A few weeks ago I was on holiday in Genting Highlands, Malaysia. I came across this article by a westerner correspondent in their local newspaper, The New Straits Times. He was talking about the current global financial crisis, and drew parallels with the Asian Financial Crisis a decade ago.
I shall not go into details about the article, but rather, I want to bring to particular attention a term which the author used - the IBG mentality.
What is IBG? Well, it stands for "I'll Be Gone". The majority of the bankers and corporate managers have this I'll Be Gone mentality. This means that they are only interersted in short-term results; and they are willing to sacrifice the future of the companies they are in charge to achieve this. I think we have no lack of examples and I shall skip that part.
There are many reasons for the root causes of this IBG mentality. Indeed, just pick up any western magazines or listen to any western current affairs broadcasts, you will have no lack of explanations given by experts.
Well, I am no expert. But I have been following this financial saga, and interested enough to come up with my own views. I shall share them with readers here.
I have not heard any of the above (i.e. magazines, broadcasts, etc.) mention that the blame lies in a critical aspect of modernity - more specifically, in the separation between ownership and management. I believe the IBG mentality grew inherently out of the fact that ownership is separated from management. As the layers grew more numerous, and more complex, who is responsible for what becomes blurrer and blurrer, until in the end, a manager/management can commit acts so fraudulent as to defy societal conscience. An example was quoted in that article from The News Straits Times :"when someone in the USA who earns USD19,000 per annum can afford to buy and get a loan to finance a house worth USD750,000, you know something is terribly wrong!"
The reason why no one has yet to lay a blame on modernity, is of course political and... uh... come to think of it, i'm writing is blog using the products of modernity... shall i bit the hands that feed me?....
No of course not... lets be clear about this, I do not blame modernity for this state of affairs, per se. Nor do I blame the bankers or corporate managers... really! - when in Rome, do as the Romans do.
I write this article to highlight a flaw of modernity and capitalism - IBG - the "I'll Be Gone" mentality. I hope readers will think about this and ask themselves if they are inflicted with this disease.
Family Image
Monday, December 29, 2008
Monday, December 1, 2008
A Poker Lesson
Last Sunday I hosted and played poker (holdem) with my cousin and friends at my home.
I was playing my ace game right from the beginning. Soon towards the end of the session I was up by nearly $400. We played $0.50/$1 game. However, I lost my entire stack of nearly $400 in one hand (which was to be the last hand of the day). here's how it transpired:
Preflop:
I held Ace-ten unsuited. raised $12 on the button, got 2 callers.
Flop:
ace diamond, something diamond, and something non-diamond.
i raised $30, one guy folded, another called.
Turn:
another diamond.
remaining player checked, i raised $50, he check-raised me $50 plus $100. I considered for a while, re-raise him all in, which he promptly called and turn over King-four of diamond for the nut flush - his hand was unbeatable.
Stupid, stupid moves by me. Why plural (s)? let me walk you through:
1. I was doomed from the start. I wanted to win that particular pot so bad that i disregarded everything else, even when the odds were staring right into my pupils and irises.
2. I talked myself into not believing that my opponent had me beat. Indeed there were so many hands he could have held that would have beaten my Ace pair with 10 kicker - 2 pairs, three of a kind, flush, ace-jack, ace-queen, ace-king....
3. But I still called my opponent's check-raise, and even re-raised him all-in, in the faint hope that he was bluffing....
Stupid, stupid moves...
In retrospect, the best strategy was to walk away when i knew I was beat. I had disregarded my inner voices, disregarded my common sense, my intelligence, my hard-earned knowledge of poker; simply becasue of the fact that I wanted to win that pot. I thought I had to win it... no matter what. I got desperate. And as a result, I fell flat, I got cleaned out of my entire stack.
I think God was trying to teach me something here...
He gave me ace-10 unsuited.
He made 2 loose players call me.
He made the flop came with 2 diamonds.
He made the 3rd diamond appear at the turn.
He gave my opponent 2 crap cards King-four of diamonds, which turn out to be the nuts (the unbeatable hand).
Ok I have to correct a bit on what I said about me being "doomed from the start". God gave me enough warnings along the way, but i refused to listen because I was blinded. I wanted to win. I WANTED TO WIN THAT HAND! AND I GOT HUMBLED THOROUGHLY. Let me explain further:
1. Ace-ten on button - can play a bit aggressive, but not too much, becaue of the relatively weak kicker. I ignore warning, raised 12 times the big blind.
2. 2 loose callers - means proceed with caution on the flop.
3. 2 diamonds - can play a bit more agressive to drive out drawers, but be careful once another diamond comes on the turn. I ignored it all.
4. A big check-raise on the turn all of a sudden by my opponent. I ignored the signs.
The punishment: Got beat by the nuts, don't even need to see the river card.
Now I realised that the best thing to do at that time was to walk away. But my pride and my ambition to win that hand had blinded me.
I could have achieve a spectacular victory (by walking away when I was re-raised at the turn), God had given me that last chance for that hand. But I ignored it.
I hope this defeat will stay with me for a long time (although I wish the pain will lessen.. haha...). I hope this defeat will remind me in whatever I do in the future - always be humble, not blinded by implusive emotions, and listen to my instincts..
Thank you God.
I was playing my ace game right from the beginning. Soon towards the end of the session I was up by nearly $400. We played $0.50/$1 game. However, I lost my entire stack of nearly $400 in one hand (which was to be the last hand of the day). here's how it transpired:
Preflop:
I held Ace-ten unsuited. raised $12 on the button, got 2 callers.
Flop:
ace diamond, something diamond, and something non-diamond.
i raised $30, one guy folded, another called.
Turn:
another diamond.
remaining player checked, i raised $50, he check-raised me $50 plus $100. I considered for a while, re-raise him all in, which he promptly called and turn over King-four of diamond for the nut flush - his hand was unbeatable.
Stupid, stupid moves by me. Why plural (s)? let me walk you through:
1. I was doomed from the start. I wanted to win that particular pot so bad that i disregarded everything else, even when the odds were staring right into my pupils and irises.
2. I talked myself into not believing that my opponent had me beat. Indeed there were so many hands he could have held that would have beaten my Ace pair with 10 kicker - 2 pairs, three of a kind, flush, ace-jack, ace-queen, ace-king....
3. But I still called my opponent's check-raise, and even re-raised him all-in, in the faint hope that he was bluffing....
Stupid, stupid moves...
In retrospect, the best strategy was to walk away when i knew I was beat. I had disregarded my inner voices, disregarded my common sense, my intelligence, my hard-earned knowledge of poker; simply becasue of the fact that I wanted to win that pot. I thought I had to win it... no matter what. I got desperate. And as a result, I fell flat, I got cleaned out of my entire stack.
I think God was trying to teach me something here...
He gave me ace-10 unsuited.
He made 2 loose players call me.
He made the flop came with 2 diamonds.
He made the 3rd diamond appear at the turn.
He gave my opponent 2 crap cards King-four of diamonds, which turn out to be the nuts (the unbeatable hand).
Ok I have to correct a bit on what I said about me being "doomed from the start". God gave me enough warnings along the way, but i refused to listen because I was blinded. I wanted to win. I WANTED TO WIN THAT HAND! AND I GOT HUMBLED THOROUGHLY. Let me explain further:
1. Ace-ten on button - can play a bit aggressive, but not too much, becaue of the relatively weak kicker. I ignore warning, raised 12 times the big blind.
2. 2 loose callers - means proceed with caution on the flop.
3. 2 diamonds - can play a bit more agressive to drive out drawers, but be careful once another diamond comes on the turn. I ignored it all.
4. A big check-raise on the turn all of a sudden by my opponent. I ignored the signs.
The punishment: Got beat by the nuts, don't even need to see the river card.
Now I realised that the best thing to do at that time was to walk away. But my pride and my ambition to win that hand had blinded me.
I could have achieve a spectacular victory (by walking away when I was re-raised at the turn), God had given me that last chance for that hand. But I ignored it.
I hope this defeat will stay with me for a long time (although I wish the pain will lessen.. haha...). I hope this defeat will remind me in whatever I do in the future - always be humble, not blinded by implusive emotions, and listen to my instincts..
Thank you God.
Baby and Maid
The other day we brought Ethan for his immunisation jab at AMK polyclinic. My wife, ,mum and maid went along as well. 2 interesting things happened on this trip. I shall relate one this time round.
While we were waiting for the doctor, we got to speak to a few mums and grandmas, who were there to bring their babies for jab too. In particular, I got to speak to a grandma, during which she gave me an advice. This is how this part of our conversation went:
Grandma: Why do you let the baby have so much physical contact with the maid? (upon seeing that my maid was trying to cuddle Ethan to sleep, and no doubt a rhetorical question)
Me: .... (don't know how to reply, so wait for her to explain further)
Grandma: Once your baby get used to the smell of the maid, he'll stick with her and you'll have trouble gaining his affection. its better to prevent this from the very beginning. wats worse, once your maid leaves, you gonna have trouble cos he'll miss the maid...etc..etc...
Me: .... (nodded, and just smile)
Okay, here's my thought:
Firstly,
How can anyone prevent "love", and still be right? of course i'm not taking about love for heroin or love for lying... i'm talking about love in its purest sense (which i think is undefinable by the way, you just know it).
Ethan is going to spend more time with my maid, or anyone taking care of him, while me and my wife is working. Naturally, he'll feel for his care-takers, and maybe more than he feels for us (mum and dad) at this point in time, simply due to the time they spent with him. Am I going to subject myself to jealousy or guilt simply becuase of that? I don't think so, really.
Me and my wife loves Ethan with all our heart. I'm sure Ethan will come to realise that in time. I am sure he will love us back as well. By him loving and feeling attachment to the maid, does not mean that he has less love to spare for his mum and dad. I think love is stretcheable... not a zero-sum game, it is expandable.. and ideally boundless...
On the other hand, we should feel happy, that he loves his maid. For he has an instinctive understanding of piety, even at this tender age. We should not teach him otherwise.
We should also feel blessed, that our maid really cares for him (we hope and we'll know in time to come).
As such, who are we to "prevent" our baby having "too much" affection for our maid?
--------------------
Many a time, I feel I should spend more time with Ethan, especially during the weekends when he comes back to stay with us. I'm sure my wife feels that too. And we should.
On another note, I feel that we should not revolve our lives around Ethan (I say this with pragmatism, and I can only hope readers understand what I mean). Or we risk burning out in the long run. We should have our fair share of social lives and activities. What this means is that it is okay to take the occassional tea-sessions with friends and leave Ethan in the care of trusted people. It is ok to have the occasional poker sessions (ha...), or any other activities, and NOT feel guilty that the time spent should be with our baby instead.
Of course, its about balancing at the end of the day, never forgetting the foundation laid with love. As such, i resolve to give up my regular holdem session during weekends, but instead spend more time with Ethan and Candy.. Yeah..!
While we were waiting for the doctor, we got to speak to a few mums and grandmas, who were there to bring their babies for jab too. In particular, I got to speak to a grandma, during which she gave me an advice. This is how this part of our conversation went:
Grandma: Why do you let the baby have so much physical contact with the maid? (upon seeing that my maid was trying to cuddle Ethan to sleep, and no doubt a rhetorical question)
Me: .... (don't know how to reply, so wait for her to explain further)
Grandma: Once your baby get used to the smell of the maid, he'll stick with her and you'll have trouble gaining his affection. its better to prevent this from the very beginning. wats worse, once your maid leaves, you gonna have trouble cos he'll miss the maid...etc..etc...
Me: .... (nodded, and just smile)
Okay, here's my thought:
Firstly,
How can anyone prevent "love", and still be right? of course i'm not taking about love for heroin or love for lying... i'm talking about love in its purest sense (which i think is undefinable by the way, you just know it).
Ethan is going to spend more time with my maid, or anyone taking care of him, while me and my wife is working. Naturally, he'll feel for his care-takers, and maybe more than he feels for us (mum and dad) at this point in time, simply due to the time they spent with him. Am I going to subject myself to jealousy or guilt simply becuase of that? I don't think so, really.
Me and my wife loves Ethan with all our heart. I'm sure Ethan will come to realise that in time. I am sure he will love us back as well. By him loving and feeling attachment to the maid, does not mean that he has less love to spare for his mum and dad. I think love is stretcheable... not a zero-sum game, it is expandable.. and ideally boundless...
On the other hand, we should feel happy, that he loves his maid. For he has an instinctive understanding of piety, even at this tender age. We should not teach him otherwise.
We should also feel blessed, that our maid really cares for him (we hope and we'll know in time to come).
As such, who are we to "prevent" our baby having "too much" affection for our maid?
--------------------
Many a time, I feel I should spend more time with Ethan, especially during the weekends when he comes back to stay with us. I'm sure my wife feels that too. And we should.
On another note, I feel that we should not revolve our lives around Ethan (I say this with pragmatism, and I can only hope readers understand what I mean). Or we risk burning out in the long run. We should have our fair share of social lives and activities. What this means is that it is okay to take the occassional tea-sessions with friends and leave Ethan in the care of trusted people. It is ok to have the occasional poker sessions (ha...), or any other activities, and NOT feel guilty that the time spent should be with our baby instead.
Of course, its about balancing at the end of the day, never forgetting the foundation laid with love. As such, i resolve to give up my regular holdem session during weekends, but instead spend more time with Ethan and Candy.. Yeah..!
Friday, November 28, 2008
Friday, November 14, 2008
Ethan's Photos
I realised Candy's photos of Ethan are much more interesting and animated than mine. I am using DSLR with prime lenses, while Candy uses normal digi camera. I am very humbled.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Bank Crises and Bankers' Renumeration Part 2
My wife just asked me why is it that some US politicians are billing the latest financial crisis as being the worst since the Great Depression. That sets me thinking...
Does the current situation even warrant a comparison with the Great Depression? Lets picture this scenario:
Great Depression: Tens of thousands of unemployed queueing for jobs every morning at factories, only a handful got picked for the day's work, the rest go home and come back next day for the lottery.
Current situation: I see tens of thousands still with their jobs. Many more voluntarily out of jobs.
I just need to illustrate the above scenario to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the current situation is nowhere near the Great Depression.
So, why are McCains and Obamas and soon to be ex-president Bush's and company painting such a stark economic picture with the Great Depression as the backdrop?
Answer is very simple my friend.
Lets assume I am a presidential candidate, and you are my supporter. You are a billionaire, and you contribute millions of dollars to my presidential campaign. I need your connections and money to fund my campaign, so I have a higher chance of securing the world's most powerful vocation.
But now, you are losing hundreds of millions in shares and what-have-yous. lets say you have USD1billion worth of shares, which are only worth USD500million on paper now, due to the current economic crisis. Obviously you are not pleased. So you suggest to me, why not scare the public with the spectre of a looming Great Depression, so that the public will consent to me using the public's money to bail you out. So that, having used the public's money to bailout, your current USD500million will once again surge up to USD1billion, or possibly even more.
In this way, you have your money, and I, with your support, secures the world's most powerful vocation, and the public, seeing that I have successfully averted the second Great Depression, will adore me no less.
Perfect. Win-win-win.
Does the current situation even warrant a comparison with the Great Depression? Lets picture this scenario:
Great Depression: Tens of thousands of unemployed queueing for jobs every morning at factories, only a handful got picked for the day's work, the rest go home and come back next day for the lottery.
Current situation: I see tens of thousands still with their jobs. Many more voluntarily out of jobs.
I just need to illustrate the above scenario to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the current situation is nowhere near the Great Depression.
So, why are McCains and Obamas and soon to be ex-president Bush's and company painting such a stark economic picture with the Great Depression as the backdrop?
Answer is very simple my friend.
Lets assume I am a presidential candidate, and you are my supporter. You are a billionaire, and you contribute millions of dollars to my presidential campaign. I need your connections and money to fund my campaign, so I have a higher chance of securing the world's most powerful vocation.
But now, you are losing hundreds of millions in shares and what-have-yous. lets say you have USD1billion worth of shares, which are only worth USD500million on paper now, due to the current economic crisis. Obviously you are not pleased. So you suggest to me, why not scare the public with the spectre of a looming Great Depression, so that the public will consent to me using the public's money to bail you out. So that, having used the public's money to bailout, your current USD500million will once again surge up to USD1billion, or possibly even more.
In this way, you have your money, and I, with your support, secures the world's most powerful vocation, and the public, seeing that I have successfully averted the second Great Depression, will adore me no less.
Perfect. Win-win-win.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Genting Poker Tournament
I recently joined a poker tournament at Genting Casino. Went up with my wife, a fren, and a cousin over the weekend.
Managed to squeezed into the final table of 10. Came out 6th, out of a field of 300 contestants.
Prize money is a tiny RM3,000... :). Well, considering that the entry fee was RM500, and that included a complimentary room at the Resort Hotel, plus another complimentary room if one got into the semi-finals, I think thats not too bad a deal at all!
For your info, the first prize was RM75,000, second: RM30,000, Third: RM15,000, 4th to 5th: RM5,000, 6th to 10th: RM3,000. So you can see that i just missed out on 5th, which would have netted me another RM2k.
In fact, there was very little I could do at the final table, due to the fact that I was short-stacked all the way, and that the blinds were exceedingly high. I won the first hand, with an all-in with Ace-Jack, the flop came Ace-Jack-something, in the end I managed to KO 2 players with Jacks full of Aces. Not a bad start. Thereafter, I din have cards to even call the big blinds. Hence I folded and folded, whenever anyone at the table showed any strength. I gave them the benefit of doubt.
My final hand played out like this: first player folded, player 2 limped in just calling the big blind, player 3 folded, Me: after eye-balling player 2 and sizing him up for 6 seconds, I pushed all my stack all-in with Ace-Jack (and silently hoping others behind me fold) I gathered I have a better chance of heads-up with player 2, since he has been calling with rags many a times. Also, other players have been playing very tight. Even if someone behind called with any pairs less than jacks i would still be even-money. True enough, all players behind me folded to Player 2.
Now, i would be happy if player 2 folded at this point, cos my Ace-jack would be a severe underdog against ace queen or ace king (which I dun think he had since he just called the big blind), or just a coin flip with 10pairs or below. On the other hand, knowing player 2, I would not have minded if he called me, because he would have called me with Ace-10 or something worse, which by then I would be a super over-dog over him.
As it turned out, Player 2 called me. And true enough my read on him was correct. He had Ace-6 suited (diamonds). For the maths-inclined, that means I am 66% favourite to win, over his 27%, with approx 7% ending in a tie. I'm a favourite to win. Flop came out rainbow rags. By this time I'm in an even better position to win (80%). Player 2 can only win with a 6, or a runner runner diamond flush. Guess what... of course he caught the runner runner flush!!
Well, i told myself before the final table that I would go out with a bang. And a bang I did went out with. I guessed I could have played very very tight, and maybe I could have gotten 5th or 4th, and thus an additional RM2k. But I know I would not be satisfied if I had not play to the best of my judgment and ability, which I did when I pushed all-in with Ace-Jack against Player 2. The downside was that this "correct play" costed me RM2k.
Overall it has been a very good experience. I won some more at the tables. And of course my wife was with me all the while, which was the most important of all :)
Managed to squeezed into the final table of 10. Came out 6th, out of a field of 300 contestants.
Prize money is a tiny RM3,000... :). Well, considering that the entry fee was RM500, and that included a complimentary room at the Resort Hotel, plus another complimentary room if one got into the semi-finals, I think thats not too bad a deal at all!
For your info, the first prize was RM75,000, second: RM30,000, Third: RM15,000, 4th to 5th: RM5,000, 6th to 10th: RM3,000. So you can see that i just missed out on 5th, which would have netted me another RM2k.
In fact, there was very little I could do at the final table, due to the fact that I was short-stacked all the way, and that the blinds were exceedingly high. I won the first hand, with an all-in with Ace-Jack, the flop came Ace-Jack-something, in the end I managed to KO 2 players with Jacks full of Aces. Not a bad start. Thereafter, I din have cards to even call the big blinds. Hence I folded and folded, whenever anyone at the table showed any strength. I gave them the benefit of doubt.
My final hand played out like this: first player folded, player 2 limped in just calling the big blind, player 3 folded, Me: after eye-balling player 2 and sizing him up for 6 seconds, I pushed all my stack all-in with Ace-Jack (and silently hoping others behind me fold) I gathered I have a better chance of heads-up with player 2, since he has been calling with rags many a times. Also, other players have been playing very tight. Even if someone behind called with any pairs less than jacks i would still be even-money. True enough, all players behind me folded to Player 2.
Now, i would be happy if player 2 folded at this point, cos my Ace-jack would be a severe underdog against ace queen or ace king (which I dun think he had since he just called the big blind), or just a coin flip with 10pairs or below. On the other hand, knowing player 2, I would not have minded if he called me, because he would have called me with Ace-10 or something worse, which by then I would be a super over-dog over him.
As it turned out, Player 2 called me. And true enough my read on him was correct. He had Ace-6 suited (diamonds). For the maths-inclined, that means I am 66% favourite to win, over his 27%, with approx 7% ending in a tie. I'm a favourite to win. Flop came out rainbow rags. By this time I'm in an even better position to win (80%). Player 2 can only win with a 6, or a runner runner diamond flush. Guess what... of course he caught the runner runner flush!!
Well, i told myself before the final table that I would go out with a bang. And a bang I did went out with. I guessed I could have played very very tight, and maybe I could have gotten 5th or 4th, and thus an additional RM2k. But I know I would not be satisfied if I had not play to the best of my judgment and ability, which I did when I pushed all-in with Ace-Jack against Player 2. The downside was that this "correct play" costed me RM2k.
Overall it has been a very good experience. I won some more at the tables. And of course my wife was with me all the while, which was the most important of all :)
Thursday, September 11, 2008
_edited.jpg)
_edited.jpg)
Friday, September 5, 2008
A Quick Response to How to identify 'Churchills' here?
I came across this article on asiaone.com, which was first published in the Straits Times on 2nd September 2008. It was written by Mr Tan Soon Hock.
The synopsis of the article can be described as: Our society does not identify, and hence fails to develope people like Winston Churchil. Our system of meritocracy does not tolerate such mavericks.
My response:
1. Mavericks cannot be identified, much less developed. We can only identify what is within society's conscious, not outside.
2. England is mature enough to tolerate mavericks like Churchills, but at the same time they tolerated Jack the Rippers. One cannot have the cake and eat it. I do not think our society is ready yet.
3. Time produces its mavericks in the form of heros and anti-heroes - Churchills, Hilters. Mr Tan yearns for such personas. Mr Tan might have asked for more than what he actually wants.
4. Mr Tan has asked the wrong question.
The synopsis of the article can be described as: Our society does not identify, and hence fails to develope people like Winston Churchil. Our system of meritocracy does not tolerate such mavericks.
My response:
1. Mavericks cannot be identified, much less developed. We can only identify what is within society's conscious, not outside.
2. England is mature enough to tolerate mavericks like Churchills, but at the same time they tolerated Jack the Rippers. One cannot have the cake and eat it. I do not think our society is ready yet.
3. Time produces its mavericks in the form of heros and anti-heroes - Churchills, Hilters. Mr Tan yearns for such personas. Mr Tan might have asked for more than what he actually wants.
4. Mr Tan has asked the wrong question.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
My Firstborn arrived on our National Day
Baby Ethan Lim arrived to this world on 9th August 2008. I thank God and Jesus that both mummy and baby are fine.
There are so many feelings, and many so of them undescribable, that I thought would be too presumptious to pen them down. I will not attempt to do that. Instead, I will only say I am happy and grateful.
I do not know what awaits me. I asks God for wisdom and courage to walk an honest path.
There are so many feelings, and many so of them undescribable, that I thought would be too presumptious to pen them down. I will not attempt to do that. Instead, I will only say I am happy and grateful.
I do not know what awaits me. I asks God for wisdom and courage to walk an honest path.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Singapore Girls: Hot
An article in Matador Nights, an online travel magazine, claims our garden city breeds amongst the sexiest girls outside of USA. The article also lists another 9 cities with similar trait.
Great article this. Our economy will benefit from it. I reckon short term gain to be at least 0.01% real GDP growth can be directly attributable to this article. Long-term gain? Snowballing, and with careful planning on our part, we stand to at least gain 100%, or double the size of our current economy - all direct contribution from this article.
Want to know my reason?
Women attracts action in all its form.
Go read about the beginnings of Trojan War, or Romance of Three Kingdoms (the chapter on the Battle of the Red Ciff).
Or play basketball when girls are around.
But of course, there are dangers lurking too. Read further on the Trojan War and the Red Cliff, you will know why. Or, ever wonder why we are more prone to injuries when girls are around the basketball court?
Great article this. Our economy will benefit from it. I reckon short term gain to be at least 0.01% real GDP growth can be directly attributable to this article. Long-term gain? Snowballing, and with careful planning on our part, we stand to at least gain 100%, or double the size of our current economy - all direct contribution from this article.
Want to know my reason?
Women attracts action in all its form.
Go read about the beginnings of Trojan War, or Romance of Three Kingdoms (the chapter on the Battle of the Red Ciff).
Or play basketball when girls are around.
But of course, there are dangers lurking too. Read further on the Trojan War and the Red Cliff, you will know why. Or, ever wonder why we are more prone to injuries when girls are around the basketball court?
Monday, July 14, 2008
Automatic Transmission Versus Manual Transmission
The following was posted on an internet forum in October last year. http://myfastgti.com/volkswagen/showthread.php/dsg-vs-manual-true-drivers-standpoint-451p10.html
I got quite a few pats on the back by fellow forumers who agreed with me; and of course, there were those who disagreed with my views and tried to invalid my arguments.
Maybe a little background as to why I wrote this post. I got more than my fair share of jibes from psuedo-manual trans purists for driving an auto sports coupe (Honda Integra, aka Acura RSX). Hence, I retorted that they (the manual trans purists) will be relegated to hobby status in the near future. To those who read between the lines, this is akin to saying that the purists will be sidelined to the irrelevances. This post was a way to get back at them. Of course, all this was done in good humour :)
ps: upon re-reading my post, i felt i could've tidied up some loose ends, but to be fair to those who responded, i decided to publish the unabridged version.
Here it goes:
Assertion:
I assert that Automatic transmission, will account for 90-95% of the cars in the next 50 years.
Definition:
For simplicity sake, automatic transmission means clutchless transmission, which includes torque converter, smg, dsg, etc. that means you don't have to manually clutch in and out to change gears.
Argument:
1. AT technoloogy has improved to a level where the machine can actually shift faster than human.
2. AT technology is actually more power efficient. by shifting faster than a human can, AT reduces power loss experienced during shifting. dsg's 8ms vs ferraris enzo's 120ms vs human's actions of approx 200ms. the best AT beats the best human's actions by more than 20 times.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-Shift_Gearbox
yes, dsg is heavier, but the odds of them getting lighter as technology advances, against a human losing weight, well... you get the picture.
3. AT technology has been proven, and adopted, at the pinnacle of motor sports, eg. WRC, F1, drag racing, etc. but of course you will argue they at at the TOP, how many can get access to those technology?
consider this: the at the birth of internet, only a select few has access to it, during the early 60s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet#Creation, but how many pple access the internet now?
4. "Completing the MISSION" vs "FLYING the mission" (take note of the caps). with the advances in warplane technologies (or even commercial ariplanes), the trend is towards more automation to achieve higher mission success rates, and less dependability on human skills. put simply, "reduce the volatility and variability of human skills, just get the MISSION accomplished."
put this in the context of daily driving. the mission here is to get from point A to point B. well, AT will get that done more efficiently and effectively.
5. stubborn purists will cling on to their old and soon-to-be deluded argument that" driving a manual get more control, more feel, more fun, most of the time much faster, won't trade that more a puny AT."
well, consider this, during the late 1880s when automobiles are still at their infancy, i'd imagine those then-purist, the horse riders, mocking the ugly piece of steel and motor, saying they "won't trade their beloved horses for a puny motorcar". riding a horse requires more skill, can get more feel, more control, than driving those cars.
u can imagine a skilled horseman telling a motorcar driver:
"hey i control my horses better than u" (modern version: "hey i can change gears, rev-match, do watever, control my car better than your AT")
or
"hey my horse cost so much less than your car and can go much faster" (modern version: "hey my MT is cheaper but much faster than your AT..." (sounds familiar?))
i could go on, but u get my drift.
Conclusion and Future
AT is here to stay. And they will grow in numbers faster and faster, for, but not limited, to reasons i have provided - cost, efficiency, and mission.
MT purist will be relegated (or promoted, if you like) to the peripheral status of a hobby or sports. just like horse-riding is a hobby or a sports now.
And in the words of Peter Drucker: the future is here now.
I got quite a few pats on the back by fellow forumers who agreed with me; and of course, there were those who disagreed with my views and tried to invalid my arguments.
Maybe a little background as to why I wrote this post. I got more than my fair share of jibes from psuedo-manual trans purists for driving an auto sports coupe (Honda Integra, aka Acura RSX). Hence, I retorted that they (the manual trans purists) will be relegated to hobby status in the near future. To those who read between the lines, this is akin to saying that the purists will be sidelined to the irrelevances. This post was a way to get back at them. Of course, all this was done in good humour :)
ps: upon re-reading my post, i felt i could've tidied up some loose ends, but to be fair to those who responded, i decided to publish the unabridged version.
Here it goes:
Assertion:
I assert that Automatic transmission, will account for 90-95% of the cars in the next 50 years.
Definition:
For simplicity sake, automatic transmission means clutchless transmission, which includes torque converter, smg, dsg, etc. that means you don't have to manually clutch in and out to change gears.
Argument:
1. AT technoloogy has improved to a level where the machine can actually shift faster than human.
2. AT technology is actually more power efficient. by shifting faster than a human can, AT reduces power loss experienced during shifting. dsg's 8ms vs ferraris enzo's 120ms vs human's actions of approx 200ms. the best AT beats the best human's actions by more than 20 times.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-Shift_Gearbox
yes, dsg is heavier, but the odds of them getting lighter as technology advances, against a human losing weight, well... you get the picture.
3. AT technology has been proven, and adopted, at the pinnacle of motor sports, eg. WRC, F1, drag racing, etc. but of course you will argue they at at the TOP, how many can get access to those technology?
consider this: the at the birth of internet, only a select few has access to it, during the early 60s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet#Creation, but how many pple access the internet now?
4. "Completing the MISSION" vs "FLYING the mission" (take note of the caps). with the advances in warplane technologies (or even commercial ariplanes), the trend is towards more automation to achieve higher mission success rates, and less dependability on human skills. put simply, "reduce the volatility and variability of human skills, just get the MISSION accomplished."
put this in the context of daily driving. the mission here is to get from point A to point B. well, AT will get that done more efficiently and effectively.
5. stubborn purists will cling on to their old and soon-to-be deluded argument that" driving a manual get more control, more feel, more fun, most of the time much faster, won't trade that more a puny AT."
well, consider this, during the late 1880s when automobiles are still at their infancy, i'd imagine those then-purist, the horse riders, mocking the ugly piece of steel and motor, saying they "won't trade their beloved horses for a puny motorcar". riding a horse requires more skill, can get more feel, more control, than driving those cars.
u can imagine a skilled horseman telling a motorcar driver:
"hey i control my horses better than u" (modern version: "hey i can change gears, rev-match, do watever, control my car better than your AT")
or
"hey my horse cost so much less than your car and can go much faster" (modern version: "hey my MT is cheaper but much faster than your AT..." (sounds familiar?))
i could go on, but u get my drift.
Conclusion and Future
AT is here to stay. And they will grow in numbers faster and faster, for, but not limited, to reasons i have provided - cost, efficiency, and mission.
MT purist will be relegated (or promoted, if you like) to the peripheral status of a hobby or sports. just like horse-riding is a hobby or a sports now.
And in the words of Peter Drucker: the future is here now.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Is the Singapore Flyer doomed to fail?
I came across a thread in the Asiaone forum titled "Singapore Flyer is doomed to fail right from the start". I got interested and browsed through the 18 pages (and counting I believe) of comments. http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=10569
Out of the 173 posts (at time of reading), less than 5 are positive encouragements. The overwhelming majority cast negative comments, most of which point to the following:
1. Too Expensive, cater for the rich only, hence the rich-poor divide debate...
2. Cater for tourists only, hence the local vs foreigners debate...
3. Another government initiated white elephant.
4. Comparison to well established attractions abroad, like the London Eye, Effiel Tower, etc.
5. Singapore do not have the rich heritage and landscape to attract crowds.
First, if I were to compare prices around the world, I think our price is fair. The reader can google the relevant websites for immediate information.
Second, I do not believe the builders of the Singapore Flyer at any time pretend that the Singapore Flyer is not primarily targetted at tourists. Go to the Effiel Tower any day and pick any of the crowd there and ask for their nationality, do you think you'd find a Parisan who was not working there?
*On a side note:
I recently travelled to Europe on holiday. Been to London, Paris, amongst other cities. And they were populated by tourists! Yes, most probably those places I went were meant for tourists, which is why I see primarily tourists. But it also mean that tourists, including me, are spending money and creating employment for the people of those cities.
I went to the shopping district in the city centre of Paris, and every shopping centres I stepped into, I see hordes of tourists, outnumbering the locals by at least 5 to 1. Of course, many of them are ( and there are many from Asian countries) buying "branded goods" (supposingly cheap, but i wonder how cheap can a prada bag get even at 30% discount off Singapore prices).
Walking along the streets of the European cities, at night or in the day time, I see tourists like me, in hordes, spending in shops, cafes, public transport, etc... I say to myself, yes, the people of London are fortunate in the sense that they inherited many buildings, structures, etc, that were built from times past, and those things are attracting people from all over the world to come to their city to spend. Taking advantage of their "inheritance", the people create shops, cafes, buses, and along with that a whole industry that is geared towards attracting tourists and helping them spend.
Also, I have no doubt that a portion of the money spent by tourists goes to contributing to the conservation of those historic monuments.
Now what is wrong with that?
Third, many well-known monuments, buildings, etc, were often disliked by the locals when they were first built. The city of Paris hated the Effiel Tower when it was first built. The population thought that the ugly mass of steel was a shameful thorn amidst their generally low-rise heritage buildings. The Empire State Building wasn't too appreciated when the idea was first conceived. I could go on, but.
Fourth, if we were to compare the Singapore Flyer to other well-known, well-established attractions, at least give it some time to become well-known, well-established in the first place! Surely Rome was not built in a day, and she certainly took quite some time to earn her reputation.
Fifth, (and those who gave comments pointing to this are the worst lot) for goodness sake, we are only 40plus years old, why would one wants to compare against cities like London, Paris or New York? Even a mundane transport infrastructure such as the London Underground began service more than 100 years before our independence! Let alone more distinguished national monuments.... What is there to compare our heritage with those cities?
Without rich heritage does not mean we give up on our ambition to build one. We have to look for other ways and we will. The Singapore Flyer is but one amongst many attempts to build something we can be proud of. If we will it, our Singapore Flyer is destined for success.
Out of the 173 posts (at time of reading), less than 5 are positive encouragements. The overwhelming majority cast negative comments, most of which point to the following:
1. Too Expensive, cater for the rich only, hence the rich-poor divide debate...
2. Cater for tourists only, hence the local vs foreigners debate...
3. Another government initiated white elephant.
4. Comparison to well established attractions abroad, like the London Eye, Effiel Tower, etc.
5. Singapore do not have the rich heritage and landscape to attract crowds.
First, if I were to compare prices around the world, I think our price is fair. The reader can google the relevant websites for immediate information.
Second, I do not believe the builders of the Singapore Flyer at any time pretend that the Singapore Flyer is not primarily targetted at tourists. Go to the Effiel Tower any day and pick any of the crowd there and ask for their nationality, do you think you'd find a Parisan who was not working there?
*On a side note:
I recently travelled to Europe on holiday. Been to London, Paris, amongst other cities. And they were populated by tourists! Yes, most probably those places I went were meant for tourists, which is why I see primarily tourists. But it also mean that tourists, including me, are spending money and creating employment for the people of those cities.
I went to the shopping district in the city centre of Paris, and every shopping centres I stepped into, I see hordes of tourists, outnumbering the locals by at least 5 to 1. Of course, many of them are ( and there are many from Asian countries) buying "branded goods" (supposingly cheap, but i wonder how cheap can a prada bag get even at 30% discount off Singapore prices).
Walking along the streets of the European cities, at night or in the day time, I see tourists like me, in hordes, spending in shops, cafes, public transport, etc... I say to myself, yes, the people of London are fortunate in the sense that they inherited many buildings, structures, etc, that were built from times past, and those things are attracting people from all over the world to come to their city to spend. Taking advantage of their "inheritance", the people create shops, cafes, buses, and along with that a whole industry that is geared towards attracting tourists and helping them spend.
Also, I have no doubt that a portion of the money spent by tourists goes to contributing to the conservation of those historic monuments.
Now what is wrong with that?
Third, many well-known monuments, buildings, etc, were often disliked by the locals when they were first built. The city of Paris hated the Effiel Tower when it was first built. The population thought that the ugly mass of steel was a shameful thorn amidst their generally low-rise heritage buildings. The Empire State Building wasn't too appreciated when the idea was first conceived. I could go on, but.
Fourth, if we were to compare the Singapore Flyer to other well-known, well-established attractions, at least give it some time to become well-known, well-established in the first place! Surely Rome was not built in a day, and she certainly took quite some time to earn her reputation.
Fifth, (and those who gave comments pointing to this are the worst lot) for goodness sake, we are only 40plus years old, why would one wants to compare against cities like London, Paris or New York? Even a mundane transport infrastructure such as the London Underground began service more than 100 years before our independence! Let alone more distinguished national monuments.... What is there to compare our heritage with those cities?
Without rich heritage does not mean we give up on our ambition to build one. We have to look for other ways and we will. The Singapore Flyer is but one amongst many attempts to build something we can be proud of. If we will it, our Singapore Flyer is destined for success.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Bank Crises and Bankers' Renumeration
Fact: Major international banks are facing massive write-downs in billions.
Fact: Central Banks and at least one Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF) I know have dished out rescue packages.
Fact: Money from Central Banks and SWFs come from tax payers, indirectly, and some would argue directly. That means your money and my money, directly, indirectly.
Shocking Fact: A recent research conducted by Breaking Views revealed that the total compensation at the 5 largest US investment banks total a little less than USD$66 billion in 2007.
More Shocking Fact: That $66 billion of renumeration managed to deliver a $50 billion reduction in the banks' aggregate stock market value over the course of 2007. Put it in another context: bankers at those banks were each rewarded with $350,000 for diminishing the value of their business by $247,000 EACH, over the course of 2007. And that reduction numbers are mounting still....
Enough facts to digest? Let me summarise for you: The average taxpayer like you and me are funding the high stakes gambles of the high-living high rollers.
And may I be allowed to quote a certain man of deep insight: "....profits are privatised but risks are socialised..."
reference: http://www.breakingviews.com/
Fact: Central Banks and at least one Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF) I know have dished out rescue packages.
Fact: Money from Central Banks and SWFs come from tax payers, indirectly, and some would argue directly. That means your money and my money, directly, indirectly.
Shocking Fact: A recent research conducted by Breaking Views revealed that the total compensation at the 5 largest US investment banks total a little less than USD$66 billion in 2007.
More Shocking Fact: That $66 billion of renumeration managed to deliver a $50 billion reduction in the banks' aggregate stock market value over the course of 2007. Put it in another context: bankers at those banks were each rewarded with $350,000 for diminishing the value of their business by $247,000 EACH, over the course of 2007. And that reduction numbers are mounting still....
Enough facts to digest? Let me summarise for you: The average taxpayer like you and me are funding the high stakes gambles of the high-living high rollers.
And may I be allowed to quote a certain man of deep insight: "....profits are privatised but risks are socialised..."
reference: http://www.breakingviews.com/
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Past life and Reincarnation
Recently I come across an interesting daily column in Shin Min Daily News. The column has tables that describes a person's past life, based on the lunar date that they are born in the present life. For example, how a person looked like, or what his/her career was, or/and most recently how a person died in his/her past life!
We often see star charts, horoscopes in newspapers, magazines and so forth. I believe most of the population see such things as leisurely and nothing more. It is quite useless to provide contrary views as these "predictions" are mostly vague and "unprovable". Mostly, the charts encompass everyone who reads it. For example, one's birthday must fall within a day within a year, say 18th April 1998, and as such that person is a Aries. It is impossible to prove that a person does not belong to a particular horoscope.
But this particular column has a major flaw. Which can be proven wrong empirically. What is more, one can prove that it is wrong using simple logic. Here it goes:
The premise to determine how a person was in his/her previous life, according to the table, is the lunar date that he/she was born in the present life. For the latter part, regarding a person's lunar birth date, is a classic "all-encompassing" premise, and as such one cannot debate against it without being enveloped into a circular argument.
The problem with this particular column is that it assumes that a person has a previous life.
But, if every person has a previous life, that means the population must be constant. As such, the equation should be:
(Those who were living) minus (Those who died) = (Those who are still living) plus (those who are born)
Therefore, those who died = those who are born. This is explained by the consideration that those who died are reincarnated as those who are born.
But, the world population has been growing. The world population in A.D. 1970 was estimated at 3.7 billion, while the world population in A.D. 2000 was estimated at 6.23 billion. To bring this a bit closer, if i assume that the world population in 2007 was 7 billion, and that the world population in 2008 is 7.1 billion, then i must necessarily concede that the extra 0.1 billion "new" people has no past lives!
And, if those new 0.1 billion people have no past lives, then surely the column which purports to be able to tell how one was during his/her past life, must necessarily be missing out on the new 0.1 billion population.
Surely those new 0.1 billion population have a lunar birth date in their present lives. But since they have no past lives, then the column must be wrong when it provides a "description" of their non-existent past lives.
We often see star charts, horoscopes in newspapers, magazines and so forth. I believe most of the population see such things as leisurely and nothing more. It is quite useless to provide contrary views as these "predictions" are mostly vague and "unprovable". Mostly, the charts encompass everyone who reads it. For example, one's birthday must fall within a day within a year, say 18th April 1998, and as such that person is a Aries. It is impossible to prove that a person does not belong to a particular horoscope.
But this particular column has a major flaw. Which can be proven wrong empirically. What is more, one can prove that it is wrong using simple logic. Here it goes:
The premise to determine how a person was in his/her previous life, according to the table, is the lunar date that he/she was born in the present life. For the latter part, regarding a person's lunar birth date, is a classic "all-encompassing" premise, and as such one cannot debate against it without being enveloped into a circular argument.
The problem with this particular column is that it assumes that a person has a previous life.
But, if every person has a previous life, that means the population must be constant. As such, the equation should be:
(Those who were living) minus (Those who died) = (Those who are still living) plus (those who are born)
Therefore, those who died = those who are born. This is explained by the consideration that those who died are reincarnated as those who are born.
But, the world population has been growing. The world population in A.D. 1970 was estimated at 3.7 billion, while the world population in A.D. 2000 was estimated at 6.23 billion. To bring this a bit closer, if i assume that the world population in 2007 was 7 billion, and that the world population in 2008 is 7.1 billion, then i must necessarily concede that the extra 0.1 billion "new" people has no past lives!
And, if those new 0.1 billion people have no past lives, then surely the column which purports to be able to tell how one was during his/her past life, must necessarily be missing out on the new 0.1 billion population.
Surely those new 0.1 billion population have a lunar birth date in their present lives. But since they have no past lives, then the column must be wrong when it provides a "description" of their non-existent past lives.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Da Mo and the True Path
This story I am about to tell you has been told and re-told countless times. I'm sure my version is somewhat different from the original one, if one could possibly trace back to it. But I hope the meaning is not lost.
During the Liang Dynasty in China, Da Mo went to see the Emperor Wu at the imperial palace.
Emperor Wu was a devout follower of Buddhism. Naturally, he was delighted to receive this traveller from afar.
Emperor Wu told Da Mo:" I have built many pagodas and temples all over my realm. I have toiled for a time as a monk at a temple. I have read as many buddhist sutras and scripts as I possibly can. How much merits have I gained from these acts?
Da Mo replied:" None."
"Why do you say that?"
"The true path is void."
"Then, what is the highest attainment one can achieve in the Buddhist path?"
"Since its void, how can there be any highest attainment?"
The Emperor was taken aback and immensely unhappy with the answers, and promptly sent Da Mo away.
During the Liang Dynasty in China, Da Mo went to see the Emperor Wu at the imperial palace.
Emperor Wu was a devout follower of Buddhism. Naturally, he was delighted to receive this traveller from afar.
Emperor Wu told Da Mo:" I have built many pagodas and temples all over my realm. I have toiled for a time as a monk at a temple. I have read as many buddhist sutras and scripts as I possibly can. How much merits have I gained from these acts?
Da Mo replied:" None."
"Why do you say that?"
"The true path is void."
"Then, what is the highest attainment one can achieve in the Buddhist path?"
"Since its void, how can there be any highest attainment?"
The Emperor was taken aback and immensely unhappy with the answers, and promptly sent Da Mo away.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Pluses and Minuses, Positives and Negatives
Hi,
If the world only has +,
E.g. A
+6 +7 = +13
+6 x +8 = +48
+8 / +2 = +4
in short, whatever you do to "+", you will always end up with "+"
On the other hand, if the world only has "-", you have a paradox, because you will invariably end up with "+" and "-".
E.g. B
-6 -7 = -13
-6 x -8 = +48
-8/ -2 = +4
So what can we draw from this?
I am sure there are many:
1.
+ = no change, or permanance. or no variety
- = change, or impermanance, or variety
2.
+ = no paradox
- = paradox
3.
?
If the world only has +,
E.g. A
+6 +7 = +13
+6 x +8 = +48
+8 / +2 = +4
in short, whatever you do to "+", you will always end up with "+"
On the other hand, if the world only has "-", you have a paradox, because you will invariably end up with "+" and "-".
E.g. B
-6 -7 = -13
-6 x -8 = +48
-8/ -2 = +4
So what can we draw from this?
I am sure there are many:
1.
+ = no change, or permanance. or no variety
- = change, or impermanance, or variety
2.
+ = no paradox
- = paradox
3.
?
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
My Brother Left for University of Queensland
My brother left for Brisbane to start his uni at the University of Queensland.
We sent him off last Sunday morning. Yes I can wake up early when it is really important. (so if i were ever late, you know where you stand... haha...). Kitiara's fans will understand the italics. But i digress...
The flight was at the new airport Terminal 3. Looks new.
My dad accompanied him. He will be there for 1 week, to help Tony settle down. My mum had to stay back because she needed to stay back to "bai ti gong" * on the 8th of the first month of lunar new year.
*to pray to the Heaven God. a tradition mostly conducted by Hokkiens in Singapore (needs verification).
I am certain she was sad to see Tony leave. I just hope Tony knows the extent (AND AS SUCH STUDY EXTRA HARD).
My brother will succeed in anything he set out to accomplish if he tries hard enough. This trip will no doubt be a stern test to his resolve. If he comes back with good grades, he comes back not only with good grades but a never-before-gained self-confidence of the first sentence of this paragraph.
Hmmm, looking back it was 11 years ago me and my brother were in opposite shoes. 11 years.
I hope he enjoys the full experience of oversea study, as I did (and yes that includes sleeping all day and waking at 7pm to watch the Simpsons; and to those who fail to appreciate that - it's your loss).
I wanted to wish him all the best, but i don't remember I said that to him. As we were walking back to the carpark to collect my car, I was feeling quite down. But suddenly, a thought came to me as vividly as it happened some 11 years ago - when I wished a friend "all the best", and he replied in his youthful conviction:"Don't worry, I'm in Good Hands!".
We sent him off last Sunday morning. Yes I can wake up early when it is really important. (so if i were ever late, you know where you stand... haha...). Kitiara's fans will understand the italics. But i digress...
The flight was at the new airport Terminal 3. Looks new.
My dad accompanied him. He will be there for 1 week, to help Tony settle down. My mum had to stay back because she needed to stay back to "bai ti gong" * on the 8th of the first month of lunar new year.
*to pray to the Heaven God. a tradition mostly conducted by Hokkiens in Singapore (needs verification).
I am certain she was sad to see Tony leave. I just hope Tony knows the extent (AND AS SUCH STUDY EXTRA HARD).
My brother will succeed in anything he set out to accomplish if he tries hard enough. This trip will no doubt be a stern test to his resolve. If he comes back with good grades, he comes back not only with good grades but a never-before-gained self-confidence of the first sentence of this paragraph.
Hmmm, looking back it was 11 years ago me and my brother were in opposite shoes. 11 years.
I hope he enjoys the full experience of oversea study, as I did (and yes that includes sleeping all day and waking at 7pm to watch the Simpsons; and to those who fail to appreciate that - it's your loss).
I wanted to wish him all the best, but i don't remember I said that to him. As we were walking back to the carpark to collect my car, I was feeling quite down. But suddenly, a thought came to me as vividly as it happened some 11 years ago - when I wished a friend "all the best", and he replied in his youthful conviction:"Don't worry, I'm in Good Hands!".
Friday, February 1, 2008
Annual Buy New Clothes for Chinese New Year
Chinese New Year around the corner!
Well, this year my wife refuses to buy new year clothes for me. I can only speculate on the reasons: 1. She thinks she has bad taste for clothes, so leave the choice to a better judge - me - instead; 2. I'm getting fatter and as such, and naturally, I am more picky on clothings - must not be too tight, otherwise it will be uncomfortable, or, must not be too loose or I'll look fatter than I really am.
During much younger days I used to shop for new year clothes with my friends (in some years with cousins). A full day event. I would receive about $100 from my mum (the amount would later be hotly debated and fought for as I got older...). It was the only time of the year where I got to spend more than $100 on clothings at one time. And with so much money in my pocket and the complete freedom to buy any clothes the budget allowed, I got to experience the full effect of consumersim and marketing attention. That kind of makes one feel important and adult dont' you think so? Definitely a major highlight of a year.
Now the scenario has somewhat changed. I mean, who'd shop with me? Everyone I know have partners or families to occupy them. It kinda feels weird to go shop alone.... but on another note, I think it feels weirder to have another friend accompanying me to shop. I mean, can you imagine 2 or 3 guys in their 30s shopping together along Orchard Road joustling with kids half their age? I can.
Also, my attention span for shopping has been lacking somewhat as the years roll on. My lovely wife can attest to that. Wait till she relates to you my Ultraman Syndrom. I'd probably spend less than half an hour on this shopping trip: walk-in, choose, check price tag, pay and go.
Or, maybe I should try to re-kindle the exhiliration of my younger days, by pretending like I'm 15 walking down Orchard Road with $100 in my pocket trying to decide how much to spend on a rare McDonald's meal so I still have enough left to buy the clothes I have been eyeing for months.
Well, this year my wife refuses to buy new year clothes for me. I can only speculate on the reasons: 1. She thinks she has bad taste for clothes, so leave the choice to a better judge - me - instead; 2. I'm getting fatter and as such, and naturally, I am more picky on clothings - must not be too tight, otherwise it will be uncomfortable, or, must not be too loose or I'll look fatter than I really am.
During much younger days I used to shop for new year clothes with my friends (in some years with cousins). A full day event. I would receive about $100 from my mum (the amount would later be hotly debated and fought for as I got older...). It was the only time of the year where I got to spend more than $100 on clothings at one time. And with so much money in my pocket and the complete freedom to buy any clothes the budget allowed, I got to experience the full effect of consumersim and marketing attention. That kind of makes one feel important and adult dont' you think so? Definitely a major highlight of a year.
Now the scenario has somewhat changed. I mean, who'd shop with me? Everyone I know have partners or families to occupy them. It kinda feels weird to go shop alone.... but on another note, I think it feels weirder to have another friend accompanying me to shop. I mean, can you imagine 2 or 3 guys in their 30s shopping together along Orchard Road joustling with kids half their age? I can.
Also, my attention span for shopping has been lacking somewhat as the years roll on. My lovely wife can attest to that. Wait till she relates to you my Ultraman Syndrom. I'd probably spend less than half an hour on this shopping trip: walk-in, choose, check price tag, pay and go.
Or, maybe I should try to re-kindle the exhiliration of my younger days, by pretending like I'm 15 walking down Orchard Road with $100 in my pocket trying to decide how much to spend on a rare McDonald's meal so I still have enough left to buy the clothes I have been eyeing for months.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)