TR EMERITUS

The Greek Debt Crisis Explained Damon Yeo It is perhaps somewhat ironic to note now that the word “tragedy” comes from Classical Greek. The economic crisis which the Modern Greek nation now faces is nothing less than a tragedy. Since 2007, we have witnessed spectacular collapses of equity markets, bond markets and major financial institutions. Perhaps one of the most pertinent lessons to be learnt was that no financial disaster is a result of single action. Cracks do not appear overnight and this particular Greek crisis is no different. A Greek Love Story The Greek economy was the darling of the Eurozone (countries using the Euro as the official currency) back in 2000, when the Euro was first adopted as the official currency. Up till 2007, the Greek economy was one of the fastest growing as foreign capital (particularly from other EU members) flooded the country. On the back of healthy financial data, the Greek government was able to borrow more extensively to finance their economy, as their credit ratings were good and interest rates were low. Because of this lavish government spending, the debt of GDP ratio remained well above 100% for about a decade. When times were good, very few were worried about Greece’s ability to pay the debts back. After all, backed by the maritime and tourism industry (the two accounted for 20% of GDP), the Greek economy appear to be generating healthy receipts. A Greek Comedy To join and remain in the Eurozone, the European Central Bank (ECB) imposes strict criteria for all the members to meet. One of the main criteria was the requirement for the member governments to “run a tight ship” - by keeping budget deficit to within 3% of the GDP. Recently, it was revealed the previous Greek government had in fact been manipulating economic data for a while now. It is apparent that the Greek government had significantly under-reported their 1999 budget deficit to gain entry to the Eurozone in the first place. More incriminating evidence were uncovered when it was revealed that in 2001, the Greek government had paid over $300million to Goldman Sachs and other banks to enter into complicated financing arrangements, where the government can obtain more funding but yet appear to meet all EU criteria (via off-balance sheet accounting). During the global financial meltdown which had begun in mid-2007, Greece was hit worse than her Eurozone counterparts, as tourism and shipping shrunk more than other sectors of the economy. The combination of extravagant spending and sudden loss of tax receipts is an almost certain recipe for disaster. In 2009, a new government took office after general elections in October. One of the first tasks of the government was to reveal that that the previous government had in fact misstated the previous years’ budget deficit. Instead of the reported 6%, it was in fact closer 13%. Overall, it was disclosed that the government debt was about €216billion in January 2010 – making the country one of the most debt-ridden in the world, with respect to GDP output. The Greek Tragedy Investors and neutrals began to see the twist in the plot in early 2010, as various events begin to unfold. Various commentators and analysts began to raise question on Greece’s financial stability. Many noted that the debt levels were unsustainable and predicted that bankruptcy was looming. On 27 April, Standard & Poor’s downgraded Greek debt rating to “junk”. This meant that the new Greek government will no longer have any access to funding in the open market, as financial institutions will now charge them a very high interest rate. The ECB stood in instantly to allow the Greek government to continue to post their debt as collateral (otherwise the country may have been bankrupt overnight), but it was apparent that a huge financial package was required to save Greece from falling into the abyss. A week later, a €100billion loan was agreed to save the Greek economy. Spearheaded by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), all other Eurozone nations had to chipped in this multinational effort. The loan deal, however, did not mark a temporary end of this Greek financial disaster. To qualify for the loan, the Greek government had to bite the bullet and agree to severe cuts on government expenditure in the coming years, coupled by significant tax increases. Amongst the many measures, the Greek government froze pay increases in the public sector for three years and bonus payouts were severely curtailed. Sales taxes and luxury taxes were also raised with immediate effect. These Draconian measures angered the trade unions, who felt that the common people were punished for mistakes made by bureaucrats in the government. They organised national strikes, which paralysed the country for a few days in early May. Three people also died on 5 May, when protesters threw firebombs into an office of an investment bank. Amongst the dead was a 32-year-old pregnant woman, who was suffocated by fumes. At time of writing, street violence appeared to have died down, as calm is slowly restored. However, given the punitive economic actions imposed, many economists predict that it would take at least ten years before the economy recovers. Related Reads: The Demise of Dubai – How the Mighty Have Fallen Irish Property Bubble  Read More →

作者:冀居·谢 这是一个很旧的台湾笑话，话说有个老人家去医院看病，拿药的时候遇到不谙台语的护士，护士勉强用台语告诉他吃药的分量，哪知道回家后吃下第一次就要送院洗胃，原来老人家把“吃饱三粒”听成了“吃百三粒”。不想这样的笑话竟然活生生出现在本地！ 语言去到较高阶段就要懂得避讳，因为语言是表达给人听、给人看的，要避免误听、误读，更何况吃错药攸关性命，是不可以把两三句话拼成一句讲的。小孩子和学外语 常常会闹笑话，就是不懂得避讳而旁生歧义。而语言到高阶时人家玩讽刺、玩双关语，你要是不会，就变成词不达意、模棱两可了。所以有人说话、写文章几十年不 进步，就是没有摸着这个窍门。 本地医院开课让外籍医护人员学方言本是好事，奈何导 师本身的闽南话根本就不行。图中明明写着“1 bai jia ba 3 liab”（一次吃饱三粒），可是咱们的华文报却可以翻译成“一次吃饱后三粒”，为什么呢？因为“一次吃饱三粒”即使是华语也是个怪句子。况且我们听语言 的习惯，听到“一次吃”后面就会注意“次数”，而不会想到用“饱”来形容前面那个“吃”，所以把后面的“饱三粒”听成“百三粒”，绝对是有可能的。 问题是出在把两三句话拼成一句讲： （错）一次吃饱三粒 （次好）吃饱，一次吃三粒（因为前面有个“一日三次”）。 （佳）一日三顿，每顿吃饱后，吃三粒。 自己都不会，怎么去教人、怎么去报道呢？希望吃错药的老人家，不会因为这种语言课程而增多，就阿弥陀佛了，BBBBBBB…… 来源：大马论坛  Read More →

In a most stunning U-turn, Education Minister Dr Ng Eng Hen now says that the weightage for mother tongue languages in the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) will not be reduced after all. On 21 April 2010, the Straits Times published an article with the title "Mother tongue weighting in PSLE could be cut" which quoted Dr Ng as saying that the "high weighting given to mother tongue languages in the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) is now under review and could be reduced." He added that his ministry is "studying" whether "it is educationally sound for mother tongue language performance to count for so much at the Primary 6 level." "The worry is whether it could exclude someone from progressing in his educational pathway even if he did well in other subjects," said Dr Ng in an interview with The Straits Times and Lianhe Zaobao. The proposed change did not go down too well with certain segments of the population with the usually compliant Union of Chinese Teachers calling for a meeting with Dr Ng to express its reservations. The Straits Times Forum received a deluge of letters from Singaporeans, many of which opposed the move to reduce mother tongues weightage in the PSLE. A petition launched at Hong Lim Park last Sunday garnered more than 2,000 signatures in less than two hours while a Facebook page started to oppose the reduction of mother tongue weightage have more than 5,000 members so far. In a press conference at the Istana today, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong reassured Singaporeans that the weightage of the mother tongue in the PSLE will not be lowered. "I think this would send the wrong signal, that we are downgrading Mother Tongue. Certainly, it will not be efficient in helping the student to reach the level which we would like him to reach," he added. In a rare public apology, Dr Ng ate the humble pie and said in MOE's press release: "In my interview, I said MOE was looking at options to address the over-emphasis on exams, where “MTL counts for so much in the PSLE.” Singaporeans became concerned that MOE was proposing to reduce the weighting of MTL in PSLE. This is not the case. The MTL Review Committee has not proposed any change to the PSLE scoring system. But I should have chosen my words more carefully and apologise for creating that wrong impression." Is this a "wrong" choice of words, a "honest" mistake or another embarrassing U-turn? We leave it to Singaporeans to judge for themselves.   Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us    Read More →