Singapore is second most competitive in the world
-
Are you stupid or ignorant? If what you said were true, shouldn't Singapore be able to print money for free too? Mind, SGD is pegged to the USD.Originally posted by Gazelle:Because USA is the only country that can print money for free.
Have you any idea what the USD is pegged to? (Hint : not George W Bush's intellect) Have you any idea how the value of the item the USD is pegged to fluctuates/varies? -
1) You can print as much S$ you want provided if there is buyer for S$Originally posted by walesa:Are you stupid or ignorant? If what you said were true, shouldn't Singapore be able to print money for free too? Mind, SGD is pegged to the USD.
Have you any idea what the USD is pegged to? (Hint : not George W Bush's intellect) Have you any idea how the value of the item the USD is pegged to fluctuates/varies?
2) S$ was never peg to a single currency, its peg to a basket of currency which also include Sterling, Yen, Euro.
3) USD is the most common currency for international trade and that is why there is always a demand for USD. And the only country that print USD is USA -
Haiz, we are ranked quite low in the 'best country to live in,' & now we ranked no. 2 in 2nd 'most competitive in the world.'
Cool right, signal others to come here do business, but after earning $ no point of stayin here since we aint one of the top places to live in. -
He fits the bill of a perfect syncopant. Nice English nice about everything and attempts to bring legitimacy to his arguments. Quite frankly I will be surprised if he isn't linked to the PAP.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:If that's the case he seems to be doing a very poor job at it... because it seems the only results of his attempts to "engage" the "insurgency" is to fan the flames even more.
What's more, as usual, when the argument gets too hot, he disappears. -
Granted, SGD is not pegged exclusively to the USD. As you've alluded, the USD is the "most common currency" and the USD plays as integral a role (if not more so than any others) as any other currency in the "basket of currencies" in influencing the worth of the SGD in the FX market. So if your argument that the US could print as much money as it wants were sound, why can't the SGD print as much as it likes too?Originally posted by Gazelle:1) You can print as much S$ you want provided if there is buyer for S$
2) S$ was never peg to a single currency, its peg to a basket of currency which also include Sterling, Yen, Euro.
3) USD is the most common currency for international trade and that is why there is always a demand for USD. And the only country that print USD is USA
I've never seen more drivel than points 1 and 3 (especially point 3) of yours - try telling me you've actually done any course in economics. As a matter of fact, the USD is pegged to gold. Just what on earth are you on about when you say the US is the "only nation that can print money for free"? If they could, they'd have cleared their national debt!
Seriously, have you got any idea how gold is traded as a commodity (or even how commodity markets work)? Or is that something not covered in your textbooks and you're resorting to conjuring up the missing bits from your textbooks in your mind to assume that's how things work? -
What no one seems to get is that it is the start ups that lead to true growth. Foreign Investment, like it or not, will never bring the same kind of holistic growth as startups do. Unfortunately we have a dearth of high tech startups, and small mainstream companies won't do much good to the level of technology here.Originally posted by Boy Stratus:Haiz, we are ranked quite low in the 'best country to live in,' & now we ranked no. 2 in 2nd 'most competitive in the world.'
Cool right, signal others to come here do business, but after earning $ no point of stayin here since we aint one of the top places to live in.
Unfortunately, it is one thing to say give funds to startups, it is another to encourage people to start up a company. There is little incentive to do so when the majority of university undergrads graduate with debt and have to first work on paying it up. After working for a long while, buying a ridiculously expensive flat, and getting married, the inertia to start a business is so great naturally we don't have much by way of start ups.
Face it. We will never match the Israelis or Americans in terms of tech entrepreneurship with so many underlying social and financial factors. There will never be a Singapore YouTube or what not. It is not easy to rent a flat and given that people overseas rent flats and not OWN them initially after graduation is enough to put a damper on any aspirations. Now we hear that foreigners have to pay exorbitant prices for rentals. Well Done Singapore. Continue digging your grave. -
Originally posted by walesa:
a) If USD is still peg to gold and not traded in the open market, then why is the value of USD not moving in tandem with gold price?
Granted, SGD is not pegged [b]exclusively to the USD. As you've alluded, the USD is the "most common currency" and the USD plays as integral a role (if not more so than any others) as any other currency in the "basket of currencies" in influencing the worth of the SGD in the FX market. So if your argument that the US could print as much money as it wants were sound, why can't the SGD print as much as it likes too?
I've never seen more drivel than points 1 and 3 (especially point 3) of yours - try telling me you've actually done any course in economics. As a matter of fact, the USD is pegged to gold. Just what on earth are you on about when you say the US is the "only nation that can print money for free"? If they could, they'd have cleared their national debt!
Seriously, have you got any idea how gold is traded as a commodity (or even how commodity markets work)? Or is that something not covered in your textbooks and you're resorting to conjuring up the missing bits from your textbooks in your mind to assume that's how things work?[/b]
b) In 1995, there are US$380 billions note in circulation with around 2/3 outside USA. In 2005, this number double to US$760 billions. Who is printing it?
c) Economist Paul Samuelson and others maintain that the overseas demand for dollars allows the United States to maintain persistent trade deficits without causing the value of the currency to depreciate and the flow of trade to readjust
I suggest that you just keep you discussion to currency, because that is already overwhelming for you. -
They are obviously narcissistic. See the way the price themselves.Originally posted by ShutterBug:
lol..
I can't even be bothered about this topic...
Our gov is just so narcissistic.... 
-
You think Singapore is losing its competitiveness? How long can it stay competitive? will our bet on biotech work out?
-
People used to call NTUC as Never Trust Union Chief, does it not make alot sense now! I wonder if this is the reason why LIM Swee Say, a gentle man, is giving up after the next election?
really? i have have high regards to this man, dispite he is working for the PAP regime to lead NTUC. maybe he realise he cant he cannot do what the PAP ask him to do, fool the unionise workers. -
You.... do know that the Chinese and Japanese hold and are paying for tonnes of US Debt in the form of US Bonds?Originally posted by Gazelle:a) If USD is still peg to gold and not traded in the open market, then why is the value of USD not moving in tandem with gold price?
b) In 1995, there are US$380 billions note in circulation with around 2/3 outside USA. In 2005, this number double to US$760 billions. Who is printing it?
c) Economist Paul Samuelson and others maintain that the overseas demand for dollars allows the United States to maintain persistent trade deficits without causing the value of the currency to depreciate and the flow of trade to readjust
I suggest that you just keep you discussion to currency, because that is already overwhelming for you.
And that Gold isn't used as a form of currency anymore?
I think the person who is actually hopelessly ignorant is you yourself. And as usual you are trying to "find fault in the white guy". -
Unfortunately you fail to comprehend simple English. With globalisation, there is free movement of labour and capital both ways. Talented workers move out where the pay is better and those who cannot compete move out to places where their skills are are needed. Investment managers may move to London for the millions they pay and the production line supervisor may have to move to Dubai if they lack such skills. Far from 'lamenting', I welcome it.Originally posted by walesa:You never cease to amaze me, mate.
So if the pay difference were the issue and primary motivation behind people deciding where to work and this being the primary result of globalisation, how then are you lamenting that people leave Singapore "probably" due to "their skills cannot compete with those of cheap foreign workers"?
So are you for the principles of a market economy and the forces of globalisation, really?
I suppose you could also try explaining how is it then the political leadership of the criminals merits being the best in the world - and by extension, warrants the best remuneration by a mile - when so many other countries are coping better with the management of the "brain drain" problem.. -
And are you an Opposition mouthpiece.Originally posted by Trump_Card:Are u a pro-govt mouthpiece?
For your information, the government does not pay me. You have a problem with free speech?
-
Insurgents do not need to be 'engaged'. They need to be put downOriginally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:If that's the case he seems to be doing a very poor job at it... because it seems the only results of his attempts to "engage" the "insurgency" is to fan the flames even more. -
why don't i feel tt it is competitive
-
If we remain flexible and continuously adapt to the needs of the global economy, we will remain competitive and relevant. To do that, we must be ruthless with our policy to ensure we do what needs to be done for the good of the nation. Biotech is a good bet but never put all your eggs in one basket. With an aging population in the developed West, there will be increasing demand on healthcare. This sector will grow. In addition to that, we should also go into green technology, as the government appears to be doing. If the green lobby in the West gains momentum and the system of carbon trading or personal carbon credit takes off, there will be a demand for green technology.Originally posted by jannycole:You think Singapore is losing its competitiveness? How long can it stay competitive? will our bet on biotech work out? -
Referring to point b) and an earlier point of yours suggesting the US is the only country printing USD, what drivel are you trying to drive home, really? The North Korean won too is only printed by the DPRK, the SGD by Singapore. If you could literally print money at your own free will and not affect the rate of inflation by the slightest, which nation in the world wouldn't be printing its own currency excessively? Taking your argument at face value, why shouldn't the US Treasury rubber stamp a policy that allows them to print as much greenbacks as they like just so that they could service their national debt? (for the sake of this argument, let's assess this simply given your limited intellect and overlook the fact a protracted government bond is actually mutually beneficial for both the bond issuer and receiver - in this case, the US government and the investment banks issuing the bonds - as it provides a market for the issuer to profit, which in turn, benefits more than just the receiver)Originally posted by Gazelle:a) If USD is still peg to gold and not traded in the open market, then why is the value of USD not moving in tandem with gold price?
b) In 1995, there are US$380 billions note in circulation with around 2/3 outside USA. In 2005, this number double to US$760 billions. Who is printing it?
c) Economist Paul Samuelson and others maintain that the overseas demand for dollars allows the United States to maintain persistent trade deficits without causing the value of the currency to depreciate and the flow of trade to readjust
I suggest that you just keep you discussion to currency, because that is already overwhelming for you.
So what exactly are the factors that curtail the amount of money being printed in circulation? If, for a moment, you're suggesting the greenbacks are actually printed in such a callous manner that it actually doesn't impede anything bar the market demand that warrants its issue, try telling me the value of the USD actually doesn't depreciate with respect to other commodities/currencies which are not pegged to the USD.
If you can't get started on addressing the above, feel free to do some research at the library... -
/me grabbing popcorn watching a flame war
ignore me, i am just here to roll my eyes -
We must therefore congrats ourselves as well as throw in a celebration...
-
Refer to your posts.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Unfortunately you fail to comprehend simple English. With globalisation, there is free movement of labour and capital both ways. Talented workers move out where the pay is better and those who cannot compete move out to places where their skills are are needed. Investment managers may move to London for the millions they pay and the production line supervisor may have to move to Dubai if they lack such skills. Far from 'lamenting', I welcome it.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The pay differential is too much...investment managers earn much more in London or New York. Someone with qualifications from LSE, Havard or Wharton would rather work in Wall Street or the City. We need to recruit more foreign talents to build up the momentum...when our industry is able to pay the kind of million dollar wages top fund managers get in London, they will return.
So are you foolishly self-contradictory or is your English so inept you can't even see the irony of your statement in the above 2 posts?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Globalisation means there will be free movement of labour and capital. Young people may leave because the pay is better overseas or because their skills cannot compete with those of cheap foreign workers. Judging from the rants in this forum, it's probably the latter. We want top talent to return (and they will, if we pay well enough) but as for those who cannot make it here, it's better they develop their careers elsewhere.
In the first post, you alluded to the fact that globalisation and market forces will dictate where capable people would go actually depends on the principles of a market economy.
In the latter, you further confirm the believe that globalisation means a "free movement of labour and capital" ( note : we're talking about labour and talents of all sorts here which includes the genuinely talented and what you regard as "cannot make it" ). Yet, you foolishly go on to conclude "We want top talent to return but as for those who cannot make it here, it's better they develop their careers elsewhere". Is globalisation and free market economy simply a matter of "wanting"? If you haven't got the market instruments and forces in place to compete, you simply can't compete. Period. Why would/should any eligible and talented Singaporean who subscribes to the notion of globalisation (which explains his/her departure from these shores in the first place) respond to something that isn't remotely dictated by market forces?
More pertinently, while you alluded to the fact that globalisation means a free movement of labour and capital, you obviously fail to see - or simply remain oblivious to it - that also means if this regime attracts those "who cannot make it", that in truth paints a dire reflection of how inept this regime is at adapting to globalisation. In a global market place where talents are remunerated on the basis of market demand and supply, surely it's no coincidence that this regime's uncanny ability to attract those who "cannot make it" is actually a terrible reflection of how pathetic this regime actually is that it's actually unable to attract more top talent that it wants and instead, ends up with a larger-than-required pool of liability?
So is your English letting your down or are you simply unable to grasp the geist of your argument? Or perhaps, you're obstinately immuned to the fact that this regime has more flaws than your propaganda-inundated mind would permit you to believe? -
haiya..spore is the first here first there..first in asia..but most importantly u all happy or not? if everyone is happy..its good..otherwise become number 1 also is useless to everyone
-
FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!
-
This is a classic example of people talking so much but mean nothing. This is just like trying to cover rubbish with rubbish.Originally posted by walesa:Referring to point b) and an earlier point of yours suggesting the US is the only country printing USD, what drivel are you trying to drive home, really? The North Korean won too is only printed by the DPRK, the SGD by Singapore. If you could literally print money at your own free will and not affect the rate of inflation by the slightest, which nation in the world wouldn't be printing its own currency excessively? Taking your argument at face value, why shouldn't the US Treasury rubber stamp a policy that allows them to print as much greenbacks as they like just so that they could service their national debt? (for the sake of this argument, let's assess this simply given your limited intellect and overlook the fact a protracted government bond is actually mutually beneficial for both the bond issuer and receiver - in this case, the US government and the investment banks issuing the bonds - as it provides a market for the issuer to profit, which in turn, benefits more than just the receiver)
So what exactly are the factors that curtail the amount of money being printed in circulation? If, for a moment, you're suggesting the greenbacks are actually printed in such a callous manner that it actually doesn't impede anything bar the market demand that warrants its issue, try telling me the value of the USD actually doesn't depreciate with respect to other commodities/currencies which are not pegged to the USD.
If you can't get started on addressing the above, feel free to do some research at the library...
I see no point in continuing this conversation with you on bonds etc especially with a person who can tell me that S$ is PEG to US$ and US$ is PEG to GOLD -
What's the point, of being so "big" in everything, but leaving behind "dirty footprints" ?? -
Good that you see you've been espousing rubbish - if nothing, at least my "ancient" and outdated "rubbish" was once pertinent to the practices of the world; unlike your rubbish (yes, the US is the only country in the world that can print the USD and they're free to print money at will - maybe you deserve a Nobel prize in economics for that?) which is utter nonsense and exists only in the confines of your warped mind. I'm indeed amazed you could spot my "outdated" arguments, yet don't see the flaws in your utterly nonsensical arguments.Originally posted by Gazelle:This is a classic example of people talking so much but mean nothing. This is just like trying to cover rubbish with rubbish.
I see no point in continuing this conversation with you on bonds etc especially with a person who can tell me that S$ is PEG to US$ and US$ is PEG to GOLD
And since you're so ept at using wikipedia as a foolproof bible to substantiate your case, just let me provide you with a link that further dispels another load of crap you've been churning out that the SGD was never pegged to any currency : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore_dollar