How to Tell If You’re Rich

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
#81
Greypiggi, i like your ambition. Even though I'm already MRed I am working towards an IPPT gold as well as one of my targets.

Corydorus, it is my firm belief that sometimes what we see are just the survivors. I know many who tried to get there but failed, and are back in jobs ratrace (and some went bankrupt because they didnt structure their risks right). On a personal note I left a stable well paying job to take a big chance in life and I managed to make it - lady luck definitely played her part. Those entrepreneurs who tried and made it tend to make outsized rewards.
Reply
#82
(01-02-2013, 04:32 PM)corydorus Wrote: Wow another 30s .... Singapore is certainly a land of opportunity

perhaps can see it as only the successful 30s have the time and chance to come here and do sharing. Such successes probably only 1 out of 100. I happen to be in the remaining 99 but i am not going to take it personally. haha
Reply
#83
(01-02-2013, 04:32 PM)corydorus Wrote: Wow another 30s .... Singapore is certainly a land of opportunity
Gosh, no wonder govt want to import alot of FT as our own pp can retire much much earlier. They also make sure our housing remains "affordable" so that the young generations wont be able to retire so soon.
Reply
#84
No matter who we are or what we are, if we only can pause and reflect a little before it's too late, we know everything is going to be alright if we don't worry too much, for we know we come into this world with nothing and we will leave this world with nothing. Don't agree? Go and read about KING SOLOMON- "All is in Vain"
Yet why i keep on investing as long as i have my wit. Why?TongueBig Grin
WB:-

1) Rule # 1, do not lose money.
2) Rule # 2, refer to # 1.
3) Not until you can manage your emotions, you can manage your money.

Truism of Investments.
A) Buying a security is buying RISK not Return
B) You can control RISK (to a certain level, hopefully only.) But definitely not the outcome of the Return.

NB:-
My signature is meant for psychoing myself. No offence to anyone. i am trying not to lose money unnecessary anymore.
Reply
#85
ah gong wants so many ft sobthat they will get more $influx as well as more votes 3yrs time...
Reply
#86
sorrie hoh, i just know one new citizen this evening, she work in the civil service and she voted for the reform party
Reply
#87
i think most of the people in any kind of "business" will want population of 6.9 to 7 million. If they only think short term. Just like investing in stocks they are short term and long term goals.
WB:-

1) Rule # 1, do not lose money.
2) Rule # 2, refer to # 1.
3) Not until you can manage your emotions, you can manage your money.

Truism of Investments.
A) Buying a security is buying RISK not Return
B) You can control RISK (to a certain level, hopefully only.) But definitely not the outcome of the Return.

NB:-
My signature is meant for psychoing myself. No offence to anyone. i am trying not to lose money unnecessary anymore.
Reply
#88
(01-02-2013, 04:59 PM)godjira1 Wrote: Corydorus, it is my firm belief that sometimes what we see are just the survivors. I know many who tried to get there but failed, and are back in jobs ratrace (and some went bankrupt because they didnt structure their risks right). On a personal note I left a stable well paying job to take a big chance in life and I managed to make it - lady luck definitely played her part. Those entrepreneurs who tried and made it tend to make outsized rewards.

Yup, that's the Risk-Reward for those who succeed. There're a lot more who failed....

For the rest of us without the entrepreneurial streak / guts, no well paying job, inheritance, rich parents, sudden windfall.....etc, the best alternative (IMO) is still to slog on a regular job, be thrifty, save and invest. Yes, aim for our 6-8% annualised returns and hope for the occasional good years like 2012 or super ones like 2009 to overcome the bad ones like 2008... to hopefully give us a good CAGR over the longer term. Hey, if we could achieve above 10%, then the Million $ (or financial freedom, if lower amount required) dream will come true earlier.... If we can hit a CAGR in the higher teens... then... an even shorter waiting time will be required... Once you hit your target, perhaps you'll be shifting your thinking from "Money No Enuff" to "Millions No Enuff"... No, not being greedy, there're always many who're less fortunate out there where we can channel the monies if we have too much of it... Big Grin
Luck & Fortune Favours those who are Prepared & Decisive when Opportunity Knocks
------------ 知己知彼 ,百战不殆 ;不知彼 ,不知己 ,每战必殆 ------------
Reply
#89
(02-02-2013, 08:52 AM)Temperament Wrote: i think most of the people in any kind of "business" will want population of 6.9 to 7 million. If they only think short term. Just like investing in stocks they are short term and long term goals.

Actually things are more nuanced than that. Yes, as business owners, and in fact any commission dependent employee whose sales benefit from increased pop, we do know that 7m pop will help us. In fact any land owner or retiree who has made his money feels that way too (more pop = more people to work in silver care service line). However, we are also fathers, mothers, fellow ns men, fellow joggers, fellow religious brothers. So these roles too affect how we view pop targets.

Personally, I know sg is very competitive and our form of meritocracy needs to be tweaked to ensure social mobility and to ensure multiple elites. We should ensure that our safety nets are robust so that those who earn little too have dignity.

But for all that to happen, as a nation we must continue to thrive and mature and grow. So I love it that wp is evolving and hopefully they gather sufficient ethical and smart people to pose a credible threat to pap. But I also feel we must be logical and accept things that make sense. Pop growth of 1+% per annum to hit 7m by 2030 makes a lot of sense to me. Don't forget we will all live much longer and we have much less children, so our actual working pop will need to be supplemented.

Also, I like it that spore is like a Tokyo or new york or London or Paris or shanghai. I don't want to become a 2nd or 3rd tier global city. Where are the opportunities for my children then? And all top global cities have a pop of closer to 10m and up. When I travel I see a lot and I am proud to be sporean because we did a lot on our own steam. We are wealthy, independent, educated and truly quite unique.

If we allow pop to remain at 5m with an aging non working pop, we will decline into a Milan if we are lucky ? Still got 1-2 good niches but not top tier. If not lucky, we will decline into a regional city. Irrelevant.

Also, we underestimate technology and advances. There are many ways to make living comfortable even with 7m people in sg. It's not just smaller apt sizes, it is removing those useless golf courses, redesignating former industrial space, multi purpose furniture, building up and downwards, etc. so much can be improved which will generate more space. And this knowledge can become another export for Singapore.

This is what I think now. So on pop, I support growing at slower pace and maybe even faster pace. Not because I am elite or support pap but because it makes sense to me as a citizen, father, entrepreneur. And how we get there matters too, not more of same but really relook land use, Building tech and even furnishing.

What say you guys?
Reply
#90
I said in another thread. The problem is they did not manage property price and car cost well when they embark on population growth.
The infrastructure is another painful reminder.

If people can afford all this without large concern and do not feel the crowd, they would have succeed increasing the population easily.
Some Ministers just screwup imo.

Just my Diary
corylogics.blogspot.com/


Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 16 Guest(s)