有錢人絕不會犯的五大購屋錯誤

One of the best investment advices. Extracted from Chinatimes.com.

有錢人絕不會犯的五大購屋錯誤 文／《住展雜誌三月號》
在Ｍ型社會中，為什麼有些人會有錢？通常是因為他們過去所做決定，對的次數較多；相對地，為什麼大多數人賺不到錢？因為他們常依照自己的直覺做決策，所以常被套牢！「率性而為」如果能賺到錢，則大多數人都會賺到錢，但事實往往不是如此。
本文將有錢人在投資購屋時，絕對不會犯的五種購屋錯誤觀念加以整理，希望能幫助大多數人打破以「直覺」投資的迷思，而能順利躋身於有錢人之列。
■購屋錯誤一：
有錢人不會先買小屋，後買大屋
一般人依直覺思考購屋，總是會依自己的能力，先買小屋再買大屋，由小而大，循序漸進。但這種作法只會造成終其一生頂多有個棲身之所，但卻無法從投資購屋中賺到錢，而躋身富人之列，為什麼呢？
首先，是因為小屋雖然便宜，但增值性有限，每一次購屋要等到景氣來臨，才會有大賺頭，但通常一次要等七至十年。
大家想想，買一戶小屋，要等七至十年，才有機會大漲一次，當機會到時，除非是將小屋賣了，不再投資購屋，否則賣了小屋，再換大一些的房屋，不但無法獲利落袋，反而還要再投入更多的資本。
然後，又要花個七至十年等其增值，即使一生順利，也頂多換個三、四次，換到一幢最大坪數的房屋後，很可能還等不到該屋的增值，就已「蒙主寵召」，讓政府坐抽遺產稅了。在其一生之中，皆處於投資的「等待獲利期」中，而真正獲利者，不是其子女，就是政府，「一生打工，如竹籃打水一場空」。既期待又怕受傷害成為其一生投資的寫照。
自住屋難獲利
其次，由小而大的購買行為，通常會捨不得與自住行為區分，也就是說，投資人所買的房屋可能大多用來自住，自住的房屋是無法投資獲利的！
因為即使房屋愈換愈大，但當想將最大坪數房屋出售時，常會捨不得，因為想到如果房屋被賣了，自己就沒有房屋可以居住，子女就會無家可歸，於是在情感上就會捨不得出售。
結果一生只會擁有一幢自用的房屋，自然也不易從房地產投資中獲利，而成為與投資獲利無緣的「屋奴」。
任何一個希望從事房地產投資的人都必須了解，「自住」和「投資」是兩件事，如果想要「自住」，依照自己經濟能力由小而大，一生做個「快樂屋奴」，是沒有問題的。
但如果想要投資獲利，則必需和自住的房屋分開，要由大而小，因為，如果先買一戶大坪數的房屋，等到一次景氣（也許七至十年）來時，即可將房屋出手獲利。
此時，可有二種作法。一是手中握好現金，等房屋跌價後，再進場購買，則可安穩將獲利落袋（先售後買法）；另一種則是同時再購買一戶小些坪數的房屋，則可馬上實現獲利（以大換小法）。
率性而為可行
如果投資人真正瞭解這二種投資獲利方法，則房屋雖然即使愈買愈小，但每次的景氣（七至十年）都會為自己帶來獲利的機會，在有生之年，至少可以賺取三至四次，甚至更多次的獲利機會。
這種做法唯一要克服的是自己的直覺式思考方法，我要再提醒一次，如果依直覺「率性而為」的投資可以賺到錢，則有錢就不會是只有少數人的專利。
■購屋錯誤二
有錢人不會先買郊區，後買市區
依一般人依直覺思考購屋，總認為應該依照自己的經濟能力先買郊區，後買市區，最常聽到的聲音是「台北市的房屋已經太貴了，買不起，只好先買台北縣（甚至更偏遠的地方）！」就投資的角度而言，這是一種風險極大的錯誤，為什麼呢？
因為郊區通常是區位較差的地方，我們每一個人都知道房地產投資的三大鐵則是「區位！區位！區位！」意思是說，寧願不要投資，也千萬不要購買區位不好的房屋，「只要台北一張床，不要台東一間房」在在說明了區位對於投資的重要性，而郊區就代表了區位的不佳。
區位不佳就代表了未來增值空間有限，風險卻很大。由過去幾十年的經驗，我們可以看到許多郊區的房屋，在每一次的景氣時，大量築「夢」，讓許多無經驗的投資者與首購族，因為價格便宜，歡天喜地的購買，後來卻多遭套牢，遭到價格被腰斬，甚至再腰斬的命運。
每一個人都知道，當景氣來臨時，是郊區房屋的漲幅大？還是市區的漲幅大？當然是市區的！那為什麼還要去投資購買郊區的房屋呢？
同樣的例子，有許多新開發區的房屋，其價格雖然較市區便宜，但其情況卻亦相同，即使該區域有增值潛力，大多也已經反映在價格之上（超漲），要等到真正投資獲利，至少都是十年以後的事了。
更可怕的是，所築的「夢」如果發生變化，例如該開的捷運不開了，該蓋的學校不蓋了，該有的設施不建了，就會產生極大的跌價風險。
根據過去的經驗，一個新開發區的成熟時間，幾乎沒有少於十年的，例如信義計畫區的成熟花了超過二十年、淡水新市鎮的開發，經過十年仍是荒草一片。 依此經驗，大直及南港重劃區，沒有再十年是無法成熟的。因此，如果想要投資房地產獲利，千萬不要因自己經濟能力的考量，而先投資郊區，後投資市區。
■購屋錯誤三
有錢人不會先買中古屋，後買預售屋
一般人依直覺思考購屋，總認為購買中古屋（或成屋）因為看得到，而且價格通常也比預售屋低，所以安心購買。其實根據房地產投資的角度，中古屋是比較不具備有投資獲利機會的，為什麼呢？
首先，中古屋所購買的是「現貨」，是一種以大賺小的投資模式，也就是說必需先投入一大筆錢（即使部分是銀行融資），然後坐等增值。
依上述的經驗，每次景氣的時間大都要七至十年，所以在如此漫長的等待期中，每一天都必須支付機會成本（opportunity cost），即使有人會說，中間會有租金收入，扣掉利息，至少應該還會有些賺頭。
但如果投資人真正拿計算機打打，目前市場上的中古屋，不論是何種產品，其租金收入通常在三％至五％之間，而銀行利息就要付出約二％至三％（甚至更高），如果再加上租金所得稅，以及房屋稅、地價稅，以及各種維護費用，即使不算折舊都不一定會賺錢，這些成本都還不包含如果遇到不良的租客，欠租或賴租，以及客戶更換中所造成的空置期損失，如果真正細算，獲利其實是極低的（有些甚至還貼上機會成本的損失）。

預售屋潛力佳
但投資預售屋就沒有這些問題，雖然，一般而言預售屋的價格較高，但在未來三至五年裡，投資人通常只要付出房屋總價的十五％到三十％，而在這段時間裡，所有的稅費，如房屋稅、地價稅，甚至土地增值稅都是由賣方（建設公司）支付。
相對的，如果房屋有增值，則一ＯＯ％的增值皆完全由投資人取得。甚至如果在房屋尚未蓋好時即已出售（轉售），則通常連所得稅都可以省下來。
根據歷史經驗，在每一次的景氣來臨時，往往購買預售屋者的獲利，都遠遠大於出售者（建設公司），就是最好的例子。
除此之外，如果房屋漲價的數額相同，預售屋的投資報酬率至少會是中古屋的三倍以上。
因此，如純就投資的角度而言，有錢人很少會購買中古屋的，因為中古屋基本上不是一種好的投資標的。
其次，回到景氣時間，如果每七到十年才能有一次景氣的機會，對於投資預售屋而言，因為其通常有三至五年的興建期（房屋才會蓋好）。
所以，相對於中古屋，其等待增值的壓力減輕了極多，許多投資人往往在房屋尚未興建好時，即已投資獲利，這是中古屋所無法比擬的。
我必須再提醒一次，預售屋的投資機會只有在台灣才有，世界上許多地方，雖然也有類似的名稱，但不是預付款（Down Payment）要很高，就是購買期較晚（如中國大陸有必須在結構體完成才能預售的規定），甚至嚴格限制了銀行貸款的方式與成數，這些都將預售屋的投資優勢做了較大的限制。
只有在台灣，沒有這些限制，也才有最佳的預售屋投資機會，投資人怎能不把握？
■購屋錯誤四
有錢人不會先買景觀，後買區位
一般人依直覺思考購屋，總認為有「景觀」的房屋會有較大的增值，因此每當許多廣告打出「景觀住宅」，總能吸引到許多人趨之若鶩。但事實上，景觀的價值是必須加以檢驗的。
一戶有景觀的房屋，當然比沒有景觀的房屋要好，這是不需要討論的，但是真正的問題是，那一種景觀能讓房屋增值？
就投資的角度，郊區的景觀是不值錢的，例如在北海岸地區，每戶房屋都能看得到海景，例如在新店安坑地區的山坡地住宅，幾乎每一戶都能看到青山綠水，但為什麼入住的人並不多，而其房屋價格的增值又十分有限？不是常聽人說「百萬豪宅，千萬景觀」嗎？
景觀要值錢是要在市中心的景觀，因為在市中心的景觀是「稀有品」！例如在台北市區大安森林公園邊的住宅，每坪已經衝破百萬元；例如中永和的四號公園旁的住宅，每坪也至少超過四十萬元，為什麼呢？
因為在市中心的景觀是稀有的，也才有增值的條件。相對地，如果在郊區，景觀就不是「稀有品」，幾乎每一戶房屋打開窗戶都有景觀，這時候，景觀就不值錢了。
最好的例子是前幾年有許多久居都市的「窒息族」，為了爭取景觀，紛紛到合歡山蓋別墅（也有到宜蘭蓋農舍的），認為該區的景觀已是台灣之最，不但可以生活的健康，其房屋價格亦必然會增值，但是，那些房屋在這一波大台北地區平均房價幾乎上漲了五十％的波段中，不但沒有增值，反而乏人問津，有些人甚至還悄悄的又搬回了都市，這是什麼道理呢？
還是「物以稀為貴」的道理，景觀不能產生價值，「稀有的」景觀才有價值。即使在台灣首善之區的信義計畫區中，真正能有景觀的房屋不到二十％，而其中還有有些景觀是許多人所不喜歡看到的（如墳墓、隧道、或是高架橋）。
因此，即使在信義計畫區內，每坪房屋的價差，也有相差到一倍的，在如此小的區域中，已有這樣大的差異，在都市中各區域間的價差自然就更大了。
對於有錢人而言，一定是先選區位，後選景觀，因為就投資的角度而言，在Ａ級區位的Ａ級產品，必然是東方不敗，永遠會贏的產品，但在Ａ級區位的Ｃ級產品卻是另一種會增值而可以獲利的產品。
最近在信義計畫區內的國民住宅，每坪也賣到五、六十萬元，就是最好的例子，不要迷信景觀，「稀有的」景觀才有增值的潛力，而大部分廣告上所標示的景觀，都不具備有「稀有性」！
購屋錯誤五
有錢的人不會先買建材，後買品牌
所謂「外行看熱鬧，內行看門道」，一般人依直覺思考購屋，總認為房屋如果建材用得好，就一定愈增值，因此，只要看到售屋廣告上說「四面石材，進口設備」，就芳心大動，衝動購買，但後來卻多無法享受較大的增值，為什麼呢？
以往，在許多建築師的訓練中，總認為蓋房子要像蓋碉堡、蓋古堡，要實在、要堅固、要遮風、要避雨，因此大量採用石材，由外而內，幾乎是在興建一棟一棟的城堡（以往在他們教科書上的例子，也多是古堡）。
但隨著時代的進步，人們逐漸發現，住宅是要讓人住得舒服，而城堡並不能讓人住得舒服，（如果大家去看過城堡就知道，城堡只能讓極少數人舒服，居住其內的大多數是不舒服的！）。
如果要讓人們在房屋內舒適的居住，風調雨順，節能省源已成為目前世界的主流。
最好的例子是前些日子，大連市蓋了一批豪宅賣給美國最大電腦公司的高級主管住，全部都沒有採用石材，記者問開發商原因何在？該開發商回答，因為該電腦公司的安全部門會先檢查每一幢房屋，如果輻射量較高，就不會同意讓該公司主管居住。
天然石材由於來自地底，多少都會含有輻射量（另一種型式的輻射屋），很不容易通過檢驗。在台灣的許多建設公司還在迷信石頭城堡的同時，世界上包含中國大陸都已經積極的在改變。
在台北市有許多擁有好品牌的建設公司，其建築物已經愈來愈少用石材，具有環保特性的鋼材、玻璃，以及可以大量通風並節能省源的門窗已經悄悄地出現在我們的四週。
具有「未來性」的房屋才具有增值的潛力，在很多外行人還在看建材、設備的時候，重視環保節能的「新好宅」已經逐步出現。
因此，有錢人已將注意力由原先的建材、設備移轉到對品牌的重視，唯有具有好品牌建設公司的產品才能經得起時間的檢驗。
在許多「一案公司」的售屋廣告還在強調其所聘用的規劃及施工團隊是如何有名，及其建材設備是如何地系出名門的時候，不知道真正有品牌的公司是不需要這些包裝的。例如雙Ｂ汽車會打方向盤或是輪胎是什麼人設計或是什麼人製造的廣告嗎？ 同樣地，LV皮包會打所用的皮或鈕扣是什麼人設計與什麼地方製造的廣告嗎？ 品牌的精神即在告訴消費者，只要你買了我的產品，我負責到底，是誰設計、誰製造並不重要，而是本公司有多久的歷史，過去提供過什麼樣的產品，什麼樣的服務；現在，對於世界潮流趨勢有什麼樣的瞭解與什麼樣的判斷；未來，要提供什麼樣的產品、服務與責任，如果消費者認同了，就購買，這就是品牌。
為什麼有錢人會願意多花些錢購買有好品牌的產品，因為好的品牌自然具備了未來性與增值性，請特別注意，愈能夠掌握未來產品趨勢的好品牌公司，才愈能讓房屋增值。
有錢人的抉擇
有錢人為什麼會有錢？就因為常能掌握致勝觀念做決定！沒有錢人為什麼會沒錢？就是固執己見，常憑著自己的直覺與感覺做決定。
世界上，能掌握致勝觀念做決定的人少，憑直覺思考做決定的人多，自然會造成少數富者愈富、多數貧者愈貧的Ｍ型社會，如果我們真正希望投資房屋獲利，自然應該要向有錢人學習致勝觀念！
前陣子十分暢銷的「富爸爸與窮爸爸」系列書籍，所要傳達的觀念，就是富者為何會富的原因是有正確觀念，而正確的觀念卻往往與大多數人所習慣的直覺思考的結果相反，所謂「學而不思則罔」，要讓一個人瞭解，他依直覺思考的結果往往是不正確的，已經十分困難，如還能說服他改採正確行動更是難上加難，但這卻是走向有錢人道路的唯一方式，祝大家投資順利！
（本文作者為：股票上市公司基泰建設總經理馮先勉博士）

Who loves Singapore? Ang Mo of course!

An Ang Mo expat wrote to Forum on 13 Mar 08 (see below letter) saying Singapore is almost an heaven.

I can really see reasons for him feeling that way and why a locally born and bred man won't.

Ang Mo men:

• received better respect than the local men from the local government and girls;
  
• enjoying safety without the need to contribute to it (read NS);
  
• have recourse to democracy by returning home to the west;
  
• in time of unemployment can return to home where welfare is a lot better;
  
• short distance to the wonderful Asia but based in a place where pay is high for expat, tax is low, travel is hassle free, English speaking and westernised;
  
• perceived to have better English and more creative than the locals whose survival is dependent on command of English.
  

In short the bests of both worlds -- working world (spore) and Shelter (home in the west).

The local men have the worse deal:

• served NS (and discriminated for that because of age and reservice);
  
• compete without preferential for University and jobs;
  
• no political power like an expat (or worse because expat has no fear of political oppression from the local elite caste);
  
• most have no recourse to other democracy or places of better welfare;
  
• perceived to be not as cultured and creative as the ang mo;
  
• may not have enough to eventually retire.
  

Note: I'm not against any race or Foreign Talents, but merely reflecting reality faced by local men. Under normal circumstances anywhere, one would expect locals to be treated no worse than a foreigner in own country.

Letter to Forum

Singapore is heaven. Almost

(http://www.asiaone.com/Business/Office/Rest+And+Relax/Story/A1Story20080313-54287.html)
David Sandison
Thu, Mar 13, 2008, AsiaOne

SINGAPORE has changed a lot since I turned up here as a lad about 17 years ago.
I remember coming out of work in the evenings - we were in Battery Road at the time - to be faced by four choices:
(1) Go home.
(2) Go across the road to Movenpick for a glass of the only beer they served (I think it was Tiger).
(3) Clamber over rubble and go past derelict warehouses on Boat Quay down to a dank little pub called Paddles for a glass of their only beer (I think it was Tiger).
(4) Walk around aimlessly along the dark, deserted streets (which was sometimes forced upon you in attempting the first of the above and not finding a taxi).
My wife saw a lot of me back then. Now, after work, I am faced with 100 choices, bright lights, and an almost party atmosphere.
I can enjoy a large variety of beer, including, but not limited to, an old favourite of mine, Green King's Abbott Ale.
The choice of food, styles and prices are immense. Boat Quay bustles with tourists and homeward bound(ish) office staff.
Clark Quay boasts its own micro brewery and a Scottish restaurant, of all things.
Robertson Quay, Far East Square and Club Street all have their share of diners and revelers.
My wife also sees a lot less of me now ("Sorry dear, couldn't get a taxi home" - which, sadly, is something that hasn't changed).
Also, you could still buy a pack of chewing gum then and not risk arrest. Now, you have to get a prescription and wander into a pharmacy to get your fix.
But this is a small price to pay to live in one of the safest places in the world. Safety is a main reason why I have stayed here for the past 17 years.
Yes, the changes have been dramatic, but they have certainly been changes for the better.
Singapore is now a sophisticated, cosmopolitan, modern city which is a pleasure to live and work in.
The city is clean, it is safe and things work ? when they don't, someone will be round within the hour to fix them.
Red tape is minimal, government officials are helpful and polite.
The good news for me personally (though bad, professionally) is that tax rates are low.
Investment income is primarily tax free and we do not have the dreaded Capital Gains Tax.
Finally, on the travel front, I have never come across an airport as efficient as Changi.
No queues, a fast track access card and a rectangular, intuitive layout (has anyone tried drawing a map of Heathrow lately?).
My record from tarmac to front door is 30 minutes - and that includes swiping a bottle of competitively priced Laphroaig - whiskey - on the way through duty free.
Sounds like heaven? Almost.
In heaven, you can get a taxi.

David Sandison is a tax partner with PricewaterhouseCoopers Singapore. He has provided corporate tax advisory services in the UK, Australia and, for the past 17 years, Singapore.

YOU CAN'T RETIRE IN SINGAPORE

Not for most under current scheme which a couple expect themselves to work until 62 year old, pay off a HDB flat with CPF, and then rely on money in the CPF Special Account plus savings in the bank to last for the rest of their life.

I estimate that up to 95% of families in Singapore can't afford retirement.

CURRENT DATA, ASSUMPTIONS & SCENARIOS

The 2006 median family's monthly income in Singapore is S$4500 (combined income of 2 or more earners).

Employed Households by Monthly Household Income from Work (source: Singapore Department of Statistics, Feb 2007):

Monthly Household Income from Work (S$): Per cent
Less than 1000: 5.7%
1000 – 1,999: 13.0%
2,000 – 2,999: 13.6%
3,000 – 3,999: 12.3%
4,000 – 4,999: 10.5%
5,000 – 5,999: 9.0%
6,000 – 6,999: 7.0%
7,000 – 7,999: 5.4%
8,000 – 8,999: 4.3%
9,000 – 9,999: 3.3%
10,000 and above: 15.8%

Let's assume that a typical Median Income couple at retirement age:

• Married at age 25 and thereafter work continuously for 37 years;
  
• Each received 12 months salary plus 13th month bonus every year;
  
• Salaries either remain or increase but never drop;
  
• No income disruption as a result of lost of employment due to retrenchment, illnesses or handicap;
  
• Final 7 years's average income is S$4500 per month (Final Monthly Income); average monthly salary in the first decade of work is half the Final Monthly Income; average monthly salary in the second decade of work is two-third of Final Monthly Income; average monthly salary in the third decade of work is three quarter of Final Monthly Income;
  
• Save 13th month bonus minus CPF contribution every year;
  
• Monthly cash balance is negligible;
  
• No net inflation (i.e. income always caught up over overtook inflation)
  
• Employer CPF contribution is on top of the Income mentioned
  
• Pay off the HDB apartment through CPF Ordinary Account by retirement;
  
• Medishield would look after all medical needs;
  
• Family retirement fund comprises of monies in Savings plus CPF Special Account only;
  
• Have S$163K by 62 year old, based on current CPF Special Account contribution structure and interest rate;
  
• Savings Account Rate is less than 1% per annum (based on rate in the past decade);
  
• Retirement Fund needs to last until at least 85 year old (or 23 years after retirement).
  

Base Case Retirement Scenario

Based on the above data and assumption, For a Median Income Family, the savings in the bank will amount to approximately S$108K, and balance in the CPF special account, S$163K. So, after 37 years of hand-to-mouth living, the couple will retire with less than S$275K to their names. Singaporean will agree that a couple will need at minimum, S$2K/month or S$24K/year for living. In this scenario, the retirement fund will exhaust within 11 years. This means, either the retiree couple would die with food in stomach before 73 or starve to death without food in stomach by 74.

Alternative Scenario I

An improved scenario would have the couple put every dime that they save every year in CPF Special Account (or equivalent) that fetches 4% return per annum. The compounded retirement fund would amount to approximately S$193K + S$163K (savings plus CPF contribution respectively) = S$356K. This scenario will allow the couple to live for 14.8 years after retirement – up to 76.8 year old.

Alternative Scenario II

A more aggressive improved scenario would have the couple put every dime that they save every year into investment that fetches average return of 8% per annum (twice as good as CPF Special Account). The compounded retirement fund would amount to approximately S$467K + S$163K (savings plus CPF contribution respectively) = S$630K (savings plus CPF contribution). This scenario will allow the couple to live for 26.3 years after retirement – up to 88.3 year old.

Likely Improved Scenario

The likely improved scenario would be in between Base Case, Alternative I and Alternative II scenarios.
To provide for rainy days, the couple kept the first S$10K in bank that bears next to zero interest. This S$10K would take at least the first 5 years of savings. The next S$20K of savings into fixed deposit that gives 2% interest. The next S$20K is at least savings from the next 7 years. Subsequent 20 years of savings will be invested in more aggressive fund with capital guarantee; which typically yields no more than 6% per annum. With 12 or more years of yield lower than 4%, lower total amount in investment less aggressive than 8% per annum return, such median income couple would likely have about S$10.5K + S$35K + S$81K + S$163K = S$289.5K (Savings Account plus Fixed Deposit Account plus Investment plus CPF Special Account respectively) for retirement. The amount could only last between12 years after retirement. That means even with investment, the median couple is unlikely to survive beyond 74 year old. Those below median income will definitely be worse.

CONCLUSION

To survive until 85 year old on annual allowance of S$24K, a couple will need S$552K as the minimum fund for a humble retirement -- it was shown on Straits Times that to retire a Singapore family needs more than S$2M.

Based on the Likely Improved Scenario investment pattern, even family with S$10K per month (top 15th percentile families) cannot retire because such family will only have S$10.5K + S$35K + S$180K + S$163K = S$388.5K (Savings Account plus Fixed Deposit Account plus Investment plus CPF Special Account respectively) for retirement.

Only family with monthly income of S$20K per month and above could afford to retire. The average annual household income of 91st to 100th (highest 10 deciles) is S$174.3K, so may be only the top 5 deciles family could afford retirement.

DISCLAIMER
This modeling of course could not take into account life style, spending pattern, the ability of family members being employed for 32 years without income drop, inflation, and better investment return. Although, only the top 10 deciles families may have spare cash for more aggressive and hence better return investment.

This model also could not determine what amount is enough for families who could afford more than minimum requirement.

Extract from 中時電子報 2007/11/01 04:49

世界經濟論壇（ＷＥＦ）昨日公布最新全球競爭力評比，二○○七年全球競爭力排名，在一三一個受評國家中，美國競爭力仍高居第一，其他依序是瑞士、丹麥、瑞典、德國、芬蘭、 新加坡、日本、英國、荷蘭等。前十名中，北歐國家就占了三國，且進步最多的是瑞典，由去年第九名上升至第四名. 台灣的排名第十四名，較去年滑落一名；南韓今年競爭力大躍進，由去年第廿三名進步為今年的十一名，在主要國家中名次進步最多。
　
世界經濟論壇「全球競爭力」指標由三大類、十二項及一一三個細項組成，三大指標包括「基本需要」、「效率增強」及「創新因素」等。

台灣在金融市場成熟度由去年四十七名滑落到五十八名，退步的幅度最大；其中，銀行健全度由去年第一百名，滑落為今年的第一一四名。
　
其次，在「總體經濟」指標方面，台灣滑落四名為第廿六名，主要是財政赤字排名第五十九名，政府債務第五十三名，這幾項排名落後，大大影響總體排名。 台灣在「體制」方面退步七名為第三十七名，包括小股東權益的保護（排名第六十九），大眾對政治人物的信賴（排名第五十七）、司法獨立（第五十三名）等細項的排名均落後, 無論在財政赤字、還是政府債務，及對政治人物信賴方面，台灣都大幅落後，影響總體排名。
　
台灣向來表現較好的「創新因素」，今年亦退步三名，排名第十，其中，企業成熟度排名退步一名，排名第十四；創新指標方面，退步三名，排名第九。此外，在「商業競爭力」指數排名，台灣今年亦退步四名，自第十九名滑落至第廿三名，其中包括公司營運與策略成熟度滑落六名，國家商業環境品質滑落四名。

　

It's Condom...Stupid

Outdated doctrine and misplaced faith creates perfect disaster that even Creator would shun.

Does the Church really care about her faithful?

• opposition of contraception make the poor even poorer -- Ghettos in Philippines and Latin America as proofs --, and
• creates downward spiral that the generation after generation could not escape -- destitution leads to lack of education, no health care hence diseases, teenage pragnancy, violence, drug abuses, sex trade, and crimes.
• Not willing to educate the faithful on the use of condom make them vulnerable to AIDS and SIDs
• With these groups of faithful being poor, uneducated, diseased, and crime-prone groups producing baby at much higher than world's average, the world even without wars will become a more dangerous place by the day.

Catholic condom ban helping AIDS spread in Latin America: UN
The Catholic Church opposes all forms of contraception and instead promotes abstinence.
Tue, Oct 23, 2007Reuters

TEGUCIGALPA (Reuters) - The rapid spread in Latin America of the virus that causes AIDS is made worse by the Roman Catholic Church's stand against using condoms, a U.N. official said on Monday.

Some 1.7 million people across Latin America are infected with the HIV virus or full-blown AIDS, and the epidemic is spreading swiftly with up to 410,000 new cases in 2006, up from as many as 320,000 new cases in 2004, according the UN AIDS program, UNAIDS.

"In Latin America the use of condoms has been demonized, but if they were used in every relation I guarantee the epidemic would be resolved in the region," said Alberto Stella, the UNAIDS Coordinator for Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica.
The Catholic Church, which holds sway in Latin America despite the rise in evangelical churches, opposes all forms of contraception and instead promotes abstinence as a way to avoid spreading AIDS.

"The fact young people start to be sexually active between 15 and 19 without sex education contributes to the spreading of the virus, as well as the fact that the evidence shows abstinence is not working," Stella told Reuters.

Latin America is home to nearly half the world's 1.1 billion Catholics, but the Church's position on premarital sex and contraception often clashes with modern values. Brazil, the region's largest Catholic nation, regularly distributes free condoms to try and bring down HIV infection rates.

God created Adam & Eve Not Adam & Steve! ...

Following is my response to an article titled "God Created Adam & not Steve!" posted on Sammyboy's Forum by BBBrothers on behalf of Christians in Singapore (the original post is below my response).

Going by the logic of the title, all human must be descendent of Adam & Eve.

Question for the Christians: Are you also against INCEST???

Because after Adam and Eve, the family -- parents and child, siblings -- had to mount each other to mass produce the entire human race.

If you are against Incest then why do you support marriage -- and called it holy communion -- as that's aiding the Incest crime?

If you are not against Incest then why does homosexuallity bothers you as it's no more sinful or unnatural than Incest?

It has been scientifically proven that homosexuality (gayness) is inborn (natural) and exists in all animal segments. The statistics was between 10% and 20% of population are gay in any communities (i.e. 1 in every 5 to 10 people you know).

So, either your religion is wrong -- human are not from Adam and Eve, hence we are not incestious; which if that's the case, then there is no point talking about Adam and Eve --, or your logic is wrong as you obviously can't discern and reason.



"God created Adam & Eve Not Adam & Steve!
There has recently been wide discussion in the press and the Internet on the issue of homosexuality with different views expressed. Christians, like other thoughtful citizens, are also concerned about this issue.

We present our position below as a guide to Christians in our member churches and as our witness, as concerned citizens, to the society in which we belong. It saddens the church when we found out that a petition is out to change the penal code which will legalize homo related activities.

Our stand:
1) Recognizing the Bible as the authoritative standard for its faith and practice the Church has historically and consistently held the view that the practice of homosexuality is clearly incompatible with the teachings of the Christian faith. The only sexual relationship, sanctioned by God and given as a gift from God, is between a male and a female within the bounds of a monogamous marriage.

2) Therefore, we do not condone homosexual practice and we consider homosexual lifestyle as sinful and unacceptable. However, this does not mean that we reject or despise homosexuals (homophobia). We acknowledge that every person is loved by God and we all live under the grace of God. Homosexuals should be regarded and treated no less as persons of worth and dignity.

3) The Church is called to be a caring community and a sanctuary, always extending ministry to all persons. As sinners ourselves, we are committed to the path of true freedom made possible by the grace of God and found in and through obedience to Jesus Christ. Without minimizing their struggles, the Church offers those beset with homosexual desire the same opportunity to receive God's forgiveness and fulfillment in Jesus Christ and to experience His transforming power. Not accepting homosexual practice and lifestyle must not be confused with homophobia.

4) In public debate about homosexuality scientific data have sometimes been used to support certain claims. To the layperson, science has been unsuspectingly regarded as an objective discipline and conclusions based on its findings have been assumed as irrefutable and authoritative. But that is an assumption we do not accept especially with regard to attempts to give biological explanations to homosexual inclination and behaviour. We note that there is no clear evidence that homosexuality is biologically determined.

5) Though we deem homosexual lifestyle totally unacceptable on the basis of the Bible and our faith, we believe that unless there are legitimate reasons homosexuals, as individuals, should not be discriminated against in areas such as employment. It does not follow, however, that our society should be re-ordered or allowed to evolve to the extent that eventually homosexual practice is endorsed, permitted or encouraged as an alternative lifestyle. In this regard, we urge our government to maintain: a) current legislation concerning homosexuality;b) its policy of not permitting the registration of homosexual societies or clubs;c) its policy of not allowing the promotion of homosexual lifestyle and activities.

6) As churches we seek to remain faithful to our Christian faith and practice. We shall strengthen the education of our members in the teachings and practices of our faith. We are committed to serving our nation by helping to preserve and promote wholesome values and lifestyles that will contribute to the well-being of our society.

What is Unnatural must not be encouraged. "

Super City -- Greater Shanghai Area

Shanghai is in the process of building a super Greater Shanghai connecting cities within 300KM radius. The Greater Shanghai will be 34 times bigger than current and 8 times more populated.

The new super city will be the largest city in the world comprising 130M people -- a little more populated than Japan and half that of USA. Satellite cities within the Greater Shanghai areas will be connected by magnetic highspeed train and highways, as well as undersea tunnel linking Pudong and the outskirt islands to facilitate 25-min car ride from end to end.

Shanghai is also buidling a high speed magnetic rail to Beijing, making travel between the 2 most important cities in 5 hours. The rail will be ready for 2010 World Expo.

The new development is likely to reduce duplication investement, maximize return, permits efficiency in logistics and creates a synchronized region conducive for rapid production and international trade.

The arrangement will have Pudong as Financial Center, current Shanghai as international trading sea/air ports, and logistic hub. The satellite town and cities will serve as production bases and sub-urban living quarters. Shanghai sea port will definitely become the busiest container port in the world in near future.

Purely from investment perspective, this super city alone will grow at neck breaking rate for another decade or two. God knows if they would spread such development model to other parts of the country to raise the living standard of the inner land?

From ecology perspective, if done wrongly the super city could create super disaster for the world i.e. pollution magnifies and environment badly damage. However, if done right, it would be a sustainable high growth model.

I could imagine half of the world's cranes and cement and steel and plenty of oil... flowing to Shanghai...just not sure the earth could sustain such development.

What can I say? Holy F**K! Seldomly in a life time we get to see such a major happening -- quasi building a Japan in one go -- for better or worse.

It just make living in Singapore a stint in Mickey Mouse's land.