residential mortgage books - that could limit housing credit and rising property prices.
That shows the intelligence and resolve of the HKMA. In 2008, HKMA also guaranteed bank deposits, AFTER MAS said there was no need to guarantee deposits.
After HKMA gave the guarantee, MAS changed stance and guaranteed Singapore bank deposits.
So, it shows our MAS is more a copycat. The HKMA has more out-of-the-box thinking than our MAS scholars.
My opinion is that HKMA thinks for the pple. MAS thinks for the businesses. Just look at the differencev in approaches to the Lehman saga. No secret that SG is a pro-enterprise outfit.
On one hand, people criticizing CPF monies been withhold, and arguing gov should let individual to take care of their monies.
On the other hand, people criticizing MAS put too much freedom on investment, when thing turn ugly e.g. Lehman saga, it should bear the responsibility.
Hmm... more freedom or more control (protection)? or best of both world?

“夏则资皮,冬则资纱,旱则资船,水则资车” - 范蠡