TR EMERITUS

Don’t you think that we are living under a government that does not even care about the welfare of people? Although we are moving towards a car lite society, motorcycles do not cost much congestion or pollution. Why are we restricting them so much when they are necessity for so many people? Many people whom I know who ride motorcycles do so because they need to make a living, such as courrier services, Grab, Deliveroo or Foodpanda food delivery riders. They do not make much to begin with, and yet they have to grapple with sky high COE prices! For a minister who makes millions, $10,000 may be a drop in the ocean for them, but to a food delivery rider struggling to pay bills, this is an amount that could break them! What are these people going to do with their livelihoods, when COE hits ridiculous prices and when their current COE runs out? Where is our Swiss standard of living as promised? Are we not declining and becoming worse off under the PAP?   Prabu Ramachandran      Read More →

Me, Myself and I One of my weekend treats was to pick up a John Grisham novel called “Gray Mountain,” which focuses on a young New York lawyer who gets retrenched from her big law firm and ends up working in the Appalachian Hills. Although I’ve only started the first few chapters but the book has already painted a wonderful picture of how a former “real estate” lawyer dealing with billionaire property developers suddenly discovering people who have no jobs and domestic violence is a way of life. This fictional account of a Wall Street lawyer in Appalachian country underlines the fact that America isn’t a single country but many countries, where people from different parts of the country have totally different experiences from other people in the same country. This is also not unique to America. Here in Asia, there are plenty of examples of countries that are in fact many countries. Like in America, the difference is largely centred on the urban-rural divide. For example, when everyone talks about the Chinese economy and the great wealth in China, they are thinking about the shinning metropolitan centres of Shanghai and Shenzhen. What nobody thinks of is the rural areas where people have been so busy worrying about getting flour to make soup to bother knowing about what goes on outside their village. Being a multitude of places isn’t limited to large countries like the USA or China. Even small places like Hong Kong and Singapore are many countries as opposed to being one unified block. If anything, the difference between the various communities in small places like Hong Kong and Singapore appear more pronounced than they are in large places. A Wall Street banker will most likely never have to look at someone from the Appalachian hills in the course of their daily lives. Here in my work place in the centre of Singapore’s financial district, you have the slick residents of condo-land walking past the aunty from one-room HDB heartland trying to sell them tissue paper just to pay her utility bill. Countries like people, want to show the world their best side to the world and wanting to “gloss over” certain realities is understandable. It becomes even more pronounced of places what need the outside world and governments in such places go through great lengths to “gloss up” their image. My stepfather, once made a point that he would only fly airlines of small but wealthy countries because the national carrier in such places were extensions of national pride. Airlines like SIA, Emirates, Cathay Pacific and Qatar consistently rank among the world’s best because they are part of their native lands that governments want the world to see. In the case of Singapore, everyone gets to see Shenton Way or the Marina Bay sands. These are iconic images and one they are very nice. I admit they are great to look at and very pleasant areas. One of my great after work pleasures is to walk from Shenton Way to the Marina Bay Sands casino and towards the bus home. However, as much as these places are nice, its important to remember that these places do not paint an accurate picture of what Singapore is. One of the most visible signs that Singapore isn’t just the glitziest place of Crazy Rich Asians comes in the form of the elderly cardboard box collectors. It is, without a doubt, easier to show off the Marina Bay Sands than it is the number of elderlies collecting cardboard boxes. I also get wealth-inequality. I spent my student days in London, where Daddy had a flat in Soho and I had friends who lived in South Kensington. Money wasn’t an issue most of the residents. However, there was inevitably an army of homeless people waiting for you to give your spare change. However, unlike what I saw in London, where the tramps were young and had probably taken a few bad turns with drugs, the ones in Singapore are inevitably old and they’re begging but doing physically demanding work for criminally low money. Nobody seems to talk about this group. If you read official news in Singapore, you are bound to think that Singapore of Crazy Rich Asians is the only Singapore. However, while we may all like to think that, this isn’t reality. I look at my work on Shenton Way and the box collectors and its not far fetched to think I may end up experiencing a different Singapore in my old age. We need an honest conversation about what is Singapore. Like it or not, the one-room flat dwellers are as much a part of Singapore as those on the top of Marina Bay sands The conversation should move from how to do we get more people on top of Marina Bay Sands to ensuring that Singaporeans, particularly the elderly ones don’t need to collect cardboard boxes in their twilight years. We do so much to create an image but that image can only be sustained if people feel some reality of that image.   Tang Li *Although I’ve been based mainly in Singapore for nearly two decades, I’ve had the privilege of being able meet people who have crossed borders and cultures. I’ve befriended ministers and ambassadors and worked on projects involving a former head of state. Yet, at the same time, I’ve had the privilege of befriending migrant labourers and former convicts. All of them have a story to tell. All of them add to the fabric of life. I hope to express the stories that inspire us to create life as it should be.    Read More →

I am no "expert" because I lack the intelligence to gaslight people with all sorts of excuses & jargons and most importantly I am not Foolish enough to be an "Expert". I am not a fund manager who invest other people's money for a living but I invest my own family's money. If I lose money in the investment, I take full responsibility and suffer the loss fully. No if or but. As "retail investor", I don't have huge amount of resources and team of researchers and "experts" to seek advice from. I am just me. I can make partial paper losses, which I always do but ever since 1997 Crisis which I suffered my greatest losses, I have never face a situation which ended up with a total collapse of the company which I have invested! SWF is not a Hedge Fund. They are expected to bring returns from their investment and at the same time, preserve the value of our Country's wealth. Stocks and shares will go up and down with the economic cycles. Temporary paper capital loss is acceptable if and only if the companies don't go bankrupt or suffered irrevocable damage to its fundamentals which render it crippled and unable to recover in the long run. SWF should not take excessive risks, definitely not risks which could result in total write off of its investment. SWF is supposed to invest for long term gains and investing in companies which could collapse overnight and go bankrupt is just anything but long term! The companies you invest must stay long term and not bankrupt if you want long term gains! Seasoned Retail investors like us know our weaknesses as compared to institutional investors. We don't have "insider information" or indepth knowledge of the companies and we depend on third or even forth tier information. We do not speculate and we know what kinds of returns we could expect with the risk we are willing to take. Institutional investors have advantages but the sheer size of their investment can become their disadvantage. It's not easy for them to dump their shares in a quick way like us. Thus, they have to be extra careful before they decide to invest in any company with huge amount of money. Thus, the judgement of characters of the leaders & management of the companies is very important for SWF, not just reading the P&L and accounts. If a SWF which is supposed to invest for the long term but ended up choosing companies which collapse with a short life, that's pure incompetency. No if or but here. Period. Apparently TH has a serious problem here. It had lost quite a considerable amount of money back in 2008/09 in the rush for "bargain hunting" but ended up with huge losses from the high risk lemons they have invested in. They didn't learn their lesson at all. They continued to take unnecessary high risks, forgetting their fundamental role as SWF is to protect the country's wealth and generate decent return without taking excessive high risks. For me as a retail investor at my age, I am investing more like a SWF for my retirement. I don't take excessive high risk inspite of the attraction of high capital gains from volatile tech stocks. I don't invest in companies that don't issue dividends, even if it's run by Warren Buffett. Especially for tech stocks which only sell you the dream but never generate any dividend for your shares. At my age, I can't afford to be like TH, just write off millions and take it lightly as it's only 0.05% of its total portfolio! It's a typical example of moral hazard when it comes to fund management. If the fund rewards its fund managers with hefty bonuses when they make great money, of course they are willing to take greater risks for greater returns! Lose money, it's not their money. They don't suffer any monetary loss Great gain, they can milk for high bonuses! For any case of investment which resulted in Total Write Off, the fund manager responsible for evaluating and deciding on such investment should be fired or penalized. At the very least, there must be accountability in SWF management. Well maybe we are not "talent" or "expert" who would enjoy indemnity from accountability.   Goh Meng Seng      Read More →