Temasek selling Merrill Lynch at a loss
-
Originally posted by eagle:
I see a troll who cannot even handle simple 'static' academic maths, yet want to attempt to discuss 'dynamic' stuff
Wanting to run before being able to walk properly.
You are most welcome to answer those questions I posted to 5125. thats only IF, you have substance to back up what you said and not some meaningless y = f(x) -
Originally posted by O o O:
Sure, lets talk about logic.
Singapore current inflation is (x) 7% and Q208 private property price grew at a rate of (y) 0.2%. So based on your believe that y = g(x,z), and f(x) = g(x,z).means y = f(x) and it is guranteed by laws of mathematics, can I know what will be your investment decision to hedge against inflation? Would you invest in property?
Or you need to figure out what are the 10 or 20 variable beside x and y?
Academic maths are static, investment and economic conditions are dynamic, so please dont try to impress me with you maths when we are talking about economic.
Dont get me wrong and dont put words in my mouth. I never said what was highlighted red. I said if f(x) can be used to represent y, then z must be a variable dependent on x and the space containing z can be span by the basis of the space of x.
Dont duan4 zhang1 qu3 yi4. I said law of mathematics in logic can gurantee a certain form of argument is logically correct, not in governing dynamics. Governing dynamics is a tough area of research.
I have never even state any comment about me bing an expert in real estate etc...in fact in my earlier post , I declare myself as a noob in real estate.
My argument with u is ur use of argument structure is wrong...nothing else.
Ur deduction of having other variables to disclaim the existence of a certain variable is logically wrong....hence cannot be used as an effective argument. That is all I want to say.
U simply dont understand my point of argument and u started treating me as a threat and put all kind of nonsense in my mouth. Be objective....I am not trying to disclaim ur other variables as nonsense...I am only trying to discredit ur logically flawed argument form.
-
Originally posted by Mostwanted5125:
Dont get me wrong and dont put words in my mouth. I never said what was highlighted red. I said if f(x) can be used to represent y, then z must be a variable dependent on x and the space containing z can be span by the basis of the space of x.
Dont duan4 zhang1 qu3 yi4. I said law of mathematics in logic can gurantee a certain form of argument is logically correct, not in governing dynamics. Governing dynamics is a tough area of research.
I have never even state any comment about me bing an expert in real estate etc...in fact in my earlier post , I declare myself as a noob in real estate.
My argument with u is ur use of argument structure is wrong...nothing else.
Ur deduction of having other variables to disclaim the existence of a certain variable is logically wrong....hence cannot be used as an effective argument. That is all I want to say.
U simply dont understand my point of argument and u started treating me as a threat and put all kind of nonsense in my mouth. Be objective....I am not trying to disclaim ur other variables as nonsense...I am only trying to discredit ur logically flawed argument form.
Dont get me wrong and dont put words in my mouth.
This internet troll does that aplenty here. Even after being banned for being childish multiple times, he continues to registers new nicks to do the same things over and over again. He's purposely trying to bait you. Best is to ignore him totally.
-
Originally posted by eagle:
This internet troll does that aplenty here. Even after being banned for being childish multiple times, he continues to registers new nicks to do the same things over and over again. He's purposely trying to bait you. Best is to ignore him totally.
A new user feeling the effects of 0 o 0 (aka Gazelle) putting words into their mouth.
-
Originally posted by eagle:
This internet troll does that aplenty here. Even after being banned for being childish multiple times, he continues to registers new nicks to do the same things over and over again. He's purposely trying to bait you. Best is to ignore him totally.
Something could be seriously wrong with him.....He thinks that me discrediting his argument form as totally regarding all his argument points as rubbish. I wonder what makes him so blindly defensive and always get the wrong idea of what ppl are trying to say.
-
Originally posted by Mostwanted5125:
Something could be seriously wrong with him.....He thinks that me discrediting his argument form as totally regarding all his argument points as rubbish. I wonder what makes him so blindly defensive and always get the wrong idea of what ppl are trying to say.
You are not the first one, many forumers here feel the same way too.The majority here believe that he could be autistic.
-
Originally posted by Mostwanted5125:
Dont get me wrong and dont put words in my mouth. I never said what was highlighted red. I said if f(x) can be used to represent y, then z must be a variable dependent on x and the space containing z can be span by the basis of the space of x.
Dont duan4 zhang1 qu3 yi4. I said law of mathematics in logic can gurantee a certain form of argument is logically correct, not in governing dynamics. Governing dynamics is a tough area of research.
I have never even state any comment about me bing an expert in real estate etc...in fact in my earlier post , I declare myself as a noob in real estate.
My argument with u is ur use of argument structure is wrong...nothing else.
Ur deduction of having other variables to disclaim the existence of a certain variable is logically wrong....hence cannot be used as an effective argument. That is all I want to say.
U simply dont understand my point of argument and u started treating me as a threat and put all kind of nonsense in my mouth. Be objective....I am not trying to disclaim ur other variables as nonsense...I am only trying to discredit ur logically flawed argument form.
I believe your argument is targeting at the below statement.
So if you said that it is incorrect, will you be able to show us with some example of how rising inflation can create a direct upward pressure on property price.
By claiming that inflation is a function of property price, you are simply showing your lack on understanding in what you are talking about.
-
Originally posted by Mostwanted5125:
Something could be seriously wrong with him.....He thinks that me discrediting his argument form as totally regarding all his argument points as rubbish. I wonder what makes him so blindly defensive and always get the wrong idea of what ppl are trying to say.
5125, dont worry, I will give credit where credit is due. But definitely not when someone who is trying to impress me with some mathematic equations which he dont even know how to use it to make investment decision.I am looking forward for you to explain inflation as a function of property price.
-
Maurizio and Eagle,
since you are the one who came up with that stupid theory about property prices will move inline with inflation, why dont you give 5125 a helping hand to prove that your theory is right instead of wasting your time talking cock on the side line?
-
Originally posted by O o O:
I believe your argument is targeting at the below statement.
So if you said that it is incorrect, will you be able to show us with some example of how rising inflation can create a direct upward pressure on property price.
Sigh....u are again taking only parts of ur post....refer to the post I have point out the logical error.
Again u dont understand my point of view. I am not saying WHICH VARIABLES ARE WRONG!!!!! I am only saying u cannot use the fact the existence of other variables to discredit the existence of a possible variable. Urs is an economic qns while what I am correcting u is a mathematical one.
FYI, u need to brush up ur O level math. "y is a function of x" so "inflation is a function of property price" means Property price is a parameter( so call x) of inflation.
What u implied in red is opposite of the statement u are saying....u are saying inflation now is the parameter or the so called variable.
With such mediocre understanding in basic math, please stop arguing using precise words such as "function, variables etc" It only exposes ur lack of understanding in them.
-
Originally posted by O o O:
5125, dont worry, I will give credit where credit is due. But definitely not when someone who is trying to impress me with some mathematic equations which he dont even know how to use it to make investment decision.I am looking forward for you to explain inflation as a function of property price.
IN NO PARTS AM I ARGUING UR INVESTMENT DECISION!!!!! U STILL DONT GET WHAT I SAID.....
MAYBE U REALLY ARE A TROLL!!!!
-
Originally posted by Mostwanted5125:
Something could be seriously wrong with him.....He thinks that me discrediting his argument form as totally regarding all his argument points as rubbish. I wonder what makes him so blindly defensive and always get the wrong idea of what ppl are trying to say.
I believe as you continue to go along, you will see him repeating and repeating his previous posts, asking for answers again and again even though they have been answered => sign of autism.
Maybe we could look at page B32 in today's MyPaper. It explains that people who like to throw insults frequently are insecure, and need to do that to feel some sort of security.
What else can explain the fact that this troll, even after getting banned multiple times, registers a new nick again to come here to throw insults one after another. His main purpose is not discussion, but as he have said, to make others look like a fool because it is , even though he has never succeeded.
-
Originally posted by Mostwanted5125:
IN NO PARTS AM I ARGUING UR INVESTMENT DECISION!!!!! U STILL DONT GET WHAT I SAID.....
MAYBE U REALLY ARE A TROLL!!!!
I suggest you ignore him totally. Dont even bother to reply him.
Just let him continue to rant and post. He has totally zero contributions to SgForums.
If you caught him in his pants (such as him telling me about his theory of tax invasion), he will start insulting.
Yet if you use articles to prove to him, he will troll around and tell you your articles are wrong, and demand more proofs.
-
Originally posted by Mostwanted5125:
Sigh....u are again taking only parts of ur post....refer to the post I have point out the logical error.
Again u dont understand my point of view. I am not saying WHICH VARIABLES ARE WRONG!!!!! I am only saying u cannot use the fact the existence of other variables to discredit the existence of a possible variable. Urs is an economic qns while what I am correcting u is a mathematical one.
FYI, u need to brush up ur O level math. "y is a function of x" so "inflation is a function of property price" means Property price is a parameter( so call x) of inflation.
What u implied in red is opposite of the statement u are saying....u are saying inflation now is the parameter or the so called variable.
With such mediocre understanding in basic math, please stop arguing using precise words such as "function, variables etc" It only exposes ur lack of understanding in them.
5125, since my discussion with the 2 idiot in this forum is talking about inflation and property investment, so please dont come and hijack this discussion just to show off you little mathamatics knowledge in this forum.
O-level maths? I did both my E and A about 18 years and got A and B grade respectively for my Os. Do you expect me to dig out my 18 years old text book so that I could engage in a meaningless discussion with you?
With all that brillian mathametical understanding, can you tell me if it is wise to invest in property bases on + inflation figures?
FYI, you need to brush up your knowlegde on basic economics and finance, and I am not even talking about property investment. These are really basic stuffs which only 2 idiots in this forum got it wrong.
-
Originally posted by Mostwanted5125:
IN NO PARTS AM I ARGUING UR INVESTMENT DECISION!!!!! U STILL DONT GET WHAT I SAID.....
MAYBE U REALLY ARE A TROLL!!!!
Maybe you should ask yourself if you are getting way off-topic in a political forum. -
Originally posted by O o O:
5125, since my discussion with the 2 idiot in this forum is talking about inflation and property investment, so please dont come and hijack this discussion just to show off you little mathamatics knowledge in this forum.
O-level maths? I did both my E and A about 18 years and got A and B grade respectively for my Os. Do you expect me to dig out my 18 years old text book so that I could engage in a meaningless discussion with you?
With all that brillian mathametical understanding, can you tell me if it is wise to invest in property bases on + inflation figures?
FYI, you need to brush up your knowlegde on basic economics and finance, and I am not even talking about property investment. These are really basic stuffs which only 2 idiots in this forum got it wrong.
wah. quote first for future reference.
-
Originally posted by eagle:
I suggest you ignore him totally. Dont even bother to reply him.
Just let him continue to rant and post. He has totally zero contributions to SgForums.
If you caught him in his pants (such as him telling me about his theory of tax invasion), he will start insulting.
Yet if you use articles to prove to him, he will troll around and tell you your articles are wrong, and demand more proofs.
I think you should let 5125 continue because he is trying to put some sense into your stupid theory about property prices moving inline with inflation.Or are you trying to engage him to join you at your little HOMEWORK forum?
-
Originally posted by O o O:
5125, since my discussion with the 2 idiot in this forum is talking about inflation and property investment, so please dont come and hijack this discussion just to show off you little mathamatics knowledge in this forum.
O-level maths? I did both my E and A about 18 years and got A and B grade respectively for my Os. Do you expect me to dig out my 18 years old text book so that I could engage in a meaningless discussion with you?
With all that brillian mathametical understanding, can you tell me if it is wise to invest in property bases on + inflation figures?
FYI, you need to brush up your knowlegde on basic economics and finance, and I am not even talking about property investment. These are really basic stuffs which only 2 idiots in this forum got it wrong.
Listen....since u accuse me of showing off and uses such crude words on me...I shall not refrain myself.
Ur Fuc k ing result in O level shows how much ur intelligence is....ur A math sucks and yet u branch into econs where true economists spend years to polish their mathematical modelling skills.
I am FUC KING telling u that ur STUPID ARGUMENT IS OF WRONG LOGICAL FORM. And because of that u cannot use that to discredit a potential variable. And hence not fair for ppl to swallow ur argument.
Who are u to tell ppl to accept arguments that are flawed logically?? Instead, u should give cases to suggest that certain potential varaibles are wrong, not by the existence of other variables...
If ur argument is logically wrong....I wonder how are u going to convince ppl to invest????
If u wish me to speak to u in a manner of an ah beng ...I am more than capable....show ppl some respect if u want ppl to respect U!!!!!!
-
Originally posted by O o O:
5125, since my discussion with the 2 idiot in this forum is talking about inflation and property investment, so please dont come and hijack this discussion just to show off you little mathamatics knowledge in this forum.
O-level maths? I did both my E and A about 18 years and got A and B grade respectively for my Os. Do you expect me to dig out my 18 years old text book so that I could engage in a meaningless discussion with you?
With all that brillian mathametical understanding, can you tell me if it is wise to invest in property bases on + inflation figures?
FYI, you need to brush up your knowlegde on basic economics and finance, and I am not even talking about property investment. These are really basic stuffs which only 2 idiots in this forum got it wrong.
wah!!!
E and A maths for O levels!!!
We are so amused with your achivements!!!
-
Originally posted by freedom4ever:
wah. quote first for future reference.
He's telling us his maths is lousy; he only got a B
-
Mostwanted5125,
seriously, no point getting worked up about him, he would have achieved his aim of pissing forumers off.
-
Originally posted by Mostwanted5125:
Listen....since u accuse me of showing off and uses such crude words on me...I shall not refrain myself.
Ur Fuc k ing result in O level shows how much ur intelligence is....ur A math sucks and yet u branch into econs where true economists spend years to polish their mathematical modelling skills.
I am FUC KING telling u that ur STUPID ARGUMENT IS OF WRONG LOGICAL FORM. And because of that u cannot use that to discredit a potential variable. And hence not fair for ppl to swallow ur argument.
Who are u to tell ppl to accept arguments that are flawed logically?? Instead, u should give cases to suggest that certain potential varaibles are wrong, not by the existence of other variables...
If ur argument is logically wrong....I wonder how are u going to convince ppl to invest????
If u wish me to speak to u in a manner of an ah beng ...I am more than capable....show ppl some respect if u want ppl to respect U!!!!!!
Hey, don't burst out. That's exactly what an internet troll wants.
An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
wah!!!
E and A maths for O levels!!!
We are so amused with your achivements!!!
He seems very proud of his B somemore
-
There are folks here that do C and F maths, they don't even dare reveal their results.
Then there are those with A & E maths making brandishing his results to the world.
-
Originally posted by eagle:
He seems very proud of his B somemore
do note that it is 18 years ago.