View Full Version : The Ascent of Money
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Xx_5PuLIzc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coItaKim-vQ
Niall Campbell Douglas Ferguson (/ˈni:lˑ 'fɜrˑgʌˑsən/; born 18 April 1964)[1] is a Scottish historian. He is the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University. He is also a Senior Research Fellow of Jesus College, University of Oxford and a Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His speciality is international history, economic history, particularly hyperinflation and the bond markets, and British and American imperialism.[2] He is known for his provocative, contrarian views.[3]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs2gcgfv598
phantom_opera
31-03-13, 08:53
http://www.tremeritus.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MYJOB.jpg
from TR ... our AUX police from MAlaysia?
This is a bad sign. The 55 year old who is reported jobless in yesterday's newspaper maybe better off taking this job rather than to wait to be an engineer as it met his expected salary.
http://www.tremeritus.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MYJOB.jpg
from TR ... our AUX police from MAlaysia?
phantom_opera
31-03-13, 10:36
This is a bad sign. The 55 year old who is reported jobless in yesterday's newspaper maybe better off taking this job rather than to wait to be an engineer as it met his expected salary.
55y old police? I am sure cisco only want young and strong bodies
pap will now import malaysians to make it less objectionable
This is a bad sign. The 55 year old who is reported jobless in yesterday's newspaper maybe better off taking this job rather than to wait to be an engineer as it met his expected salary.
its a tough job. not necessary the 55yr old like to do or is medically fit to to it too. given 55yrs of age.
http://www.peakprosperity.com/blog/81279/federal-reserve-ben-bernanke-devalue-dollar-inflation
Money:
A simpler way to explain this is to say it has value simply because we believe it does.
The Fed holds a meeting
Those in the room decide how many more dollars they think the world needs
Someone walks over to a computer and adds that many dollars to the banks, with a few clicks of the keyboard
The banks then, if they want to, lend this new money out into the economy on a fractional basis, adding even more "thin air" dollars to the nation's money supply.
This unique ability in America lends the Fed enormous power. The power to create new money from nothing. With no limit.
The sheer amount of new money that the Fed created was unprecedented. From the time we went off the gold standard of 1933 until 2008, the Fed had created a net total of $800 billion. In the months after the financial crisis, that number nearly tripled to almost $2.4 trillion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=INmqvibv4UU#!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYXD-_AMstQ
In digital age, central bank create money out of thin air just by key in the amount digitally. Our money stored in the bank by digital mean.
It also means they can take the money away by digital means. Just like what happen in cyprus. Whether they do it in the name of devaluation (because of inflation), levy, or tax, our money in the bank is very susceptible.
Meltdown - The Global Financial Crisis? pt 1of 4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXfnHM9QBjk
Money As Debt - Full Length Documentary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqvKjsIxT_8
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/bitcoin-the-anarchist-virtual-currency-12Je7jeKQZmn~Hx1YaNitQ.html
phantom_opera
31-03-13, 16:20
to be fair, although M2 may have doubled since 2005, wages did not grow as fast so end up high psf low quantum
http://www.salary.sg/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/household-income-decile-chart.png
in 2012, the top 20% of families earn > 15kpa
contrast this to the old stats:
1993 1998 2003
Highest 20% 8,469 11,450 12,792
on average, the purcashing power for top 20% of families have about doubled since 1993 but only about 30% more since 2003
Good video with beneficial learning outcome. ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYXD-_AMstQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMQF2rSHnbw
AGM coming up soon at SB.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMQF2rSHnbw
phantom_opera
31-03-13, 16:56
nominal income growth for top 20pc only 3.6%pa compound, this is even slower than cpf SA rate lol
it could only mean most growth go to top 5%
so we need GST? lol
Yes sure! Else who is going to pay the buck of the taxes? They saying taxing the top income people more in income is not the way to go! In fact, they reduce top income tax rates and impose GST!
Strange. Tax more on top income people cannot, impose additional taxes on everybody's wealth is Ok :doh:
nominal income growth for top 20pc only 3.6%pa compound, this is even slower than cpf SA rate lol
it could only mean most growth go to top 5%
so we need GST? lol
Allthepies
31-03-13, 20:09
GST is a consumption tax, the more you spend the more you get taxed. GST also tax foreigner spenders.
Yes, also tax on our housewife, retires, children and sicked person who can't work.:doh: Why tax on dependents? :rolleyes:
GST is a consumption tax, the more you spend the more you get taxed. GST also tax foreigner spenders.
If they think about to tax on the top 5% through GST, then they are very wrong!!
Why? The rich are very mobile and they can always buy those branded goods oversea at a very good discount 25-70%. It's very significant if you buy a lot! At the end of the day, only poor and middle income holders and immobile here got hit by GST tax.:tsk-tsk:
nominal income growth for top 20pc only 3.6%pa compound, this is even slower than cpf SA rate lol
it could only mean most growth go to top 5%
so we need GST? lol
phantom_opera
31-03-13, 22:05
If they think about to tax on the top 5% through GST, then they are very wrong!!
Why? The rich are very mobile and they can always buy those branded goods oversea at a very good discount 25-70%. It's very significant if you buy a lot! At the end of the day, only poor and middle income holders and immobile here got hit by GST tax.:tsk-tsk:
I was reading the household income/expenditure report from Singstat, when they calculate real income gain, they always use the core CPI which exclude imputed rental (otherwise, the statistics will be really bad)
and they never analyze the top 3-5% for obvious reason
phantom_opera
31-03-13, 22:12
source
http://www.singstat.gov.sg/Publications/newsletter/archive/ssnsep2005.pdf
1993 1998 2003
Highest 20% (Expense) 5,425 5,891 6,160
Highest 20% (income) 8,469 11,450 12,792
interestingly, most of the income gain in the past 20y was delivered btn 1993-1998 ..income growth golden era
As you rightfully pointed out, income growth is sluggish for majority (think ~90%).
While in the mean time, inflation shot through the roof and everyone felt it vividly....
Core CPI is rubbish to me since gov use it and can't even have good feel of how people is struggling....
As a rule of thumb for me, I normally multiply 2 on CPI value.:D
I was reading the household income/expenditure report from Singstat, when they calculate real income gain, they always use the core CPI which exclude imputed rental (otherwise, the statistics will be really bad)
and they never analyze the top 3-5% for obvious reason
AGM coming up soon at SB.
Time fly, when is the AGM? Going back for 10 days in April.
You should be in time for it. They should be sending out the agenda shortly.
Time fly, when is the AGM? Going back for 10 days in April.
phantom_opera
01-04-13, 14:03
The average increase in income for the top 20 per cent households in Singapore over five years (2002-2007) was 6.8 percent while the figure for the lowest 20 per cent of households in Singapore was significantly lower at 2.9 per cent.
=> 2002-2007 period are the "drawdown" years for household income
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.