China, Japan to launch yuan-yen direct trading

Tweet

Play Video

Trade between Asia’s two largest economies is about to get a whole lot easier. China’s central bank confirmed Tuesday that the country will allow the direct trading of its currency against the Japanese yen starting Friday.

VIDEO: CHINA, JAPAN TO LAUNCH YUAN-YEN DIRECT TRADING CCTV News – CNTV English.

This makes the yen the first major currency besides the US dollar that can be directly traded with the RMB. The move is part of efforts made by China and Japan to strengthen cooperation in trade and financial markets. And it’s a huge step forward for the internationalization of the yuan.

After some excitement in the Asian markets yesterday. The People’s Bank of China confirmed on Tuesday that China and Japan will start to directly trade their currencies in Shanghai and Tokyo from June 1. The move will shore up trade and financial ties between Asia’s two biggest economies, and also marks another step to raise the yuan’s international role.

Japanese Finance Minister Jun Azumi, who announced the decision in Tokyo, stressed the cost benefits behind the move.

Azumi said, “By conducting transactions without using a third country’s currency, it will bring merits of reducing transaction costs and lowering risks involved in settlements at financial institutions. It will also contribute to improving convenience of both countries’ currencies and reinvigorate the Tokyo market.”

The step eliminates the US dollar’s monopoly position to set the exchange rate between the two currencies, and follows a deal struck by the leaders of the two countries in December.

Experts say it’s an important move towards the internationalization of China’s yuan currency.

Professor Ding Zhijie, dean of School of Banking & Finance, UIBE, said, “It raises the convertibility of the yuan. And I believe the yuan trading will be accepted by more Asian economies as well as the international markets. It will also push forward the internationalization of the yuan.”

Several banks in the two countries, including Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ and Bank of China, will start the direct trading.

Huang Jiaying, trade with Bank of China said, “The move will likely make the yuan accepted by more Japanese investors as well. It will also help boost the possibility of the yuan becoming an internationally-settled currency, which is an important move of propelling the yuan to become an international reserve currency.”

And Japan, which in March pledged to buy about 10 billion US dollars of Chinese government debt, is the first economy to connect with China’s yuan. The move is likely to strengthen ties with its biggest trading partner.

Japan, China to shore up yen/yuan trade

Japan and China will start trading their currencies directly in Tokyo and Shanghai from June 1 in a move that shores up trade and financial ties between Asia’s two biggest economies and also marks another baby step to raise the yuan’s international role.

The step eliminates the use of the dollar to set the exchange rate and follows an agreement struck by the leaders of the two countries in December, which also involves Japan buying Chinese government debt and efforts to forge a free trade pact between China, Japan and South Korea.

“This is part of China’s broader strategy to reduce dependence on the dollar. The yen has been chosen because of large trade flows between the two countries,” said Dariusz Kowalczyk, senior economist and strategist at Credit Agricole CIB in Hong Kong.

“Volumes of currency trading on shore are small, but this could lead to an expansion of trading with other currencies. It would be easier for China to expand into other Asian currencies.”

Japanese Finance Minister Jun Azumi, who announced the decision in Tokyo, stressed the cost benefits of the move.

“By conducting transactions without using the third country’s currency, it will bring merits of reducing transaction costs and lowering risks involved in settlements at financial institutions,” Azumi told reporters after a cabinet meeting.

The People’s Bank of China noted benefits for mutual trade, but also tied the decision to China’s drive to boost the use of the yuan as a settlement currency for trade and financial transactions.

“Developing the direct yuan/yen trading will help form the direct yuan/yen exchange rate and reduce the trading cost for entities and promote the use of the yuan and yen in bilateral trade and investment as well as help strengthen financial cooperation between the two countries,” it said in a statement.

A separate statement issued by the China Foreign Exchange Trade System said it will provide a market-making system for direct yuan/yen trading.

Until now yen-yuan rates were calculated on the basis of their respective rates against the dollar, so the move is expected to narrow trading spreads, lower transaction costs and allow more trade deals to be settled directly.

For Japan, which in March pledged to buy about $10 billion of Chinese government debt, becoming the first major economy to do so, the move could strengthen ties with its biggest trading partner.

Despite sometimes rancorous political ties between the two neighbours, Japan’s economic fortunes are increasingly tied to China’s economic growth and consumer demand.

Dealers in Shanghai said the near-term effect would be probably higher trading volumes and lower costs.

“Direct yuan-yen trading is likely to cut trading costs, boosting yuan-yen trading liquidity,” said a dealer at a foreign bank. “Most yuan trading against the yen now goes through the dollar, because traders refer to dollar-yuan value to price yen-yuan.”

But some played down the broader impact.

“From what I can see, it doesn’t actually include any opening up of the capital account at all. It just allows a direct cross to be traded rather than actually increasing the amount of flow that can happen onshore to offshore,” Dominic Bunning, currency strategist at HSCB in Hong Kong, said.

“It seems to be more of a technical issue rather than a major development.”

The move to facilitate yen-yuan trading and the debt deal are part of Beijing’s long-term efforts to elevate the yuan’s status as an international currency, which so far have mainly centred on China’s promotion of the yuan to settle trade.

Beijing has struck agreements with several nations from Malaysia to Belarus and Argentina on the use of the yuan in trade and other transactions. It has expanded a pilot programme started in 2009 into a nationwide one allowing firms to settle their trade in yuan.

The result has been a relative surge in the use of the currency. More than 9%of China’s total trade was settled in yuan in 2011, up from just 0.7% in 2010.

Few argue against the idea that the yuan will one day become a reserve currency, given World Bank predictions that China will overtake the United States as the world’s top economy before 2030. But to achieve that the yuan would need to become fully convertible and Beijing has yet to indicate any timetable for reaching that stage..- Reuters

Related post/stories

• Demise of US dollar as world currency
• Crossover: Investors’ reaction to Yuan-Yen direct trading 2012-05-30
• China and Japan to start direct currency trading 2012-05-30
• China-Japan direct currency trading to boost economies, trade 2012-05-29

U.S. designs on South China Sea exposed!

Tweet

BEIJING, May 25 (Xinhua) — U.S. Senator John Kerry‘s recent statement on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea has exposed the country’s selfish intentions for the South China Sea, an area where the United States has no claims to sovereignty and is not a party in disputes there.

Kerry, chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, said during a hearing on the convention held Wednesday that China and other countries are “staking out illegal claims in the South China Sea and elsewhere.”

He added that becoming a party to the treaty would provide an immediate boost to U.S. credibility “as we push back against excessive maritime claims and illegal restrictions on our warships or commercial vessels.”

As the United States turns its national security focus toward the Asia-Pacific region, its willingness to join the convention is a means to find a legal framework for the country to interfere with issues in the South China Sea and elsewhere, as well as maximize its strategic interests in political, economic and military fields around the world.

The U.S. is the only major nation that has refused to sign the treaty, which has been endorsed by 160 countries and the European Union.

The hearing was the first one on the treaty in four years, and the Obama administration and the U.S. Armed Forces are now pushing Congress to sign it.

The reason why the U.S. once refused to sign the treaty is that the treaty’s provisions will limit the free navigational rights of U.S. warships in other countries’ exclusive economic zones.

However, the U.S. attitude toward the convention is now changing.

Dr. Zhang Haiwen, deputy director of the China Institute for Marine Affairs under the State Oceanic Administration, said the U.S. has realized the disadvantages of not signing the convention, which have impaired its role as a leader in global maritime issues.

Kerry said at the hearing that ratifying the treaty will lock down the favorable navigational rights that the U.S. military and shipping interests depend on every single day. It will also strengthen the country’s hand against China and others who “stake out claims” in the Pacific, the Arctic or elsewhere.

The treaty will also help U.S. companies’ oil and gas investments secure the country’s energy future as well as help secure access to rare earth minerals, which the country needs for weapons systems, computers and cell phones, among other products, Kerry added.

Kerry also said that China and other countries are “staking out illegal claims in the South China Sea and elsewhere.” However, the truth is that he thought disputes in the South China Sea have affected U.S. companies’ rights to gain oil and gas resources in the region and the free navigational rights of its vessels.

Zhang said the convention is the fruit of over a decade of international negotiations and the product of the balance of different interests. It provides fundamental and principled provisions for maritime activities for the whole of mankind.

“But the convention itself cannot solve territorial disputes,” said Zhang.

She said China’s territorial claims over some islands and shoals in the South China Sea have sufficient historical evidence and legal bases, and have been recognized by the international community over a long period of time.

It is dangerous that some U.S. politicians are expanding U.S. claims and raising its degree of interference. This will aggravate regional tensions and is not conducive to resolving issues.

Related posts/articles and news:

Who owns the South China Sea islets in the eyes of the world?

China’s warns US of Confrontation over South China Sea

United we stand, divided we fall in South China Sea?

China to handle S China Sea disputes through direct negotiations

BEIJING, May 25 (Xinhua) — A Foreign Ministry spokesman said Friday that China will negotiate directly with relevant parties in regards to resolving disputes in the South China Sea.

“China has long been committed to safeguarding peace and stability by consulting with ASEAN nations and signing agreements, such as the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said. Full story

Video: China opposes third party involvement in Huangyan Island dispute

•	U.S. top diplomatic, military officials urge Senate to ratify UN sea convention
•	U.S. defense chief urges Congress to ratify UN Sea Convention
•	China to handle S China Sea disputes through direct negotiations
•	China strengthens control in Huangyan Island waters
•	China opposes third party involvement in Huangyan Island dispute

China issues 2011 US human rights record

Tweet

US human rights report is full of distortion & false accusations

Watch Video

Play Video

China has hit back at the US State Department’s controversial annual human rights report, saying it is full of distortion and false accusations. China says the US should stop pointing its finger at human rights situations in other countries and regions, a notorious practice of interfering in their internal affairs. In a further response, China has released its own report into the US’s Human Rights Record last year.

VIDEO: CHINA ISSUES REPORT INTO US HUMAN RIGHTS CCTV News – CNTV English.

China’s report says the US is again pointing a finger at the human rights situation in nearly 200 countries and regions, including China. However, the US turns a blind eye to its own terrible rights situation and seldom mentions it in its controversial annual report. China’s report urges the US to face up to its own human rights violations.

China’s report says the United States has real strength in human, financial and material resources to exert effective control over violent crimes. However, its society suffers chronically from such crimes, and its people’s lives, properties and personal security lack proper protection. The US also has a high incidence of gun related crime.

The report says the violation of people’s civil and political rights by the government is severe. US citizens’ rights and freedom were seriously violated during the “Occupy Wall Street” movement, with tens of thousands of protesters arrested. While advocating media and Internet freedom, the US in fact imposes fairly strict restrictions on the media and cyberspace. The US regards itself as the “beacon of democracy”. However, its democracy is largely based on money.

China’s report says the US is the world’s richest country, but Americans’ economic, social and cultural rights are going from bad to worse. Unemployment remains high and the gap between the rich and the poor is continuing to widen. It also notes the number of people classed as poor in the US has hit a record high. More than 46 million Americans were in poverty in 2010, 2.6 million more than a year earlier. The number of American people without health insurance has increased progressively each year.

The report also says racial discrimination is deep-seated in the US. Minority groups regularly confront discrimination at work. They also face inequality in education. Racial discrimination is evident in law enforcement and judicial systems, racial hate crimes are frequent, and immigrants’ rights and interests are not guaranteed.

The rights of women and children rights are suffering. Gender discrimination against women exists widely in the US, and women in the country often experience sexual assault and violence. The report also says many children in the US live in poverty. Violence against children is severe.

The report points out the US has a notorious record of international human rights violations, imposing illegal medical tests on people in other countries. The US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have caused large numbers of civilian casualties. The report also says the US continues to violate the living and development rights of Cubans.

The report says the US has taken human rights as a political instrument to defame other nations in its own strategic interest. While illustrating a dismal record of the US on its own human rights, China’s report says the US is not justified in posing as the world’s fighter for human justice. It uses double standards in evaluating human rights conditions in other countries. China reiterates its stance of opposing foreign intervention in its internal affairs under the pretext of human rights.

Related stories

• China rejects US human rights report 2012-05-25
• Full Text of Human Rights Record of the United States in 2011 2012-05-25
• Chinese Foreign Ministry: US human rights report biased 2012-05-25
• China issues 2011 US human rights record 2012-05-25
• U.S. releases controversial annual human rights report 2012-05-25
• VIDEO: CHINA: 2011 US HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD CCTV News – CNTV English.

ChinaCache, TM in strategic partnership

Tweet

KUALA LUMPUR: ChinaCache International Holdings Ltd and Telekom Malaysia Bhd (TM) have established a strategic partnership in a joint effort to provide Chinese content localisation in Malaysia.

The partnership will improve the accessibility of Chinese content for Malaysian Internet users, where ChinaCache will provide the technology to localise Chinese content in Malaysia which will enhance users’ experience and reduce costs for carriers.

“The localisation technology will allow content to be stored in, and served, via the caches deployed in Malaysia before reaching the end customers through TM’s network,” it said in a joint statement.

ChinaCache is a leading provider of content delivery network services in China.

ChinaCache’s North American branch general manager Joe Zhu said the strong social media presence in Malaysia had accounted for growing interest in Chinese content and ChinaCache was committed to the goal of making that content easily accessible internationally.

“TM is indeed very pleased with this collaboration with ChinaCache.

“Malaysians, especially TM’s customers, will not only be able to enjoy excellent Chinese content but also enjoy enhanced surfing experience as the source of content is stored locally here, which will result in seamless network performance.

“This new collaborative effort between both companies will definitely help cement the value of Malaysia as an important content hub in this region, complementing Malaysia’s existing sound Internet infrastructure,” TM Global executive vice president Rozaimy Abd Rahman said. – The Star

Facebook Seeks Political Ad Dollars

Tweet

 Published by MIT

Political advertisers are going to flock to FB this year

There’s certainly money in politics, and Facebook knows it. The company, now under pressure to to justify its enormous $104 billion IPO, is trying to hire someone to maximize political advertising sales during the 2012 election season in the U.S.

“The Client Partner will establish and strengthen key relationships with national political campaigns and organizations with a focus on driving revenue, platform adoption, advertiser education, and advertiser satisfaction,” the posting on Facebook’s website says.

How much money is in politics for Facebook? That’s hard to say. But with the rise of the Super PAC, campaign spending on advertising will likely reach record-breaking levels this year. A growing percentage of that is moving online, in part because fewer people are watching live TV than during previous election years, according to the global ad agency WPP. The Hill reports that the Obama campaign alone is on track to spend $35 million on total online advertising this year, up from $16 million in 2008.

Unlike other advertisers that have questioned the value of Facebook this week, both the Romney and Obama presidential campaigns are likely to appreciate Facebook’s importance. It had 40 million U.S. users in 2008 compared with 160 million today—almost the entire American voting public, according to The Guardian.

So, yes, we’ll be seeing a lot more politics in and next to our News Feeds over the next few months, targeted based on our activity and our friends’ activity on the network. Whether the lifting of corporate spending limits on political campaigns, a result of a Supreme Court decision in 2010, will actually be a meaningful boost Facebook’s bottom line this year is unknown. The company’s total advertising revenue worldwide was about $3 billion in 2011.

Jessica Leber  Newscribe : get free news in real time

Related posts:

Facebook price falls !

US market ahead: major signs say ‘sell’, the Facebook effect

The Facebook Fallacy 

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg “Likes” Chan and Weds 1 day after IPO

Make money from Facebook IPO!

The Biggest Cost of Facebook’s Growth

Stop the banks from gambling!

Tweet

The JPMorgan Chase debacle is ample reminder that banks are dangerously risking money on dubious bets with dire consequences if they are not stopped.

US giant financial services group JPMorgan Chases trading debacle which has already lost US$2bil and which threatens to raise losses to double that, will likely put pressure for greater regulation of the banking industry, not just in the United States but around the world.

That is as it should be for despite the 2008 financial crisis which resulted from bankers structuring complex and questionable credit derivatives which few understood but many bought because they believed the rating assigned them by unknowledgeable credit rating agencies, the lessons dont appear to have been learnt.

With massive US government help, many banks which were on the brink of failure were rescued and the memories of those tempestuous times when the future of not just the banks but the worlds financial system was in jeopardy seems to have faded away from public consciousness.

Until now that is.

JPMorgans debacle is but a stark reminder that little has changed since the 2008 world financial crisis in terms of how banks operate and that the world is still held to ransom by rogue traders and others who risk shareholders funds and depositors money as easily and as nonchalantly as spinning the dice on a gambling table for a few dollars.

The sad truth is that little has been done despite all the rhetoric to ensure that the predatory chase for profits by banks does not involve gambling with shareholders equity and deposits. Players still get away with massive profits and bonuses when they succeed and little more than slap on the wrist when things go wrong.

It is an indication of a financial world that has gone awry as players such as hedge funds effectively search for new games to play in a massive, borderless casino where the uninitiated are quickly gobbled up and the others play high-stakes games in which some must become major losers.

This comment by Mark Williams, a professor of finance at Boston University, who has also served as a Federal Reserve Board examiner quoted in the New York Times aptly sums up JPMorgans mistake:

JPMorgan Chase has a big hedge fund inside a commercial bank. They should be taking in deposits and making loans, not taking large speculative bets.

The trades by JPMorgan are complex to say the least and no one really seems to understand them. The New York Times reported that the complex position built by the bank included a bullish bet on an index of investment-grade corporate debt and was later paired with a bearish bet on high-yield securities.

The report further said that the trading losses suffered by JPMorgan have accelerated in recent days and have surpassed the banks initial estimate of US$2bil by at least US$1bil. Part of the reason for this is that hedge funds already know JPMorgans position is under pressure and are piling in on the opposite trade. That means the US$4bil losses anticipated may materialise sooner rather than later.

While the US$4bil loss wont threaten JP Morgans capital base, the question that must arise is what if the losses were much bigger and they could well have been. JPMorgan would most likely be considered one of those banks that cant fail and would have been rescued by the US government.

To stop exactly such situations, the Obama administration had put up the Volcker Rule named after former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker who helped formulate it but the legislation is still being hammered out. The rule basically seeks to prohibit banks from trading for their own account.

But there are exceptions and these allow banks to aggregate their positions and offset their exposures in a single hedge. Some feel that JPMorgans so-called hedge an oxymoron in this instance as it hedged nothing falls into that category but others dont.

For most of us, the solution is quite simple and straightforward if you are a bank and you take depositors money, you got no business speculating using that money, especially since you also have access to low-cost funds from the Fed and elsewhere by virtue of being a bank.

But it is an election year in the US and the silly season of course, much like it is here.

Remember, free enterprise and the capitalist system on which the US is built. You cant restrict free enterprise, the reasoning goes, even if it is your money the bank is using.

Big business has big money and they are using that to try and put Mitt Romney into the White House. If that happens, then it may well be bye-bye to banking sector reform which would be bad for the United States and the world.

New York Times columnist and renowned economist Paul Krugman was very blunt in his analysis of the JPMorgan debacle at the end of which he basically thanked JPMorgan Chases chief executive Jamie Dimon for confirming that the banking sector needs greater regulation.

Krugman, an unashamed and unabashed Democrat, has been one of those opinion makers who has been consistently calling for greater regulation of the US financial sector in the wake of world financial crisis.

JPMorgan, relatively unscathed by the world financial crisis sparked off by the subprime crisis but now in trouble through a trade engineered by a trader in London known as The Whale, is a timely reminder that little has been done to stop the recurrence of another world financial crisis.

Let us take heed before it is too late.

A QUESTION OF BUSINESS By P. GUNASEGARAM starbiz@thestar.com.my

Independent consultant and writer P Gunasegaram sometimes thinks that the financial world is just one whole, big, casino of unimagined proportions. The trouble is no one knows who owns it.

Related posts:

 How will JPMorgan’s $2 billion loss affect American banking rules? Senior executives to leave!  May 16, 2012

Lehman Sues JPMorgan for Billions of Dollars in ‘Lost … May 28, 2010

UK bank governor warns of eurozone crisis ‘storm’; Eurozone ‘very close to collapse’! May 17, 2012

MBA today is disrupting the competition?

Tweet

The in word in business school today is disruption 

Harvard Business School (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

AFTER seven weeks of cool spring weather, our Malaysian sun finally arrived in Boston. As I basked in the warm sunshine in the courtyard of McArthurs Hall, Harvard Business School (HBS), a gentle breeze reminded me of Awana Genting back to 2004, where I last enrolled in a two-week HBS management programme organised by our Malaysian HBS Alumni Club. Four HBS professors taught us then.

Here I am, eight years later, being taught by no less than 15 senior Harvard professors covering almost 120 case studies and numerous lectures. To justify their hefty fees, HBS threw their full arsenal of specialist professors at us. From basic strategy, finance, marketing subjects to deal making negotiation to social media to entrepreneurship. We have had the presence of former and current CEOs of Merck, Cisco, Carl Zeiss and many others attending our discussions on their company followed by their explanation and defence on their course of actions/decision making as per their case study.

Today, we covered the Facebook case study to coincide with its listing. And we had the director of FBI giving us a lecture after attending the case study on FBI reorganisation after Sept 11. To say that I am impressed would be an understatement.

It was like a Hollywood movie. There must be at least 10 FBI agents with their standard issued earpiece and dark suits staring at us at the entrance and exit. And then a standing ovation at the end of the speech to send off The Director. Captain America has saved the universe again.

HBS is the post graduate business school of the Harvard University. It has arguably the most revered MBA programme in the world. With a fixed annual enrolment of 900 students, an applicant has a 7% success rate and he or she will be at least 27 years old with an average of four years working experience. It is a two-year programme with full residential accommodation provided in campus. Depending on ones preferred living standards, the expected investment should be between US$160,000 and US$200,000 (RM480,000 and RM600,000) over two years.

It is in the executive education that HBS has amazed me the most. They have built a business model that is difficult to replicate when in the world, all kinds of education business is being commoditised. They have differentiated themselves in terms of positioning, reputation and school fees. High, higher, highest.

HBS is a money making machine. They have built an organisation that is always evolving, very sensitive to the external environment. If necessary, they are not afraid to modify their strategy, realign people, structure, processes and their unique culture to face the new environment. All the time, staying close to their core strategy of providing a unique learning experience to their target market. They practise what they preach.

Sensitive to change

So are you sensitive to the changing environment’ When do you think is a good time for your organisation to adjust your strategy and realign your organisation to face new challenges’ Is it during the good times or only when your organisation is in intensive care’

On hindsight, just look at Malaysia Airlines over the last 15 years. What do you think the management should have done then’ When Southwest Airlines and Ryanair in the United States and Europe respectively have successfully taken their markets by storm, they should not have ignored the threat set by AirAsia. When you see air ticket prices being commoditised, you will be flying into a smaller gross margin zone. Which means you need a leaner and lower cost structured organisation to face a new challenging environment. So what do you think happened’ And is their current organisational cost structure lean enough to face even tougher challenges today’ We will find out within 15 months.

In the current world where many products and services are moving towards commoditisation, how are you differentiating your products and services from the competition’ More importantly, how do you continue to differentiate to stay ahead of your competition’ Look at Astro. From a virtual stranglehold grip on cable TV market, their monopoly status has been threatened by new entrants offering lower cost options straight to your homes. Astros response must be swift and decisive. As a true market leader, Astro should pre-empt and disrupt the competition. With new technology and smart devices like iPad and smartphones, Astro will deliver contents to their consumers anywhere their consumers find it convenient to consume. Just like The Stars ePaper.

Then from the competitors viewpoint, just imagine Malay Mail relaunched as an ePaper. Massive savings on newsprint and delivery costs. Does that mean that this is the beginning of the end of free physical newspaper’ Absolutely intriguing. Technological advances have disrupted businesses all over the world. And HBS is actually reviewing amongst themselves whether e-learning will disrupt their current successful executive education model’ Will your business be disrupted by new technologies’ If it is, be afraid. Be very afraid.

High margin

I have always emphasised that entrepreneur wannabes should go into high margin business. Which means avoid businesses that is being commoditised and having the ability to differentiate your products or services from your competition. The in word in business school today is disruption. Disrupt others before they disrupt you. Disrupt yourself to stay ahead. Stay ahead of technology disruption. Be the disruptor not the disruptee. There are no such words. I just disrupted the dictionary.

So is the HBS executive education programme as good as they claimed’ Does it justify the high positioning and high cost charged’ Honestly, I have no idea. They have kept us so busy from day one to stop us from thinking about it. And they have piled a tonne of case studies and notes onto us. Plus many free books written by the professors. So much so that this bunch of senior executives with an average age of 47 years face information fatigue, CPU overload and degrading eyesights.

Case studies still piling in until the last day. John Kotter still to speak next week. But spirits are high as we look forward to the close of the programme. This programme has been a major disruption to my life. Miss my country, my sunshine, my food, my friends and colleagues. And most of all my family.

Have a happy weekend.

ON YOUR OWN By TAN THIAM HOCK

The writer is an entrepreneur who hopes to share his experience and insights with readers who want to take that giant leap into business but are not sure if they should. Email him at thtan@alliancecosmetics.com

Dog attacks humans, it’s the owner, not the breed!

Tweet

Ferocious debates notwithstanding, there are studies to show that almost every breed has been involved in fatal dog bites, and dogs that bite humans were 2.8 times as likely to be chained as unchained.

IN a kopitiam in Subang Jaya, Selangor, two 30-something women were snarling at each other over dogs.

A woman, whose bark was probably (hopefully) worse than her bite, insisted that pit bulls should be banned in Malaysia while her canine-loving friend argued otherwise.

Both were in a ferocious discussion about a death in their neighbourhood.

And I thought: “Who let the dogs out?”

On Tuesday morning, a 74-year-old man was mauled by a miniature bull terrier cross while jogging about 1km from his house in Subang Jaya.

The dog attacked Yip Sun Wah for almost four minutes, biting his neck and almost tearing of his left ear.

The Star reported that the owner, a 25-year-old accountant, bought the animal three months ago after her house was robbed.

Eavesdropping, I pretended to be fascinated with the condensation on my glass of iced white Ipoh coffee.

The woman whose bark was hopefully worse than her bite went on and on about how “fierce” dogs (i.e. Akita, Neapolitan Mastiff, American Bulldog, Dogo Argentino, Fila Brasileiro, Japanese Tosa and American Pit bull) were “killers on the loose”.

She supported the knee-jerk decision (in my opinion) by MPSJ (Subang Jaya Municipal Council) to immediately ban these dogs – classified as under the “big” category as predisposed to aggressive or dangerous behaviour.

Her friend, whose expression was that of a terrified Chihuahua, snarled back, calling the woman Mussolini for supporting a fascist move.

The dog-hating woman and MPSJ, I thought, were barking up the wrong tree.

I wanted to interject in the “dogfight”. But I didn’t as I was afriad the two rabid women would maul me.

Instead, I fired up my iPad to find an article which I read in the New Yorker, a weekly magazine, about a few years back that a violent dog was a reflection of its owner and not its breed.

It was written by the clever Malcolm Gladwell who has authored bestselling non-fiction books such as The Tipping Point: How Little Things Make a Big Difference and Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking.

A quick search on www.new yorker.com produced Gladwell’s article titled Troublemakers: What Pit Bulls Can Teach Us About Profiling, published on Feb 6, 2006.

Gladwell argued that the notion of a pit-bull menace rested on unstable generalisation.

Quoting Randall Lockwood, one of the United States’ leading dog bite experts, he wrote that Lockwood had seen virtually every breed involved in fatal dog bites.

“… including Pomeranians and everything else, except a beagle or a basset hound,” Lockwood said. “And there’s always one or two deaths attributable to malamutes or huskies, although you never hear people clamouring for a ban on those breeds.”

Gladwell also quoted a study that found dogs that bite humans were 2.8 times as likely to be chained as unchained.

“About 20% of the dogs involved in fatalities were chained at the time, and had a history of long-term chaining,” said Lockwood.

“Now, are they chained because they are aggressive or aggressive because they are chained? It’s a bit of both.

“These are animals that have not had an opportunity to become socialised to people. They don’t necessarily even know that children are small human beings. They tend to see them as prey.”

Gladwell continued: “The strongest connection of all, though, is between the trait of dog viciousness and certain kinds of dog owners. In about a quarter of fatal dog-bite cases, the dog owners were previously involved in illegal fighting.

“The dogs that bite people are, in many cases, socially isolated because their owners are socially isolated, and they are vicious because they have owners who want a vicious dog.

“The junk-yard German shepherd – which looks as if it would rip your throat out – and the German shepherd guide dog are the same breed. But they are not the same dog, because they have owners with different intentions.”

Lockwood said: “A fatal dog attack is not just a dog bite by a big or aggressive dog. It is usually a perfect storm of bad human-canine interactions – the wrong dog, the wrong background, the wrong history in the hands of the wrong person in the wrong environmental situation.”

If you think I’m a die-hard dog lover, I’m not.

When I was a 12-year-old, a dog (owned by a Catholic convent running Stella Maris primary school in Tanjung Aru, Sabah) bit the back of my left knee.

It was a local breed.

ONE MAN’S MEAT By PHILIP GOLINGAI

Related posts:

American Pit Bull Kills Jogger !

Pit bull Terrier, a restricted breed; Time to regulate pet shops!

Politics and religion a bad mix !

Tweet

People who go to places of worship are united in their faith and never for a particular political party or politician.

PRESIDENT Barack Obama has landed himself in a controversy by declaring his support for same-sex marriage. The US President has obviously taken into account the political impact of his move ahead of the US presidential election.

He must have done his maths and worked out the number of votes he could win and lose as a result of his stand. Obama is no angel. He is a politician and his only concern is to get himself re-elected.

Official photographic portrait of US President Barack Obama (born 4 August 1961; assumed office 20 January 2009) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Last week, a Gallup Poll Survey showed that 50% of Americans supported gay marriage while 48% opposed it. What Obama hopes to do from his announcement is to win over the younger voters who are more open to this subject. His rival, Republican’s Mitt Romney, has come under attack from the Obama camp for being out of touch with his anti-gay marriage stand.

Obama also believes that blacks will still stick with him even though opposition against gay marriage among black church-goers is the highest among all the racial groups in the US. He retains the black votes and wins extra votes from the white liberals, and he knows he’s into his second term.

But I do not think it is necessary for Obama to invoke his Christian faith as well as Scripture in his defence of gay marriage.

He is not only the first American president to reaffirm same-sex marriage but must also be the first one to quote from the Bible to justify his decision. In this instance, he quoted Matthew 7:12, known as the Golden Rule from Jesus’ Sermon On The Mount.

The Sermon On The Mount is a collection of sayings and teachings of Jesus that emphasises moral teaching in the Gospel of Matthew. The Sermon is the longest piece of teaching from Jesus in the New Testament.

In a nutshell, the Golden Rule states that one should treat others the way one wants to be treated. My Bible states the Golden Rule paragraph as: “Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets.”

What Obama has done, like many politicians and their supporters including those in Malaysia, is to read selectively a passage or chapter from a holy book to back their political arguments – political expediency, in other words.

Worse still, some Obama supporters have written about or appeared on TV to point out how some figures in the Bible were polygamists or adulterers while conveniently leaving out the parts that these people eventually repented and found God. They can get away with this because most of us feel inadequate to take on a debate on theology.

Holy books are supposed to be read as a whole, not as a chapter or two, to enable us to have a complete understanding.

Obama, for example, has even implied that the Apostle Paul’s objection to homosexuality in the Bible “is less than transparent” and perhaps even at odds with Jesus. I am not sure if Obama, whose campaign theme is Change, is planning to change the Scripture.

In Malaysia, we are used to reading and hearing PAS leaders – politicians masquerading as theologians – quoting from the Quran to justify their political positions. Umno leaders are often criticised as “pharaohs” from the Age of Ignorance – kejahilan – before the age of Islam.

But now there is a trend among some Malaysian church leaders and Christian-based writers, who support Pakatan Rakyat, to quote from Scripture to justify the need to vote against the government in the coming general election.

This is done during Sunday sermons and via email, and those who are uncomfortable with this religious push are being made to feel guilty or not in sync with the rest of the church. Likewise, nobody wants to listen to a priest or pastor on a Sunday heaping praises on the Barisan Nasional or telling us about the coalition’s transformation plans. We will leave that to the Prime Minister and Datuk Seri Idris Jala.

Politics and religion should not be mixed. People who go to places of worship are united in their faith and never for a particular political party or politician. That’s why we are in a democracy and that’s why we have elections – the right to differ and the right to choose.

The lesson to learn from the Obama controversy is this – the first time around, he was a fresh personality and people around the US wanted change. They were fed up with anything conventional and mainstream. Obama represented hope and ideals.

But the fact is, he is not a Saviour. He is just another self-serving politician who will do anything for self-preservation.

First, it was same-sex civil union. Now it’s same-sex marriage and once that’s legal, same-sex couples would have the constitutional rights to adopt babies from orphanages, and churches will break the law if they reject performing wedding rites for them.

Well, that’s change for you from Obama.

On The Beat  By WONG CHUN WAI

Related posts:

Practise ‘Addin’, a Malaysian way of life? PAS Vows Hudud for Malaysia!

Politics, Religion don’t mix!
Don’t let the sun go down on our rights; those mess up politics …
Malaysian Chinese at a Political Crossroads forum …
Speaking up for religious tolerance 
Is the Two-Party-Sytem becoming a Two-Race-System … 
Get set for Malaysian politics of the young!

America, a “Generation of Sissies”

Tweet

The “elephant in the room”— one big question in the minds of so many Americans is—“Why has the middle class in America lost so much ground, and when will it recover to earn better wages (and close the gap between the top earners and the middle class)?”   The answers are brutally simple:  ”Because America’s middle class became non-competitive globally,” and, “Not until American middle class workers—and the kind of work they do—become globally competitive again”   There are two huge problems facing the America in the future:  one is demographic, the other is cultural.

America (Photo credit: acb)

1)  “Baby Boomers” are retiring from the work force at the rate of 10,000 per day, and will do so for 17 years.  Most of them don’t have enough pension or 401(k) assets to support retirement for their life expectancy (15-20 years).  Too few employerswill hire these older folks, with their potential problems of age—reduced stamina and more health-related problems (and higher health care costs).

2) In recent decades, American parents have raised a “Generation of Sissies”—of spoiled, lazy, pampered and over-rated youth—who are highly educated, but in things that the world doesn’t value very much (and thus won’t pay for).  The top 25% may be as good, as bright, as motivated as ever, and will likely be as successful as ever.   The vast majority of this generation consists of formally educated, but spoiled, soft post-adolescents, who will struggle to be self-sustaining as adults.  Because of this, they will not be able to support the massive wave of retired “Boomers,” who will be going broke in their later years.  In eras past, the elderly were supported by the coming younger generation(s).  Those days are gone.

Members of this “Generation of Sissies” have been the victims of being coddled, babied, pampered, misled, misguided, and under-educated so badly that their “take care of me” upbringing cannot be sustained as they move into adulthood.   The parents, who did this, also share in the responsibility for the failure of America’s educational system.

I won’t lay all the “blame” for these failures on American youth—although they have been willing accomplices.  Parents and educators failed to prepare them for adult life in the cold harsh world, and where they must compete for gainful employment.  Then the youth chose easy and fun majors in college; not the ones in that are in demand by employers.  Thus they can’t find jobs, or certainly not good paying jobs.

For too long, American parents have also abdicated the responsibilities for educating and raising their children to a cadre of teachers and educational institutions ill suited for the task at hand.  Parents used to prepare children to take care of themselves—sort of an apprenticeship in becoming an adult.  Along the way, they used to teach them, and demand of them, that they learn critical personal skills, and useful, responsible habits—like earning your own way in life.  Not any more.

Now, because of globalization the jobs have gone to wherever qualified workers will do them for the least pay.  American workers have fallen behind global competitors.  Thus, the American middle class, now and for the foreseeable future, will have to “play catch up” —learning new skills and how to apply them—and then employers will have to regain the work that provides the jobs.  Otherwise, the middle class will continue to languish with subpar wages—at least until it becomes competitive again, if that ever happens.  The only part of the middle class with growth prospects are employees of new, small businesses that grow–when they are not stifled by an oppressive government regulations.

 

Worse yet, is the untimeliness of this “Generation of Sissies,” who think that there are no winners or losers.  They learned this because everyone got rewarded just for participating. Trophies no longer represented hard work and winning to them.  Success meant just being involved and  “showing up”—and sometimes, not even that.  News flash for Americans of this Generation of Sissies: In the cold, harsh world of 21^st century global business there ARE winners and losers—and YOU are losing!

The “Generation of Sissies was victimized by too-busy parents, who abdicated their responsibilities, and tried to pass them off onto schools and teachers.  The teachers were not prepared to handle these new responsibilities.   Add to this the expectations that have been created: “free meals” (government funded, means “free”) that go far beyond the old school lunches; “free transportation” (or being driven to school);  “free extracurricular activities,” and much more.   And for this, all they had to do was“show up.”  Even grades are no longer a dose of reality.  Kinder words replace letter grades, to soften the truth of impending mediocrity.

Schools now teach “softer studies” (some of which used to be taught at home by parents) make up over 1/3 of total credits: “21st century life,” or “career-technical education, or “health, safety, & physical education,” or “visual & performing arts,” and “language arts literacy.”  Many students can’t write a grammatically correct sentence, and some don’t even see the point in learning to write (cursive) at all.  They use Text-messages and Tweets.   Signatures are nearly obsolete.

Schools still require a modicum of Math and Science, but not enough to meet todays employment demands.  In many cases, one 3-credit course (out of 110 credits) is offered on financial, economic, business, and entrepreneurial topics. Teachers are not held to the highest standards either, since doing so would require compensating the best ones more, and removing the worst ones—and teachers’ unions (and tenure) simply won’t allow that.  Today’s youth learn that being late, or absent isn’t so bad, because there is always an “excuse.”  But when they get in the world of work, employers expect employees to show up, on time, every day, and actually work all day.

Then parents pay a fortune (instead of putting it away for retirement) for college because it used to be a sure path to a decent job  (Now students graduate deeply in debt—over $1 Trillion and rising).  A degree in the arts or humanities may have once been the ticket to a job, but it’s not any more!   The youth of today and the adults of tomorrow simply have not been educated in the reality, the necessary skills and the knowledge they need to be competitive and self-sufficient.  Many do not have a clear understanding of how much hard work and  commitment they must invest to ensure their own future.

Too many people  feel sorry for these “underachievers,” even though part of the failure is their own fault.   The “Occupy movement” is filled with members of this “Generation of Sissies.”  They expect someone to “take care of them” and give them what they cannot or are unprepared to earn for themselves.   Who has what that they want?  The very people who worked hard to get a good education, studied, learned, applied themselves and learned to compete.

There will be negative comments about my title: “Generation of Sissies”—as being demeaning.  These comments will come mostly from the very same segment of society that helped create these problems—and still condones them.  To them I say, “Prove me wrong.”  Right now, the results confirm what I have written.  Until America puts the onus for education back onto the people where it belongs—first on youth and their parents, and next on quality schools and good teachers—the American middle class is doomed to remain stuck where it is.  Any other outcome is a delusion.

Can these problems be fixed?  Yes, but it took an entire generation or more to create them, so the fix will be slow and painful–as it is proving to be right now.   There is an even larger question.  It is not, ” WILL AMERICA COMPETE in the global economy of the 21^st century?  It is, “DO AMERICANS HAVE THE WILL TO COMPETE?   Will Americans take the necessary actions to make themselves and future generations competitive.  We can only hope that the answer to this question is YES!

By  John Mariotti, Forbes Contributor

John Mariotti is an internationally known executive and an award-winning author. His newest book, co-authored with D. M. Lukas, Hope is NOT a Strategy: Leadership Lessons from the Obama Presidency is available now at www.amazon.com  in paperback and Kindle, and in other e-book formats at www.smashwords.com

Newscribe : get free news in real time