这是一则学妹发给我的邮件，觉得值得分享一下！

 

哈哈，趁着世界杯的热潮，写篇BLOG发表一下自己的看法，希望大家多多指教！

（3-4-3）

门将：范德萨

后卫：内斯塔，卡洛斯，费迪南德

中场：贝克汉姆，卡卡，托蒂，杰拉德

前锋：劳尔，克劳斯，舍甫琴科（可怜的欧文提前告别了），努诺戈麦斯（替补的吧）

     

 

I felt a sense of despondency after reading today’s newspaper..

 

Over the past few days, a lot of coverage was given to DPRK, the mischievous “axis of despot” walking on a path of no return. “North Korea shocked the world in 1998 by firing Taetodong 1 into the Pacific Ocean passing over Japan.” The sentence has been repeated at least three times in today’s newspaper. I was wondering what our Chinese government would comment on this. We have been so magnanimous towards this neighbor by inviting it to the negotiating table. North Korea has been portrayed as China’s wading-the-turbulent-water-and-stepping-over-the-fire-brethr

-en. How is the government going to smoothly metamorphose this image into something evil and unruly, in line with the world? I searched the people’s daily website. Surprisingly, there was not single report on this issue. Wait until the North fires the ballistic missile, hopefully the editors are allowed to write something at least to acknowledge their awareness of this not-so-insignificant event that has attracted not so small scaled attention.

 

Only losing to DPRK, but beating everyone else in capturing the headlines, is, again one of our best “strategic partners”, Iran! I find today’s commentary rather interesting, “Talks about talks”. China-Russian-Iran VS USA! Much more exciting than the world cup finals! The crucial thing is how are we going to persuade and ensure that Iran stay with us for ever? What if it becomes another North Korea? Though unlikely in the near future because we are pumping huge sum of money into Iran to assuage our thirsty for the yellow liquid; there is no benefit for Iran to jeopardizing its ties with China and Russia. Otherwise it is going to be very “interesting”. Imagine this: Two boys, one with everything-weapons and money-and the other with nothing but one lethal weapon, stand opposite to each other, brandishing aggressive gestures; another two boys who are a bit disoriented and swim from one side to the other, doing nothing but warning and pacifying.

 

Besides these, there is “tiger’s” bloody killing, the chemical plant blast….

 

But at least there is one piece of good news: People’s Bank of China finally adopted a tighter monetary policy to cool down the investment heat. Quite far-sighted given the inflation rate is only 2%.

 

Want to watch England vs Sweden tonight! But sad, there is no cable TV in the hostel!

A fantastic movie!

A movie which watered my eyes in the silent midnight...

A movie which reveals the ugliness of human greed and avarice to their extremes!

Has the heart-rending roar of King Kong waken up those who are absorbed in their envioned world of wealth? The ignorance and cold bloodiness of the fame craving producer, the flocking photographer and newspaper reporters, the relentless firing of the callous pilots and the repugnant remark from the rich made me doubt so.

However, the two beautiful souls "higher up on the monolithic skycraper" shed some hope...

The movie is not about beauty and beast...

It is about moral decadance, betrayal,fame, fortune, ignorance, trust, bravery and LOVE.

It leads me to ponder this:

Are we, human beings,  too presumptuous to assert that homo sapien is the most superior form of species in the animal kingdom?

 

 

 

 

From hxjofzc@263.net Fri May 28 09:01 MET 1999
Date: 28 May 1999 04:55:30 -0000
Message-ID: <19990528045530.25740.fmail@263.net>
From: hxjsdzc@263.net
To: hxjofzc@tonghua.com.cn
Cc: hxjofzc@263.net
Subject: Kosovo and Chinese Embassy
Dear Sr.
My English is poor, so if there are some unfit word, pardon me please.
Off and on, I wrote three essays in Chinese: 'What is behind the
Kosovo warfare (99.03.25)', 'Kosovo --- falling of the European Union
and the Split of the NATO (99.04.05)', 'The reason of bombing Chinese
embassy (99.05.08)'.
The third essay is written at 8 May 99, several hours after the
attack to Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia. You can comprehend that
there is fervent emotion in the essay. The word is too fervent to
read, although I think my view is right. Therefore, I do not
translate the third. If you want to know what it said, you can find
an interpreter, and then the emotion in the translated essay will be
smooth.
What is behind the Kosovo warfare?
Seemingly, the act of air raid on Kosovo is for the humanism. In
fact, the United States is carrying out a plan to deter the
development of Europe. USA will take great advantage.
After the cold war, the competition between capitals is becoming
increasingly tense. For example, The Asian financial crisis, which
might not be made by USA, occurred last year. However, the World
Bank, which is manipulated by USA, worsened the crisis by delaying to
offer loans to those countries which were badly hit by the crisis. By
intention or not? Only God knows. As far as we know, the economy of
USA is at its best with Dow Jones index rising all the way. The ASEAN
capitals, which once had been the potential threat to the American
capitals, now can not threat USA, furthermore need a few years to
recover.
The Gulf War is another example from which USA gained a lot. Ever
since the end of the Gulf War, the oil price fell gradually. Being
the world biggest oil consumer, USA saves a big money. Maybe it was
reasonable to remain army at the Gulf in the past, but now more and
more people do not agree this act again. 'Oh, take it easy, don't

worry about it!' the American will say like this. Because if there is
American army at the Gulf, there will have no stability at the Gulf,
and the oil price will not increase, and USA will keep on gaining.
Now, there has no cry for energy crisis in USA. There is the Gulf
crisis, so nobody will be afraid of energy crisis.
Now here comes the Kosovo crisis. Balkan, the barrel of explosives,
is in war. If there is no peace in Kosovo, there is no peace in
Yugoslavia and there is no peace in the neighboring countries, and
whole Europe will not be stable again. Then, the European capital can
not focus on growing any longer and the European capital has no
chance to grow faster than the American's does. Let the Europeans
stuck in the troubled water. USA can march on to the Asian market,
African market and even the European market. Let us look around the
world. Who can compete with USA in economy? Europe and Japan are the
only two rivals of USA. Japan is too small to grow, so it is not the
real rival. The Europeans have worked for decades to have their
European Union, but as there is whole mess in Kosovo, there is no
grow of the European capital, and the Union for Europeans is useless.
The European capital is not a rival any more.
What will USA lost? First, some unlucky soldiers will die. Second,
the world public opinion will blame USA. Third, the public opinion of
USA will blame government and some parades against warfare will come
off. At most, the American government who can not deal with the
matter in the future will resign. By any means, any actual important
vantage will not be paid out. What we must impress is, if tactic is
made by heart, all the defects we refer upward will be avoided.
The investment is so small and the interests are so large, whoever
will miss this kind of chance? As we know, the Bosnia and Montenegro
crisis has not brought bankruptcy to European economy. Now Kosovo
crisis will help. European economy will be depressed for years ahead
and even will be bankrupt forever. By then, the Americans can not
help laughing in their dreams.
In Europe, some countries participate in the bombing of Kosovo.
What can they get from it? Being sold by the others, you help to
count money for the sellers. The Americans are the troublemakers
instead of peacekeepers. By setting fire on Kosovo, USA can achieve
the following three goals: selling their weapons, letting the
Europeans challenge the Russians, deterring the European economy. If
I were Bill Clinton, I would like to fish in the troubled water, why
not.
Poor Balkan people. Who would take care of them?

Initially, I thought it just a simple collection of individual items. Gradually, I realized that it is

much more than that. I can’t say that I hate logistics, but it indeed nearly drove me crazy

throughout the last few weeks. Somehow I felt that I had a predilection for juggling all the

logistics. I can still vividly recall the first meeting we had with the MOE. How passionate we

were and how sanguine we were. Eventually our passion and determination moved the MOE

officers who generally sponsored us for 6000 to organize this concert. I forgot how the name

XinLinXin first popped into our minds, but I do remember that when somebody said this out,

everybody agreed unanimously. 心连新…such an ingenious idea as long as CCTV does not

sue us for infringing intellectual property rights. At the start, everything progressed very smoothly.

Soon we found some high-quality items. Then it was the March block tests and everybody put

the concert aside and focused on studies. However, we soon realized that time was running against

us! We had less than two months left and a lot of things had not been settled. The MOE officers

suggested us to postpone the concert until July. We really had a hard decision to decide on the time

and nearly resorted to voting. However, we told the MOE officers that we would try out very best

to carry out this in May and we would check our progress in early April: if we were not prepared,

we would then consider postpone it to July. After that, we really started working hard. However,

we soon faced the problem of finding the venue. I could say that I had never experienced such

frustration in my life! Our vice principal supported us from the first time I told her about the idea

and she encouraged us to carry on. When it came to sourcing for a suitable venue, we tried to use

the auditorium in Hwa Chong. However, it was too late as the audi had long been booked fully by

other performing arts groups (there are a lot of concerts in May). Having failed, we turned our

attention to the drama center, that is when our predicament started. Initially, they told us drama center

was available on the 20^th may, but we must have a letter from the teacher from college section. We

were so happy and we quickly got the letter. However, their attitude suddenly changed! After a lot

of negotiations (I really do not want to talk about those unhappy things any more…), they eventually

rejected us despite the fact that the college supported us and the drama center was going to be free

on the 20^th! Maybe yibo is right, “ this is life.” The teacher told us,” Do not go to that side… There

are a lot of red tapes and inconveniences. Use our own audi or lecture theater.” At that time, I realized that the so-called merger is nothing but an empty name and the “big Hwa Chong family” is nothing but hypocritical

claim. The conclusion I arrived at is this: Hwa Chong Junior College is Hwa Chong Junior College;

Chinese High is Chinese High. Do not mix them together. Meanwhile, we kept on changing the time

and venue for the concert. We sensed that the Chinese dancers were really getting a bit unhappy about

all these changes and they dropped out from the two performance at Anglican High and Chung Cheng

High. We really could not do anything about this. Our first rehearsal was really pathetic. It was

held in Chinese High Boarding School functional room because there was no proper venue for

us to stage our rehearsal. Luckily, we were able to enjoy delicious KFC after the rehearsal. Thanks

to the financial support from the Ministry of Education. It was then end of April and the devastating

thing was that we still could not confirm the venue! We tried the Chinese High drama center again

and again. Every time we saw some hope, we fought for the opportunity, but to no avail. The MOE

officer once again suggested to us to postpone the concert to July and after serious discussion, we

maintained our initial decision: we will realize it in May! We reached a consensus that we would

hold the concert in Lecture Theater Three. Yes , the PA system and lighting system are lousy. But

it is the only choice we have. We believe that the quality of the items speaks more. After confirmed

the venue, everything started to proceed quite fast. Throughout the last week, my mind was filled

with nothing but the concert. There were so many logistics to handle… Borrow video camera from

the PA, work our the timeline, get floor plan to do seat allocation, recruit volunteers, recording minutes,

excuse performers from lessons, invite old folks from homes, send invitation letter to school admins,

ask the CO teacher in charge to clean up the backstage, borrow ladder from the library to hang the

decorations, book bus transport, count the number of lunch packs, contact perfomers, contact Anglican

High, do powerpoint…. The list was really eternal. The minute I confirmed with two old folks’

Home, I really felt “stone touches the ground”. The minute I recruited 14 Singaporean local volunteers,

I felt another “stone touches the ground.” I think I must have sent about 1000 messages last week…I was

staring at the hand phone wherever I went: walking, on the bus, sitting in the tutorial room…But

the effort paid off. We had our full-dressed rehearsal today and it was quite successful. I love the stage

decoration because it reminds me of Chinese New Year in China. And the items are all quite nice. Just

that we need more coordination for the PA. But considering it is the first time full-dressed rehearsal, it

is quite good actually. Next Wednesday, we will perform in AHS and next Saturday, will be at

Hwa Chong. Haha, pray for us ok? I really hope this PRC scholars-initiated concert can be proven

to be a success. We will not let those who have supported us disappointed.

（转载）写在五一劳动节之即――十族劳动者十种不如意<964>字节

今天是劳动节，放假七天中的第一天，爸爸妈妈特地带我们到动物园玩。  　　按照惯例，我们早餐喜欢吃地瓜粥。今天因为地瓜卖完了，妈妈只好黔驴技穷地削些芋头来滥竽充数。没想到那些种在阳台的芋头很好吃，全家都贪得无厌地自食其果。  　　出门前，我那徐娘半老的妈妈打扮的花枝招展，鬼斧神工到一点也看不出是个糟糠之妻。头顶羽毛未丰的爸爸也赶紧洗心革面沐猴而冠，换上双管齐下的西装英俊得惨绝人寰，鸡飞狗跳到让人退避三舍。东施效颦爱漂亮的妹妹更是穿上调整型内衣愚公移山画虎类犬地打扮的艳光四射，趾高气昂地穿上新买的高跟鞋。  　　我们一丘之貉坐着素车白马，很快地到了动物园，不料参观的人多到豺狼当道草木皆兵，害我们一家骨肉分离。妻离子散的爸爸鞠躬尽瘁地到处广播，终于查找到差点认贼作父的我和遇人不淑的妹妹，困兽之斗中，我们螳臂当车力排众议推已及人到挤到猴笼前，鱼目混珠拍了张强颜欢笑的全家福。 　　  　　接着到鸡鸣狗盗的鸟园欣赏风声鹤唳哀鸿遍野的大自然美妙音乐。后来爸爸口沫横飞地为我们指鹿为马时，吹来一阵凉风，让人毛骨悚然不寒而栗，妈妈连忙为爸爸黄袍加身，也叮嘱我们要节哀顺便。  　　到了傍晚，因为假日的关系，餐厅家家鹊占鸠巢六畜兴旺，所以妈妈带着我们孟母参迁，最后终于决定吃火锅。有家餐厅刚换壁纸，家徒四壁很是美丽，灯火阑珊配上四面楚歌，非常有气氛。十面埋伏的女服务生们四处招蜂引蝶，忙着为客人围魏救赵口蜜腹剑到让人误认到了西方极乐世界。      饥不择食的我们点了综合火锅，作怀不乱的爸爸当头棒喝先发制人，请求为虎作伥拿着刀子班门弄斧的女服务生，快点将狡兔死走狗烹，因为尸位素餐的我们一家子早就添油加醋完毕，就等着火锅赶快沈鱼落雁好问鼎中原，可惜锅盖太小，有点欲盖弥汤料沸腾后，热得乐不思蜀的我们赶紧解衣推食好大义灭亲上下其手，一网打尽捞个水落石出。火锅在我们呼天呛地面红耳赤地蚕食鲸吞后，很快就只剩沧海一粟，和少数的漏网之鱼。母范犹存的妈妈想要丢参落四放冬粉时发现火苗已经危在旦夕，只好投鼠忌器。幸好狐假虎威的爸爸呼卢喝雉叫来店员抱薪救火，终于死灰复燃，也让如坐针毯的我们终饱私囊。鸟尽弓藏后，我们一家子酒囊饭袋，沆淡瀣一气，我和妹妹更是小人得志，沾沾自喜。不料结帐的时候，老板露出庐山真面目，居然要一饭千金，爸爸气得吴牛喘月，妈妈也委曲地牛衣对泣。  　　啊！这三生有幸的劳动节，就在爸爸对着钱包自惭形秽大义灭亲后，我们全家江郎才尽，一败涂地。

(编辑： 作文屋 www.zuowen5.com )

Start to feel exhausted after drilling the endless vocabulary list into my mind...

Sometimes I ponder this question,"why do I want to go to America?" I am sure that I am not attracted by the prestige many American universities enjoy. When I first came to Singapore, I had this mentality that Singapore is just a springboard for me to enter the more exciting world. After four years' of study in Singapore, I still have this mentality. However, now the "exciting world" refers to China. It may sound very strange. Coming to Singapore is a springboard for going back to China??? Indeed, this is true. Competition is so fierce in China that only the luckiest few can climb up the social echlon to have their dreams realized. Though the Chinese government has realized the immense potential of the country's domesitic pool of talents, many Chinese companies still value foreign degree and foreign experience more. I aspire to be a central banker. I do feel that if I am one of the millions of graduates flooding into the limited job market each year, the chance for me to get into the People's Republic Bank of China will be much slimer as compared to now... With a degree of top American universities and adequate performance during the job interviews, I think it is something that I not only can dream about, but also can strive to achieve. Candidly speaking, I think this is not escapism, but rather pragmatism.

So the motive driving me to those famous US universities is very clear-I want to get a "nice-looking" degree which can increase my chance of getting into the PBC. I was thinking writing something about my opinion and passion for China's economic reform as my US college application essay. But I wonder whether or not the Americans will just throw my essay into the dustbin if I tell them explicitly that I am very determined to go back to China after graduation...But that is really what I am thinking about.

OK,of course, there is another reason why I want to go to America. I am intrigued by the complexity of world politics and economics. Even though Singapore's world-class telecommunication system allows me to access the world news almost unobstructedly, I do feel that the country is too tranquil and placid. There are not so many disputes and issues to discuss about...To add colour to the life, Singaporeans, sometimes, like to cavil over little things and make a whirlpool in a teapot. Imagine how exciting it will be if I can sit in Yale's auditorium to hear Rice or Rusfeld talking directly in front of me and enjoy the luxury of posing buring questions to them after the talk. Imagine how exciting it will be if I can go to the New York Stock Exchange Market every morning to gaze at the fluctuating Dow Jones Industrial Index. Imagine how exciting it will be if I can discuss with prominent American professors about Sino-American trade issues.Imagine how exciting it will be if I can really experience those world events which I can only hear on BBC now.I think after all these, I can really enlarge my outlook and the rich experiences will definitely prompt me to ponder a lot of issues and prepare me for future career as a central banker of China.

Ok, I think I shall go back to SAT now...or rather go to sleep,haha.

期待已久的International Physics Olympiad的分配结果终于下来了，好兴奋，被分到了白俄罗斯队。哈哈，还是这辈子第一次当导游，而且要开始学俄语了，要不然到时候可真是大眼瞪小眼了。组委会想得还真周到，办了俄语学习班给带说俄语国家的导游们。恩，又要体会上夜校的滋味了，苦中有乐！

总之，对未来充满了希望！希望我对这门新的语言不要太迟钝了。哈哈。

Is the Fed Obsolete?

by Bob Gelfond

Bob Gelfond is CEO and founder of MagiQ Technologies.

Despite the overwhelming evidence that markets perform best when left alone by the government, it is still virtually taken for granted that one consumer product should be completely controlled by every government in the world. One product, so ubiquitous, that it's used by almost everyone in the world on a daily basis: money.

Money is vitally important; the lifeblood of our financial system, but it is a product nonetheless. Consumers use this product not just as a medium of exchange but also as a liquid store of value and as a basis for accounting. Money producers, i.e., central banks, profit through seignorage, the ability to earn interest on their assets while issuing notes, e.g., dollar bills that pay no interest. The Fed creates money from thin air when it buys an interest bearing Treasury security and credits the seller with dollars. These dollars are not backed by anything in the sense that the Fed is not obligated to buy or convert dollars into anything.

Now there would be nothing wrong with this if the Fed were just some private institution trying to earn a living in an unregulated market. But of course, the Fed is a government-protected monopoly. Even prior to the Fed's creation in 1913 there was always some level of government regulation of money. Prior to the Civil War, private banks used to issue dollar notes that were convertible into gold. Scholars debate whether the banking crises and panics during this period were a product of government regulation of these currencies and banks. What is clear is that there was never a completely free market in currency issuance. Well, the time has come.

To believe that the Fed is necessary is to believe that money is such a special product that it is optimal to give power to a group of expert economists either to use their best collective judgment in setting policy or to remove their discretion and create certain rules for them to administer. The only alternative is to eliminate government control of money.

Let's examine these beliefs. Currently, Fed policy is essentially targeting low inflation. There are discussions about whether there is sufficient productivity growth to allow a high rate of GDP growth but the bottom line is protecting against an increase in inflation. While the target is not explicit, I would argue that markets are free enough and evolved enough to force the Fed towards this implicit target.

The Fed controls the spot interest rate market (Fed funds) by creating or destroying spot dollars. All the other points along the money market yield curve are more or less determined without government interference. If the market feels the Fed is being lax on inflation, all the non-spot money market rates will rise and spot dollars will be sold for inflation hedges like commodities and foreign currencies. These trends will continue until the market catches the Fed's attention and the Fed funds rate target is increased.

A more efficient policy would be to announce an explicit inflation target. With the continued development of the inflation protected bond market, which trades on real rates, this policy could be accomplished by explicitly targeting the market's expected inflation rate (a first order approximation is calculated by taking the geometric difference of real rates from the nominal rates of comparable bonds). The Fed could choose the means by which to affect the markets. But this still leaves the problem of what inflation rate to target and how to define an inflation index.

It is arguable whether stock and real estate prices should be included in an inflation index because price bubbles are destabilizing and an indication that monetary policy is too loose. There certainly are non-linear effects in markets that can cause self-reinforcing trends that push markets away from their fundamentals. But bubbles, at best, can only be defined after the fact. Like an Oliver Stone movie where lack of evidence is an indication of the strength of the conspiracy, prices continuing to go up are evidence of the increasing size of the bubble! The term is meaningless to describe current conditions because it can't be disproved; prices go up because there is a bubble; prices go down because there was a bubble, either outcome is proof of the existence of a bubble. So let's stick with CPI.

Changes in the CPI can occur for non-monetary reasons (i.e., events independent of too much or little money creation). If the Fed is going to target CPI and minimize inflation due to monetary policy it has to be able to adjust for these non-monetary events. Central bankers are happy (and correct) to overlook price rises from supply shocks, such as droughts. The flipside is that price drops due to supply shocks coming from productivity growth also need to be adjusted for. If some innovation allows the cost of producing widgets (of equal quality) to drop the credit should not go to monetary policy.

So the ability to measure productivity is critical regardless of whether an inflation target is explicit or implicit. Even with the way current Fed policy is formulated, productivity is at the core of the debate over the appropriateness of policy. Higher productivity growth means the economy is running more efficiently and can therefore run faster without increased inflation. But the technological and financial advances that we have seen and will continue to see (if the government can stay somewhat out of the way) are quickly transforming our ability to define let alone measure productivity.

In the economy of the 1950s productivity was easy to measure as it was largely a function of widgets produced per man-hour. Today more and more firms are valued not for how many widgets they produce but for the quality of the ideas they produce - their intellectual property. These ideas may not generate any revenue today but in the future, and can therefore only be calculated today by looking at a firm's market capitalization, a highly volatile measure. (This is not to argue that a firm's market value is a perfect measure but that a priori it is the best unbiased measure available.)

Consider a firm whose sole function is to develop patents for licensing. The only quantitative measure of their output will be the number of patent applications generated per man-hour. However, what is important is the economic value of these patents, which may not correlate with the number of patents generated. This economic value can only be ascertained by seeing what value the market gives to the company.

While there may not be a lot of pure research companies like this, these types of companies effectively reside within virtually every tech firm. The research aspect of a tech firm is perhaps its most vital part because the trade secrets and patents produced are the engine of its future growth.

Many would be happy to sweep these issues under the table because, in their view, the economy is doing great and the Fed deserves much of the credit. In other words, if it ain't broke don't fix it. After all, the stock market has had an incredible run (despite being down some this year), the dollar is strong, inflation is seen to be under control, and the last time unemployment was this low Bill Clinton was busy not inhaling. Going back to the start of 1995, the S&P 500 has more than tripled and GDP growth has been 4.1 percent (go back further and this rate drops).

But as good as things have been, they fall short in comparison with the average GDP growth of over 5 percent in the hundred years prior to 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window and floated the dollar. This may not sound like much of a difference but it means that national income would have been more than 25 percent higher during these past five years had the economy been growing at a historically average rate.

Additionally, while inflation is low, it isn't zero (even considering any and all measurement biases). So our money is still being debased, albeit at a slow pace. Given the tremendous technological advances and the subsequent increases in productivity, we should really see falling prices if the dollar were truly maintaining its usefulness as a store of value. Not a 1930s-style severe deflation that was caused by a variety of bone-headed fiscal and monetary policies that squashed both demand and supply. Just a steady, modest price decline reflecting productivity growth adjusted for quality improvement in products and services, where even products whose quality stays the same become cheaper to produce, raising the standard of living for all.

This recent period has also had many advantages over the prior period. With the Cold War over and defense spending being cut, valuable capital and human resources have been deployed in far more productive activities. Financial markets have evolved to be far more efficient, sophisticated, and global than a generation ago, allowing capital to be allocated more efficiently. U.S. corporate performance has reaped the benefits of the restructurings during the 1980s. Granting employee options is now prevalent. This gives both better incentives to workers and provides a tax-advantaged way of compensation resulting in a far more efficient way to pay staff.

Yet despite these advantages we can't seem to match the growth rates of the past. Of course this foregone income cannot all be chalked up to the failings of monetary policy. Certainly the enormous increases in taxes, regulation and government spending bear much of the blame.

But a truly market-based monetary policy might not have been such a willing accomplice to the increasing encroachment of government into the private sector. Without the implicit inflation tax and monopoly profits from the Fed, government would be forced explicitly to raises taxes (politically difficult) or to lower spending and deregulate. If the latter path is accompanied by tax cuts, experience shows that the economy benefits. In other words, the dynamic of tighter monetary policy (to eliminate current inflation) hurting short-term growth can be completely offset by fiscal policy. (Shockingly, many still hold to the Keynesian notion that increasing spending is the fiscal antidote to slowing growth when, in fact, it will exacerbate poor economic conditions by displacing the market's more efficient allocation of resources. Japan in the 1990s is the latest example of this although they suffer under many other bad policies too.)

There's certainly reason to have confidence that competent Fed officials will be able to avoid a sustained resurgence of inflation. It is also clear, as shown above, that there are many reasons to believe that we should be doing better and that therefore monetary policy is not optimal. The simple fact is that it is not just hard but impossible to tell what exactly the right policy should be at any given point in time. Economies are just too dynamic and are composed of too many players. No matter how smart members of the Fed may be, it makes no more sense to have them set monetary policy that it did for elite economists in centrally planned economies to set the price of food, cars or any other product.

Even if it were possible for Fed members to have completely mastered the art of central banking, is it healthy to vest so much power in one person or group of people? Imagine how the markets would react if Greenspan should have a very sudden demise.

So, how do we solve this problem of imperfect people using imperfect data creating a one size fits all policy? The first step is to remove discretion over policy from the government. The explicit targeting of inflation, previously mentioned, accomplishes this except that setting the goal would still be discretionary and likely to be sub-optimal given productivity measurement problems. An alternative is a return to a gold standard as way to effectively automate monetary policy. Despite its popularity in some quarters there are serious problems with any type of gold standard.

Go ahead and ignore the fact that no country has ever been able to maintain a gold standard (perhaps with Hong Kong and Argentina both having kept their currencies fixed to the dollar even during periods of severe economic distress, it is an indication that times have changed). The main flaw in fixing the dollar price of gold is that it assumes that the value of gold doesn't change, like some physical constant, as immutable as the maximum speed of light. Gold's value comes in two parts. First as a commercial product with limited use as an industrial metal and as jewelry or ornamentation. Clearly, the price of any commercial product will vary for a variety of reasons having nothing to do with an economy's general price level.

The other component of gold's value derives from its long history as a store of value and is wrongly assumed to be intrinsic. The supply of gold varies as new mines are found and mining techniques improved. Demand for gold as a store of value is based on the ability of gold to compete against other liquid stores of value. So, the only advantage of gold over a fiat currency is that the production of gold is not controlled by the government (ignoring taxes and regulation).

But if we fix the dollar to something that floats are we accomplishing anything? If the supply of gold increases due to a new way to mine, the dollar price of gold needs to fall. (As an example if the supply of gold doubled as a result of productivity boosts and there was no change in the productivity of producing other goods, the dollar price of gold should be halved as to protect the purchasing power of the dollar.) If the dollar price of gold is held constant, as in the gold standard, inflation will ensue (which is historically what happened under these conditions).

Irving Fisher attempted to solve this problem with his compensated dollar plan. The plan allows for the dollar price of gold to be adjusted by a CPI priced in gold. The problem is that this plan only works if productivity in the mining sector is the same as in all other sectors of the economy. Not a bad assumption, perhaps, in Fisher's day but unlikely to be true now and even less likely in the future. Two other possible solutions are to let the price of gold vary based on the relative productivity of gold production to productivity in the rest of the economy or instead of fixing the price of gold, fix the dollar price of gold plus other commodities (i.e., define the dollar as some fixed basket of commodities).

Well, the first solution is pretty messy, as it would require the government to calculate productivity rates that as argued above are inherently impossible to measure precisely. Furthermore, even if productivity could be measured precisely, it could in practice only be measured with a time lag. Not very helpful for knowing today's price of something.

The second solution sounds more workable but determining the composition of the basket that would define the dollar is tricky. Leave something out of the basket and you have the same problem of the relative production productivities of what's in and out of the basket. So just about everything the economy produces must go in the basket (obviously there are diminishing returns to accuracy for each additional product added, so you start with the most important products and work towards things that are used less). Now with many products in your basket you need to determine relative weights to reflect relative usage and importance of these products. But the resultant basket is just the same as that used to calculate inflation (with the identical problems as mentioned earlier)! Linking the dollar to this basket is exactly the same as having the Fed explicitly target zero inflation.

The key to getting better monetary policy is not to merely limit the discretion of the government but to get the government out of the money business altogether by privatizing the Fed. Sell the whole thing to the highest bidder. The government would also have to deregulate enough to allow competitors to arise in the currency issuance game.

By eliminating this government protected monopoly, more of the informational value of consumers ever changing preferences and behaviors could be used by producers to create a product that can best balance everyone's needs. The free market can be looked at as a computer, calculating within all the constraints and using the near infinite amount of interrelationships and feedback between economic actors, on a global scale, to solve the problem of what are the best forms of money. This is an impossible calculation to do any other way.

Consumers would choose between U.S. dollars, euros, Citi dollars, GE dollars, etc. This choice would be based on confidence in the issuer and how well the product serves the consumer's needs. Companies would issue money solely as a means to profit. Produce too much money and it becomes worthless, too little and not enough people will be able to use your money for you to profit. The notion of a government having a monetary policy goes the way of governmental industrial policy (or choosing which firms receive government help - see Asia).

If private firms were allowed to compete on equal legal footing as a private Fed, currency competition would lead to better money just as market forces improve the quality of any product. In an unfettered environment, using precious metals as a backing for a currency is just a starting point. Nobody can predict the improvements and ingenious ideas that would emerge. Already consumers have reaped benefits from quasi-currencies like airline miles and credit card rebates in the form of products (clearly, these things don't currently have the liquidity to make for a good form of money).

There are usually several objections to private money. It is argued that it is necessary to have a lender of last resort in times of crisis and that only the Fed can fill this role. Of course, there is no reason why a private central bank couldn't provide sufficient liquidity during a crisis and no reason why private regulators couldn't get big financial institutions together to provide liquidity (J.P. Morgan did this in the panic of 1907, prior to the Fed's creation). Also prior to the Fed's creation, private clearinghouses would lend to members who were solvent but needed liquidity. Furthermore, using the Fed as a lender of last resort creates moral hazard. If the perception is that the Fed will be compelled to act in a crisis, the effect will be to allow participants to take more risk, as they believe they are receiving some downside protection from the Fed.

In 1998, a financial crisis that started in Asia threatened world markets. "Contagion" was used to describe the effect of countries with healthy economies seeing their markets roiled. The contagion spread through trade and capital flows between countries and from the market realizing countries with a certain economic profile (high current account deficits, low foreign exchange reserves, and a pegged currency) were vulnerable. Markets in developed countries became infected as credit spreads widened and volatility increased (a mathematical implication being that correlations between markets increase). To extend the biology analogy, the best defense for a population against mutant viruses is genetic diversity. The economic equivalent is the diversity of products and regulation that spring forth from a free market. This diversity would reduce the frequency of crises that might need a lender of last resort.

Another concern about a world with only private money is that things would be too complicated with all the exchange rates that would exist for these new currencies. Technology can easily solve this problem. Only want to see prices in one particular currency? Your handheld device or browser could automatically convert all prices and even facilitate conversion of your currency to one that would be acceptable to a merchant. Currencies that were too volatile would quickly fall into disuse, as part of their utility would always derive from them being a stable store of value.

As with any free market reform, there is no expectation that private money would lead to a perfect world where there are no crises or problems, just a better world. Better not just in a strictly utilitarian sense but also in a moral sense as people could store the fruits of their labor however they see fit and not be forced to submit to a tax (inflation) that is not explicitly levied and voted on.

Many involved in the information revolution are confident that with the help of new technologies, markets will continue to evolve and reach a point that government's ability to tax and regulate will be stifled. What these optimists miss is that government too has the ability to evolve and counter these trends. Government's monopoly on the use of force can trump any market innovation. Ultimately, it is necessary for the political climate to change before government will acquiesce and not try to fight the liberalizing effects of technology.

These changes are certainly not around the corner, but they should be our goals.

• Repeal all laws giving the Fed monopoly power to issue currency.
  
  
• Eliminate all government regulation of banks and financial institutions.
  
  
• Change the tax laws so there was no preference given to transactions done in dollars (payment could still be required in dollars but there should be no capital gains if you choose to hold your money in yen, for example).
  
  
• Completely privatize the Fed either through an auction or fair distribution of shares to taxpayers.
• Exempt banks and financial institutions from antitrust laws.
  
  Deregulate. Privatize. To improve our standard of living, increase the level of freedom, and to set a powerful example for the world to follow.
  
  

This article was prepared for the Cato Institute's 18th Annual Monetary Conference cosponsored with The Economist, October 19, 2000, Washington, D.C.

 

 

“城里头的人想出来，城外头的人想进去”

Anachronistic?

No.

I think we can draw an analogy between the situation described in the old literature book and the grotesque phenomenon in today’s China.

20-year gradient development has resulted in abysmal rural urban gap. There has been sudden accumulation of wealth of the rich and perpetual impoverishment of the poor.

“城里头的人想出来”

Rapid industrialization has led to shortage of land for further investment. How? Land grabs!!! Nowadays, we see cities encroaching into its nearby rural countryside…

“城外头的人想进去”

Being lamentably left behind by the gradient development, China’s peasants are desperate to share the pie of economic growth. How? Immigration!!! Nowadays, we see millions of farmers flooding into the cities…

 

BBI的结果终于出来了

我们落选了

多少有点出乎意料。

不过，真的很喜欢那个想法，也坚信它很有发展的前途。后来想想，可能是参加错了比赛。它可能不是一个利润很高的business idea,更像是一个macroecons的project.

Mrs Tan说是个good try，她会给我们解释为什么。我们也很迫切想知道。现在唯一能够想出来的理由就是这个想法太“大”，实施起来可能需要很多资金，人力的投入，很可能涉及到政治，无法在短期内捞到什么利润（短期指的是三五十年之内）。

总之，接受吧。学到了东西，享受了这个过程。就是有点惋惜。

 

 

同学今天问我“现在中国还有抄家类似的事情发生么？”

我无语。

同学又说“应该没有了吧，那是红楼梦那个年代的悲剧了。”

更加无语…

那地方政府强行没收霸占农民土地算什么？

 

又一个时代的悲剧。

Vociferously condemn China for the alleged dumping activities and for its abysmal trade deficit which hit record high last year, yet at the same time, remain curiously silent over EU’s Common Agricultural Policy which hurt poor farmers in LDCs.

Unilaterally raise tariff rate and impose import quota on China’s exports, yet at the same time, harangue the world about the importance of trade liberalization.

Aggressively attack PBC’s control of the RMB exchange rate, yet at the same time, get “pissed off” by Iraq’s “Oil for Food” policy which challenges the dollar’s monopoly position in the oil market. Uncle Sam, do you fear that the demand for dollars cannot be sustained given the rise of euro? If you do, then I must say, you are absolutely far-sighted.

Denounce China for her lack of human rights, yet at the same time, blatantly carry out savage torture of prisoners in Guatemala Bay.

… …

The list goes on and on. Note: I am not trying to defend anything, just trying to show the double standard…

The talk today is indeed enlightening I think and I learnt a lot of things which I have never heard of before… For example, Al Qaeda was first founded by the US in retaliation against Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan! Remind me of one old saying “Pick up a stone and drop it on your own feet.”

 

Something he said really struck me is the fact about children growing up in the tumultuous Middle East. They grow up amidst bombings, gunfire and the world they see through their eyes is filled with chaos, blood and violence. What do we expect them to grow up to be? Peace-loving? Or hostility-driven?  

 

I think some people have this conception that Islam perpetuates discrimination against women or breeds terrorism… Back to a few years ago when the war on terror first started and I was still in China at that time, the photos of Bin Laden could be seen everywhere, newspapers, televisions, etc. I can vividly recall the uneasiness I felt when I finally met a Muslim who dressed like Bin Laden on the MRT after I came to Singapore. I am really ashamed of myself for this kind of stereotyping. But yeah, I could not control the feeling…

 

Religion is a kind of belief, belief in the existence of some superior entities. Therefore it is highly subjected to human interpretation. We cannot blame Islam for terrorism because the JI fundamentalists choose to interpret it in such a way and instigate their interpreted values into the "matyrs". We cannot blame Islam for gender discrimination because again, it is the Afghanistan politicians who choose to interpret it in such a way. There are also many others who choose to interpret Islam in other “positive” ways such that it contributes to the society. Some people say that religion is exclusive in nature and it appeals on emotion, thus defying sensible judgment. Again it is up to the individuals as how they want to interpret the holy doctrines. For example, in the Bible, Jesus told his disciples to “Love thy neighbors”. Christians can interpret the sentence in many different ways. What does “neighbors” mean? Some may choose to interpret it in a way that it refers to people from different religions. The religion doctrines are just there and it is up to the people to interpret it.

 

Of course, how to ensure religion is not being misused by those with ulterior motives is another big issue. Because religion is something that is attached to one’s fundamental belief and thus it appeals to emotion. However, in this world, everything is complicated by what we call “politics”. I feel that the importance or the relevance of religion waxes and wanes according to political and economical motives. Sometimes religion becomes very relevant as what has been shown in the Danish cartoon controversy. In some other cases, it becomes not so relevant as exemplified by Saudi Arab, which remains notoriously uncommitted in the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Why not the Saudi Arabians fight for or at least speak for their Muslim brethrens who are suffering in Palestinian? Some says that religious solidarity is overridden by political interests because the Saudi Arabians do not want to jeopardize their good relationship with the US…

 

Complicated...

今日北大 自由的坟墓

   

   作者：刘晓波

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

   北大在沈默！

   北大的“一塌糊涂”网站被强行关闭，只有法学院教授贺卫方先生和已经离开北大三名校友滕彪、俞江、许志永挺身而出，分别致公开信给北大校长和中共要员胡锦涛、温家宝，爲北大师生的言论自由发声，而衆多的教授们、研究生们、学生们……沈默著；

   北大副教授焦国标先生，因公开发表讨伐中宣部的檄文而被新闻与传播学院停课，北大几乎听不到一丝声音；

   崇拜毛泽东的北大法学院院长朱苏力，制造了招收博士生的“德怀门”丑闻，除了朱本人近于狡辩的公开说明之外，北大的行政机构和衆多师生依然沈默；

   校友杨子立身陷“文字狱”时，人们听不到北大人的声援之声；北大研究生江绪林在“三角地”爲六四亡灵点燃蜡烛时，偌大校园的其他地方仍然一片漆黑；…… ……

   北大在咆哮！

   在美国前总统克林顿来北大演讲时，对发生在身边的人权灾难极端麻木不仁的北大学生，却争相加入事先由校方导演的提问行列，“勇敢地”置疑美国的人权状态，说英语的声音很有些嘹亮；

   在“校园拒绝邪教”的运动中，北大学生集体宣誓，愤怒声讨法轮功，那声音已经近于歇斯底里的咆哮；

   在官方纵容的反美游行中，北大学生走在最前面，向大洋彼岸“美国霸权”倾斜仇恨，咬牙切齿的口号喊得震天响；

   在北大百年校庆之后，前党魁江泽民要求“建立世界一流大学”的谕旨，被北大人作爲振兴中国高等教育的最响亮口号，喊遍国内外；

   北大的博士研究生陈伟写出《伟大的政治家江泽民与中国新世纪发展战略──论“三个代表”的政治意义》的论文，旨在论证：“我们应当维护、珍惜党的政治权威，而不是去质疑它，以所谓‘民主化’的旗号去挑战它。”该文结尾简直就是歌功颂德的尖叫：“‘三个代表’之伟大，不仅在于它是马克思主义理论发展史上的重大贡献，更重要的还在于它揭示了新世纪中国发展战略的大脉络。从权威、传统、文化、公共性等多个方面，我们可以看到‘三个代表’所蕴涵的政治大智慧；‘三个代表’体现了以江泽民同志爲核心的第三代中共领导人的雄才大略和高瞻远瞩的战略眼光。正是在此意义上，我们完全有理由说：江泽民同志不仅是一位功勋卓越的领导人，而且是一位伟大的政治家。”（见“学说连线http://www.xslx.com”200年9月26日）

   北大法学博士宋小庄也曾写下诗评，赞美温家宝访港时引用晚清诗人黄遵宪的诗句来“以诗言志”，宋博士写道：温家宝总理以诗言志，意在鼓励香港同胞以杜鹃啼血之情热爱香港、热爱祖国，以精填海之心建设香港、建设祖国，又间接阐释及弘发了邓小平以爱国者爲主体治港的理念。（见《东方日报》2003年7月9日）…… ……

   这就是六四之后的十五年中北大的沈默和咆哮。

   北大，曾经是中国大学的骄傲，而现在的北大学生似乎并不知道：这骄傲，决非来自1949年之后的北大，而是来自1949年之前的北大：来自“五四运动”的民主与科学的传统，来自蔡元培、胡适等师长开辟的自由传统及其丰硕的学术成就，而不是来自毛时代的极权教育的新传统，不是来自文革红卫兵的造反精神；如果说，1949年之后，北大还有什麽引以爲傲的人文精神的话，那麽，它只能来自昂首面对暴君毛泽东的老校长马寅初和年轻学生的林昭，来自在八九运动中的北大师生对老北大的自由精神和社会关怀的继承，而不是来自那些看暴君脸色、专写御用文章的教授们，更不是来自六四血案之后日益犬儒化的北大。

   1998年的北大百年校庆之际，当中共第三代党魁江泽民出席庆祝大会的官方宠幸被北大人视爲最高荣誉之时，北大的自由精神已经死亡：不仅死在恐怖的威慑下、而且死在金钱的收买下。北大的官僚们、教授们和学生们，几乎就是踏著喋血长街的校友们的尸体，一面践踏著老北大的自由精神和人文关怀，一面领受著独裁寡头们恩赐的荣誉、地位和金钱。

   1919年6月15日，蔡元培先生曾发表过《不肯再任北大校长的宣言》，蔡先生辞职的重要原因之一就在于：“思想自由，是世界大学的通例。”而“北京大学，向来受旧思想的拘束，是很不自由的。”蔡先生做了校长之后，一改旧北大的无自由局面，而首开“相容并蓄”的学术自由和思想自由之风，而“这点半新的”却被旧势力视爲“洪水猛兽”，招致“国务院”、“参议院”等衙门的横加干涉。于是，蔡先生质问道：“世界哪有这种不自由的大学麽？还要我去充这种大学的校长麽？”所以，蔡先生表示：“我绝对不能再做不自由的大学校长。”

   但在1949年后的中国，从1950年代的“思想改造运动”开始，北大很快就沦爲暴政扼杀自由的工具；在中国最有希望走上良性改革之路的20世纪80年代，老北大的自由精神和社会责任感有所恢复，在新啓蒙精神的激励下，北大人投身自发竞选运动，参与文化大论战，特别是在伟大的八九运动中，北大人重新找回了失去的尊严；而在六四血案以来的十五年中，再次被打断脊梁的知识份子们，又开始争做无自由的北大的校长、教授、博导，自觉充当独裁政权及其跛足改革的辩护士。

   现在的北大，已经成爲“教育産业化”的最大受惠者之一，不但拥有高盈利的公司、高价位的文凭和政权的钜额投资，也拥有越来越多高薪教授和明星教授，却失去曾经拥有人文尊严、育人良知和学术成就，学术掮客们忙于争取“国家科研专案”，用大量的学术及其思想垃圾换取丰厚的功名利禄。比如，北大法学院院长朱苏力，先是用两部电影爲实例来论述“法治本土化”，之后又将毛泽东学术包装爲中国宪政的奠基人。正如宪政学者张祖桦先生的评论所言：“苏力挖掘法治的本土资源挖到他最爲崇拜的毛泽东身上，真是走火入魔。毛是破坏中国法治的罪魁，他一生主张‘造反有理’、‘和尚打伞，无发（法）无天’。经苏力一包装，竟成中国法治与宪政的奠基人。真是荒谬绝伦！毛自称明朝皇帝的继承人，一直坚持中央高度集权和专制主义，何尝实行过‘纵向分权’？从毛身上寻找通向法治的道路好比抓著自己的头发幻想登天一样。”

   今日北大的金色招牌，与其说代表著一种值得骄傲的人文精神和学术地位，不如说仅仅代表著“学而尤则仕，禄在其中”的功利化欲望。今日北大人要“创造世界一流大学”的信誓旦旦，早已把北大变成了“一流学院衙门”、“一流权力工具”和“一流敲门砖”。

   1926年3月23日，北京各界人士、各社会团体、各学校齐聚北京大学大操场，爲“三•一八惨案”的亡灵们举行万人公祭大会。北大代校长的蒋梦麟在会上沈痛地说：“我任校长，使人家子弟，社会国家之人材，同学之朋友，如此牺牲，而又无法避免与挽救，此心诚不知如何悲痛。”他说到这里竟潸然涕下，引得“全场学生相向而泣，门外皆闻哭声”。

   1989年的“六四惨案”，政权对徒手的学生和市民的暴力镇压，其屠杀之野蛮和血案之惨烈，远远超过60多年前的“三•一八惨案”，但六四后的北大，先是在恐怖高压和军训洗脑之下、继而在功名利禄的收买之下，已经整整沈默了十五年！

   在此意义上，1989－2004的十五年，正是北大的尊严扫地和良知丧尽的十五年，是中国最著名的高等学府的最耻辱的十五年。

   北大：昔日的“自由的摇篮”，今日的“自由的坟墓”。

   2004年10月4日于北京家中

   ——转自《观察》

   10/5/2004

不锈钢老鼠的自白书 (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

(海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　力刀 (Ｄ砂俅?www.hjclub.com)

(海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　任手脚紧锁沉重的镣铐， (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　任他把警棍举得高高。 (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　你不需要什么认罪， (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　哪怕黑猫白猫的长牙利爪！ (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　囚室能锁住老鼠身躯， (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　高墙电网却拦不住思想飞跃 (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　无期的监禁算得了什么？ (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　人生棋枰的一手长考。 (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　面对群猫你无声嘻笑， (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　思想的囚牢在笑声中晃摇。 (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　这就是你，一个平凡女孩的自白 (海纳百川 www.hjclub.com)

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　磨穿牢底，终要回到亲人的怀抱

 

诗的作者叫刘荻，是一个跟我们大家都年龄相仿的中国女大学生，可是她的青春却差点葬送在监牢里！难道仅仅是因为她发表过几篇倡导中国人权的文章么？这个“企图颠覆国家”罪定的也太离谱了吧！我读过她的几篇旧帖，里面甚至有提倡共产主义的。我想她“冒犯”了上级大概是因为她为被捕的异见分子抱不平，为强制被关闭的“羊子的思想家园”气愤吧。不过，她现在终于被无罪释放了。不过有人说，现在的不锈钢老鼠今非昔比了，她以经被封了嘴，改“过”自“新”了。

我决不是在煽动什么反政府的情绪。那句话说得没错，中国太大了，管起来太难了。胡温新政初衷是好的，可是等到真正传到老百姓这一级，都走成什么样子了啊！中国的官僚制度的腐败人尽皆知，绝非几个人几十年的力量就能整顿出来的。中国要发展，中国的老百姓，学生要活跃起来，不再沉默！妈妈给我浇过一盆冷顺，她说从下往上，说得容易啊，可是你要是冒犯了上级，你就得下岗失业，百姓哪有那个资本往“上”啊。我承认，她说得一点都没错！但是不是也有成功的例子么，人民发动的维权运动终于让孙志刚沉冤得雪，彻底废除了收容遣送！陕北油田的田主自发到北京请愿，引起了中央的高度重视，不也为民营企业讨回了个说法么？ 所以，虽然任重而道远，但是中国人民不能放弃！