本地化语言，随便谈谈

过路客

原帖由 goodluck88 于 3-12-2008 11:33 AM 发表
美国的三大汽车工业，有没有合并的可能性？

面对着破产危机，只要能保住公司，什么事情都可以商量。

但，如果有得选，三大肯定不会要合并。

就连我国的普腾，都不肯卖或合并。理由是？关乎国家工业、就业人数（上万人）、声誉。可能还有一点个人贡献...... 的因素，这个不知道。

但那三大呢？不要说是美国人的骄傲，就连我们的历史教科书、科学教科书，都有 Henry Ford 的大名。
还有 GM 呢？听过 cadillac 吗？很多人以为本地没卖 GM 的牌子。看多路上 Daewoo、Saab、Chevrolet 等等吗？在路上驰骋自己的宝座，脸上好像有风那样。当然，要负担（消费）得起这些车子，不是容易的事情。

试想想，如果这些牌子破产了，这些车主感觉如何？

想像不到，换个角度。如果 proton 或 perodua 破产了，这两个牌子从此在市场上消失了。那么，驾着这些车的车主，感觉如何呢？

这个应该比较有感觉吧。

美国人的感觉，更不用说了。

所以，美国人都不想这三大破产。

可惜，如今美国面对更严重的经济考验。没时间理会这三大。

在星期五的 Black Friday ，是每年一度美国感恩节的最大倾销，百姓抢购的样子，不像是为捡便宜货而来的，更像是为经济不济而来抢购的。有一个员工被百姓推挤、践踏而死。如你美国有朋友，尤其在城市地区的。问一问他们那边的状况如何了。让他亲口告诉说，环境多不妙。

美国的经济状况，已经糟糕到没办法理会三大了，可惜美国人又放不下这几个国家工业。

当然，要救汽车工业也很合理，因为这牵涉着数十万人的饭碗，加上周边行业，如果这三大一倒闭，接下来一年，会影响远远超过百万人的饭碗。搞不好，美国真的会陷入经济萧条。

救或不救，很难为美国。如果可以拖得一时，比方说合并、或被其他车厂收购，这三大也许会用缓兵之计拖延几年，希望未来可以翻身。

这三大的 ceo 曾说，他们的钱，只够用到年尾，在不想出办法，钱就要烧光了。其中 GM 和 Ford 每隔一天，面对上亿元的损失，大火烧上眉头了，他们只是要保住牌子，其他的什么问题暂时搁置一旁。



结论是，合并与否，不重要。重要的是，美国政府，愿意出钱救这三大吗？

如果美国愿意，这三大也许得救。但是，美国未来的经济问题，更加严重了。

Mr.Business

Ben Stein这一期的文章似乎很有怨气。

Ben Stein How Not to Ruin Your Life

Change? To Washington? Ha!
by Ben Stein
Posted on Tuesday, December 2, 2008, 12:00AM

The change it had to come
We knew it all along.
We were liberated from the fold, that's all.
And the world looks just the same
And history ain't changed
‘Cause the banners, They are flown in the next war.

I'll tip my hat to the new Constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday.
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again.

This snippet from the greatest of great songs by the Who keeps running through my head as I read about Timothy F. Geithner, chosen to be the new secretary of the Treasury by President-elect Barack Obama. I have studied this song for decades and never has it been more apt.

If it were scientifically possible to create a man who is the exact opposite of "change" in the political and financial realm, which is what I recall Senator Obama talking about during thXXXXXn, it would be Mr. Geithner.

Scion of East Coast eggheads, a Dartmouth graduate, an honor student at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, this is no Che Guevara. Mr. Geithner was a colleague of Henry Kissinger at Kissinger Associates, a toiler at the Council on Foreign Relations and a bureaucrat at the Treasury under Larry Summers and Robert Rubin (of course, of Goldman Sachs). Mr. Geithner even made his Brooklyn-born self into a fly fisherman in the mold of Paul Volcker.

Mr. Geithner appears to be the Eastern establishment finance gentleman and scholar incarnate. A frequent defender of scant financial market regulation, à la Alan Greenspan, Mr. Geithner makes Paul O'Neil and John W. Snow, the first two Treasury secretaries under George W. Bush, look like Lenin and Trotsky.

In no sense does this make Mr. Geithner anything less than a fine man and possibly a superb steward at 15th and Pennsylvania N.W. But it does raise some interesting questions about just what kind of "change" Mr. Obama has in mind in the economic world.

Along with Henry M. Paulson Jr., the current Treasury secretary, Mr. Geithner was part of the decision not to save Lehman Brothers when it fell into crisis two months ago. Yet it now seems that allowing a bank as central as Lehman to fail was the shove that sent the world's financial system over the cliff. The rescue of Citi and the market's reaction tells us a lot about just how important a failure that fiasco with Lehman was.

We could have avoided the whole catastrophe of the last ten weeks if Geithner had had a clue. I wonder if Mr. Geithner would now acknowledge that he made a spectacular mistake. I wonder if he would promise to never even consider allowing a big financial institution to fail, and to do everything conceivable under the Constitution to keep the country from falling into a depression.

From what I read, Mr. Geithner helped fashion the so-called Troubled Asset Relief Program, the bailout program that received $700 billion from a terrified Congress a couple of months ago. Mr. Geithner and Mr. Paulson, as well as Ben S. Bernanke of the Federal Reserve, told the legislators that the money was needed to avoid financial calamity. It would be used to buy troubled assets - that is, loans - from banks and insurers and unclog lending.

After some fits and starts the legislation passed. Then for two months plus the Treasury didn't use a dime of the money for that purpose, after all, but instead bought stock in banks and for other similar purposes. This was a bait and switch of historic proportions. You need only consult bank stock prices to see how well it has worked. Earlier this month, Mr. Paulson declared that he would not buy troubled loans at all. That move battered the bond market and especially the commercial real estate bond and REIT markets.

I have not heard one word from Mr. Geithner repudiating those moves. It would be nice to know his position on them. Maybe his part in rescuing Citi tells us he and Paulson have learned something. That would be nice.

Perhaps while he's at it, Mr. Geithner might explain just what he's been doing as head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York for the last five years. That job involves vital supervision of key "money center" banks. When did he notice that there were problems in excess leverage involving questionable assets and issues of accountability of hedge funds?

Did he do anything about it? Did he call in the lords of finance and tell them to cut down on leverage, to stop selling credit default swaps they could never pay off in a downdraft, and to act like bankers instead of gamblers? If he did, he kept it pretty quiet, and it didn't have much measurable effect. What's his explanation?

Now step back and ask the basic question: Was he, in his five years at the New York Fed part of the problem or part of the solution? I do not doubt that he worked cooperatively to put liquidity into the system along with Mr. Bernanke. But when the moment of decision for Lehman Brothers came in September, where was he?

And as the clock of destiny is ticking now for the auto makers, and thus for all of us, where is he? Or, to put it even more bluntly, it sure looks as if Mr. Geithner, charming as he may be, is not stepping up to save an economy deeply imperiled by the failures of the current financial ruling class. I have not seen one word from him that shows any marked difference from his boss, Mr. Paulson.

In fact, if it had been possible for George W. Bush to run for and win a third term, wouldn't Mr. Geithner have been exactly whom he would have chosen to replace Henry Paulson if Mr. Paulson ever decided to leave the Treasury? But wait a second. Didn't Mr. Obama campaign against Bush policies? Is he now giving us a third Bush term? Geithner at Treasury, Gates at DOD, Mrs. Clinton at State? Sure looks a lot like what Bush would have chosen if he had been able to run and win.

Not that this is a big surprise: There is a permanent ruling class in this country, whatever they call themselves, no matter how they talk about change. They may not be very good at it, but there they are. "Meet the new boss," as the Who said, "same as the old boss."

http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/yourlife/126180

[ 本帖最后由 Mr.Business 于 3-12-2008 01:09 PM 编辑 ]

goodluck88

转帖cct2048网友：

李光耀：奧巴馬財經團隊6個月內可見成果   2008-12-02

      新加坡內閣資政李光耀昨天表示，美國總統當選人奧巴馬已任命他的新財經團隊，團隊成員將在未來三到六個月內透過措施決定美國是陷入長期且深或中期且淺的衰退。

     根據新加坡媒體今天報導，李光耀昨天在香港出席美國前總統柯林頓發起的「柯林頓全球計畫（Clinton Global Initiative）」亞洲會議，在與柯林頓對話時做出上述表示。

     不過，李光耀認為，面對十幾年來最嚴重的金融危機，不可能看到美國經濟短期內很快地復甦。

      李光耀說，只有這些人可以告訴你，哪些是當前需要解決的困難，這些人是美國出色且最具經驗及思維者，例如伏克爾（Paul Volcker）、薩默斯（Larry Summers），和蓋特納（Tim Geithner），還有一個委員會在他們背後。

      李光耀說，有信心奧巴馬任命的財經團隊，可以扭轉疲軟的經濟。

      談到這次金融風暴何時能結束，李光耀認為，相信半年內這場風暴仍難以解決，但可以訂定中、長期方案，讓全球經濟復甦過來。

       李光耀指出，由美國次級房貸引爆的金融海嘯，除非能為房地產找出底價，再設法在這個底價上為房地產增值，否則美國就會像日本一樣出現通貨緊縮，並在預期個人財產減少下，失去消費的動力。

       李光耀強調，現在的問題不是通貨膨脹，而是通貨緊縮。如果人人都貧窮了，就不願消費。

      李光耀也和柯林頓談到再生能源、水源和環境等諸多問題。

cct2048

原帖由 goodluck88 于 3-12-2008 02:34 PM 发表
转帖cct2048网友：

马来国被搜括能力超强的巫统搞成通貨膨脹，平民资产贬值緊縮




人民幣放手 亞洲爆貶值競賽  2008-12-02

　貿易緊張 美嚴正警告

　　搶在美國財政部長鮑爾森後天訪問中國的敏感時刻，中國人行突然“放手”任人民幣大幅貶值到6.885低點，貶幅高達0.73%、創下2005匯改以來最大貶幅。

　　不過，人民幣的大幅貶值立即遭到美國嚴正警告，也升高了中美雙邊貿易的緊張，使得今早人民幣的貶勢略微收斂，暫時維持在昨天6.885 左右水準。

　　不過，人民幣“宣示性貶值”動作，卻已經引爆了亞洲貨幣的競相貶值壓力，印度幣今早大貶1%、創下50.5元的新低價位，印尼盾也重貶1%貶破12350，連台幣今早開盤也再次貶破33.50元大關。反倒是今年貶值幅度超過50%的韓元，今早走勢相對抗貶，但此一趨勢實已透露出亞洲貨幣競相貶值態勢已無法避免。

　　明年底前“見到7字頭”

　　根據中國外匯交易中心，人民幣昨重貶0.73%，來到6.8848 元兌1美元，為6月17日來最低收盤價。目前人民幣的海外無本金交割二個月期報價都已“見到7字頭”，市場強烈預期人民幣在年底前將貶至6.95元兌1美元價位，明年底前見到7.15元以上的價位。

　　大陸雙率雙降“來真的”

　　但因本週四美國財政部長鮑爾森訪問中國，美國方面極度不樂見中國大陸以貶值方式來刺激出口，並立即警告大陸的貶值動作，多少也讓大陸有所警戒。

　　但以中國大陸出口衰退、上個月製造業萎縮幅度創歷年最大、11月採購經理指數更創2005年新低等不利經濟數字來看，就算美國反對，中國大陸擬以人民幣貶值救經濟的動作“絕對是來真的”，絕不可能任美國等國際勢力干擾中國大陸目前採取“雙率雙降”的貨幣政策。

　　就怕…全球貿易大緊縮

　　只是一旦人民幣大幅貶值，勢必衝擊到亞洲貨幣競相貶值、恐重蹈1930年代經濟蕭條時引爆貿易、匯率競賽、全球貿易大緊縮的疑慮，也因此，人民幣貶值態勢已確定，只是如何減緩對亞洲市場及全球經貿市場的衝擊，可能就是中國大陸在啟動人民幣貶值救經濟時，無法置外的重要轉折點。

　　【2008/12/02 聯合晚報】



经济衰退看来难以避免了

[ 本帖最后由 cct2048 于 3-12-2008 03:40 PM 编辑 ]

jack500

原帖由 过路客 于 3-12-2008 12:39 PM 发表


面对着破产危机，只要能保住公司，什么事情都可以商量。

...

破产不等于停产。就像报穷籍的人依旧要工作一样。

如果马航再度破产，政府想用1000亿救他，人民应该不会领情。但政府会拿失业者来做挡箭牌，马航不能倒，倒了国家也倒，最后人民怕了，答应救了。但汽车不能和航空比较，后者是"必需品"。

但我认为他们还是会救的，动之以情就可以了。

过路客

原帖由 jack500 于 3-12-2008 03:58 PM 发表
破产不等于停产。就像报穷籍的人依旧要工作一样。

既然你明白这个道理，应该大概知道各种破产保护令下的权益和操作方式。

拿入穷籍的人来比喻，一样行得通。

这个被判入穷籍的人，之前月入过百万。

由于之前欠下大笔债务，如果他还继续工作，法院规定他超过个人基本开销的，全数用来还债。
如果法庭裁定他每个月消费 2千元（入穷籍的人，不可以有任何资产，所以不可能有贷款债务，对吗？），若他现在写书拿版权，月入1万，那当中的 9800元，就要被充公。

所以，即使依旧可以操作，这个破产判入穷籍，有人希望得到吗？虽然 7年后可以回复自由身，但一世的名誉、信用，全没了。为了名誉。这是为何当年本地前马华陈总会长出狱多年后，还是继续偿还贷款以图脱离穷籍（当中也有另一个故事，那个是政治篇了）。

再说，入穷籍案件太多，也并非首要处理案件。一般上都会多3、5年才下判。所以，一个人从被诉的日子算起，往往需要超过 10年的时间才能恢复自由身。被判入穷籍的，都是正适打拼的黄金岁月，35-45岁。十年过后，不要说信用，单说拼劲，人都老了，还拼社么。

把这个道理套在公司身上。

一个被判破产的公司，谁把它救了，就等于要为它付起这个债务。

如果这个时候，你说自己有几百亿美元，肯为 detroit 三大的其中一个汽车公司负起债务，就算他把 ceo 让给你做，象征式 $1 卖给你，都行。（airasia 的故事不是也几乎这样开始的吗？）

但你能担保自己的经营手段，将来肯定让这家公司赚钱吗？若不，你的几百亿，岂不白白浪费了？

------------

再说，你说航空是必需品。汽车工业不是。

若对自己的写作才华具信心（我自问完全没这个水准），应该写几篇搞，投去各大报章。为何政府不应该救汽车工业。也许，伯拉和敦马两人看了，一个会点头微笑，另一个会气得把报纸扔了。

虽然我觉得，汽车是必需品，但是，单从经济角度出发，政府没理由动用百姓的钱，去救一家面临营运亏损的公司。

过路客

原帖由 cct2048 于 3-12-2008 02:53 PM 发表

马来国被搜括能力超强的巫统搞成通貨膨脹，平民资产贬值緊縮

我可以教你。

马来西亚的同胞，称自己的国家为“大马”。

马国、马来国，是一种贬称，通常是貌合神离的邻国、对本地不太了解的亚太国，才这么称呼我们的国家。

如果你是本地子民，不要学坏的那种叫法。

如果你不是本地子民，你非常幸运，终于有人纠正你的错误。

过路客

原帖由 Mr.Business 于 3-12-2008 01:08 PM 发表
Ben Stein这一期的文章似乎很有怨气。

Ben Stein How Not to Ruin Your Life

Change? To Washington? Ha!

Ben Stein 是出了名的共和党中坚份子。他挺共和党，贬奥巴马，理所当然。

不过，坦白说，我个人对奥巴马也有点失望。不得不认同 ben stein 的说法。

让 Timothy Geitner 当财长，让希拉里当国务卿，算不上什么 "变革"。（change）

虽然 roubini 和 peter schiff 等人，同样预见金融危机。但拯救方法完全不同。

roubini 主张注资拯救。peter schiff （ron paul 共和党总统提名人之一的幕僚团）主张让市场自我调整。

虽然我不喜欢共和党的侵略政策，但也不喜欢民主党掺杂资本主义+社会主义（再加上一点自我保护主义）的政策。

1929年的萧条，让大家了解，市场应该被政府适度拯救。

1990年代的日本经济不景，让大家了解，市场不应该过份被政府干预。

中庸路线，还是最好的。

这回，美国注资注到“疯”了。显然已经过份干预。

Genghiss

过路兄，

深深受教了。我也是用马国的，难怪你会那样问我。与其说它是贬称，不如说它是简称，是惯称。

法国以前叫法兰西共和国, 英国以前叫大不列颠爱尔兰王国, 美国以前叫美利坚合众国，旧称花旗国。她们都是先进，发达的国家了。多数时候我们也只叫她们英国，美国和法国。

马来西亚现在叫大马。以后我国先进了，强大了，繁荣了就会叫做马国了。身为大马子民，把国家叫为马国绝对不是教坏人。让我们有信心，有尊严的叫马来西亚声马国吧。而这种叫法绝对是对未来的一种期望。

cct2048

原帖由 过路客 于 4-12-2008 11:26 AM 发表


我可以教你。

马来西亚的同胞，称自己的国家为“大马”。

马国、马来国，是一种贬称，通常是貌合神离的邻国、对本地不太了解的亚太国，才这么称呼我们的国家。

如果你是本地子民，不要学坏的那种叫法。 ...

上层的马来族人一直在宣扬
M国是他们的禁孿
而為所欲為

嘿嘿

cct2048

看在经济逐渐进入寒冬
怎样千方百计剥削平民百姓

http://cforum5.cari.com.my/viewthread.php?tid=1432736&extra=page%3D1

Mr.Business

10月的出口额与9月相比减少14.2%。已经预知，可是看到published数据还是有点吃惊，相信接下来的出口数据将是继续难看。



Published: Thursday December 4, 2008 MYT 1:27:00 PM
Malaysia’s October exports down

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia’s exports in October fell 2.6% to RM53.46bil from year ago and also declined by 14.2% from September.

The Ministry of International Trade and Industry said the weaker exports were due to lower exports of electrical and electronic (E&E) exports, commodities including petroleum and palm oil.

The report said on Thursday that imports fell 5.3% to RM43.84bil in October froma year ago. Total trade declined by 3.8% to RM97.3bil.

MITI said major markets which registered declines were the US, Singapore, China, Hong Kong and Australia.

On the decline in imports, it said the decrease was mainly due to lower import of capital goods and intermediate goods.

Intermediate goods, which are used in E&E, totalled RM32.13bil or 73.3% of total imports.

Capital goods accounted for RM6.04bil (13.8% of total imports) and consumption goods RM2.49bil (5.7% of total imports).

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/s ... 132640&sec=business

[ 本帖最后由 Mr.Business 于 4-12-2008 02:52 PM 编辑 ]

Mr.Business

04-12-2008:- October annual exports suffer surprise drop

KUALA LUMPUR: The country's exports unexpectedly fell in October from a year ago, the latest evidence that it is being hit by falling demand from abroad because of the global economic slowdown.

The 2.6% decline from a year ago compared with economists' expectations for a 6.3% rise in a country where trade is more than 100% of gross domestic product, or the value of all goods and services produced.

"We are likely to see much weaker numbers for Malaysia going forward with external demand very weak, and with the unlikelihood that demand for electronics will recover anytime soon," said Alvin Liew, an economist at Standard Chartered.

Exports dipped slightly in July 2007 but the last big fall was in March 2007 when they fell 4.5%.

Imports for October fell by 5.3% year-on-year compared with analyst expectations for a 1.8% rise.

The data comes after South Korea saw exports slide by 18.3% in November, the biggest drop in seven years, and amid tumbling oil and commodity prices, key exports for Malaysia.

Exports totalled RM53.46 billion, down from RM62.31 billion in September, while imports fell to RM43.84 billion.

That ate into the trade surplus, which fell to RM9.62 billion in October compared with RM14.5 billion in September.

Malaysia has pinned its hopes of avoiding a recession on boosting exports to Asia, although the October data showed exports to the 10 countries that make up Asean fell by 6.1% from a year ago and exports to China fell to RM4.89 billion from RM5.26 billion on weaker commodity and oil prices.

Malaysia hopes to record economic growth of 3.5% in 2009, but many economists say it will not manage that. Investment bank UBS sees no growth at all.

The poor trade data may spur Malaysia's central bank into action after its first rate cut in five years earlier this month when it shaved 25 basis points off its key rate to 3.25%.

"The central bank will look into at least another 25 basis points. I'm looking at 50 basis points in January and February," said Gundy Cayhadi, economist at IDEAglobal.com. -- Reuters

http://www.theedgedaily.com/cms/ ... a-10bbd420-697e079b

过路客

原帖由 Mr.Business 于 4-12-2008 02:47 PM 发表
10月的出口额与9月相比减少14.2%。已经预知，可是看到published数据还是有点吃惊，相信接下来的出口数据将是继续难看。

http://www.miti.gov.my/storage/images/7b7/com.tms.cms.image.Image_2c544a00-c0a81573-2 ...

虽然没直接涉及金融风暴，但我国的影响程度是连锁性的。效果慢慢呈现。

这个我们老早已经预料了。

可是偏偏一些大机构、分析所的高级、首席分析员还看不到。

普通分析员月薪 4、5千，经理级的有上万薪水。不知道这些所谓的高级、首席分析员，他们拿多少薪酬呢？猜想，大概有 3、4万以上吧？

一个月几十钱的闲钱，只会往高级餐厅享受，他们哪里能感受到经济危机的蔓延？

一个可靠的资料来源，某个女装高级品牌，最新季度，销量不减发增。看来在我国，不是做生意的，而是领取高薪的那种，还没感受到危机的来临。

江湖

哈 我就觉得只是我们这个板块比较悲观

不信你看看汽车板的 还谈论什么车 值得买

Mr.Business

来Penang感觉一下，冷风阵阵。很多半导体厂和电子厂在／将要停止生产几星期，裁员的消息不断, 接下来的出口数据将是非常难看，说不定会吓坏那些分析员。。。

ss24

题外话。

我朋友去英国留学认识到中国的朋友，当他称马来西亚为“大马“时就被那中国朋友臭骂一顿，说什么小小的一片土地还敢自称“大“马。。。。我想，海外遇到华人还是称马来西亚为“马国“比较好。。。。

江湖

哈。。 我的前工厂朋友还很活跃， 一班明天 明天邀我吃大餐
一班邀我趁年中shutdown 出国旅游， 我用要备粮作理由， 被鸟 说不够朋友， 说钱收那样多做么。。。  

还是硬硬跟去

Mr.Business

去旅游充充电是好事来的。。。

过路客

原帖由 江湖 于 5-12-2008 10:41 AM 发表
哈 我就觉得只是我们这个板块比较悲观

不信你看看汽车板的 还谈论什么车 值得买

因为我们在股票区，嗅觉自然比花钱一族要早一些。

同样在硬体、手机区，多数是学生一族，把父母当 ATM 的那些，应该也还在高谈阔论吹捧最近自己买了什么高档货。

原帖由 ss24 于 5-12-2008 10:53 AM 发表
我朋友去英国留学认识到中国的朋友，当他称马来西亚为“大马“时就被那中国朋友臭骂一顿，说什么小小的一片土地还敢自称“大“马。。。。我想，海外遇到华人还是称马来西亚为“马国“比较好。。。。

我也遇过类似问题。

无论哪个国家的华人，一般都是这样子，爱比较，爱吹捧自己的东西有多好。中国人对自己国土之大、人口之多、散步之广，有自豪感，那是一定的。

我是以邻国新加坡来说，自己在该地住过一段日子。

该地的报纸，不喜欢称马来西亚为“大马”，是心理因素，主要是不希望时时刻刻提醒自己国土小，并承认马来西亚比他们的国家“大”。新加坡人是出名“好练”和“kiasu”，他们自己也勇于承认这点，甚至偶尔引以为荣。

香港同样是一个岛屿国，却大方多了。他们常称我国为“大马”，有时叫“Ma Lai”。

中国、台湾比较不理会，所以常交替使用，“马来西亚”、“马国”、“大马”等，都会用。他们没有邻国的执着。由于新加坡和马来西亚两地隔条桥，加上新加坡太多来自大马的 PR，所以新闻免不了常要称呼马来西亚，若要把它缩短为二字，除了“大马”，还有什么方法呢？

新加坡百姓，口语称呼大马人为“联邦人”。也是一种心理因素。