<999 誰是兇手?>

又有人掉漒水彈. 我個人唔認為尋日捉到個件係真兇手.

差佬, 簡稱衰人, 除左屈柒人同埋保護權貴份子, 已經唔識保護一般小市民如你我. 星期五派八百人去立法會保護班撚樣, 但佢又地派左幾多人捉漒水狂徒?

無論如何, 既然特首呼籲市民幫手, 咁我呢d 好市民, 梗義不容辭拉. 我用簡單既推理方式, 估下兇手下一步會點.

背景 :

觀察 :

— 集中係九龍區

— 多遊客, 多本地人, 多人, 鬧市

— 全部係金融海嘯後發生, 多數係星期五六

— 地區特別多舊樓, 而樓宇高度, 一般係十層以下

— 近來犯案特別頻密, 疑兇會去新地方做案

推理 :

— 要掉漒水彈, 所需氣力不少. 佢唔係拎地放落街, 係執地拋落去. 疑犯 : 男人.

— 疑犯智商正常, 有正常推理能力. 故意造成社會不安, 一路只係令人受傷, 無令人死亡. 而且佢專揀星期五六, 專揀人多熱點; 而且呢個人心思細密, 係要掟既地方走過線, 留意過附近大廈的高度, 座向 同埋 保安.

— 佢應該有正當職業, 所以多數係星期五六犯案. 而且佢多次買漒水唔會有店鋪懷疑, 可能係外表似係做水電工程既人 (留意只係外表, 佢未必要係水電工程人士)

— 至於疑犯係咪精神唔正常? 如果計佢損人不利己個部份, 佢肯定唔正常; 但睇黎佢對社會有種反抗感, 特意要造成動盪. 大家一齊咁仆街. 性格非常偏激既人

— 疑犯 (假設多案為同一人) 係住係九龍/ 新界區 (肯定唔係港島). 佢住既地方, 搭地鐵去到 (廢話, 香港有地方係地鐵去唔到咩?)

— 年齡 : 好大機會三十歲以上. 八九十年代, 印象中好多劇集 (及新聞?) 都講用漒水傷人 – 乜野毀容, 包二奶等. 

— 下一個高危地方, 人氣旺 : 尖沙咀; 尖沙咀最旺而又乎合以上條件既地方 : 加連威老道, 海防道, 北京道

<廣深高速鐵路 – 對經濟效益推算的質疑>

在運輸及房屋局交給立法會工務小組及財委會的文件, 皆有不少篇幅講及高鐵的經濟效益及乘客量預測 (立會相關文件的第四至七頁; http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr09-10/chinese/fc/pwsc/papers/p09-68c.pdf).

大致來說, 當局認為高鐵的經濟效益, 有以下三方面 :

細閱當局的經濟效益論述, 以下非常令筆者困惑

第一 : 既可量化, 但又不可量化的經濟效益

第二 : 將乘客等同為香港的生產原素

(1) 什么是經濟效益?

當局在評估高鐵為香港帶來的可量化經濟效益, 作出頗為具體 (但不詳細, 也不代表正確) 的論述. 所謂可量化的乘客得益, 包括節省的時間成本及道路交通意外減少. 當局沒有交代何以計算後者, 但對前者就有論述, 即

簡單一點說, 乘客的直接得益, 就是以金錢去量化所節省的時間 (撇除估計因高鐵而所減少的道路交通意外不談).

(2) 為什么所節省時間的量化, 可以談得上是 “經濟效益” 呢?

這個評估最重要的假設是 : 所節省的時間, 可以用來幹一些有經濟效益的活動. 舉例來說, 若然一個香港商人, 以前回廣州談生意, 車程三小時; 起了高鐵後, 車程是一小時, 那么他節省了的兩小時, 可以讓他早點回香港, 做些其他事情.

這是很重要的. 以上的 “假設”, 當中有很多地方, 有很多地方可以有爭議. 例如 :

這些我們都無從得知. 最簡單的假設, 就是計算一下, 一個平均工人一小時的薪金是多少, 然後當這便是每一小時的時間代價. 不用那么複雜, 反正這不是重點.

(3) 重點是什么?

更重要的是, 若要計算高鐵為香港所帶來的經濟得益, 我們必須要頗為肯定 (不需要有十足把握), 那么所節省的時間, 一定是屬於香港生產力的人士 (工人, 商家, 勞工, 白領, 廠家, 外地勞工).

起一個機場, 我們不會天真地以為, 所有乘客所節省的時間, 都是香港的經濟效益. 作為一個跨境運輸網, 起高鐵和起機場的道理, 一模一樣. (你明白這點, 可以直接看結論)

再舉例說 : 若有一個美國人, 以前是乘巴士經香港到廣州, 車程三小時; 有了高鐵後, 車程一小時. 節省的兩小時, 這人即使花在經濟活動上, 也一定不會計到香港的頭上. 這頂多是高鐵對世界, 及對美國的經濟效益. 但肯定不是對香港的效益.

不要說那美國人節省了的兩小時, 可能花在香港購物或其他活動. 那是屬於 (c) 催化效益. 和可量化的經濟效益 – 即所節省的時間價值 – 風馬牛不相關.

(4) 若不明白, 再說多一點.

根據香港統計署的本地生產總值報告, 對於本地生產總值是如下界定 :

香港人搭高鐵, 所節省的時間, 可以計入對本港的可量化經濟效益 (時間價值); 不屬於本港的勞工, 即所有沒有權在本港工作的人, 所節省時間的經濟效益, 是對世界有利. 但絕對不能計算入對本港的經濟效益.


倒轉來說, 除非我們能肯定, 乘搭高鐵的, 都是能在香港工作的人, 否則所有乘客所節省時間的價值, 並不等於對香港的經濟效益. 若然以為所有節省時間的價值, 是等同對香港的經濟效益, 是完全高估. 那不過是高鐵對全世界的經濟效益.

香港本土的運輸系統 (例如港島南線), 還可以假設乘客 及 能在香港工作的人 (或屬本地生產力一部份) 兩者等同 (當然乘客當中可以扣除遊客). 但一涉及跨境運輪系統, 情況便十分複雜, 不可以再將兩者簡單地等同.

(5) 那么, 當局做這個分析時, 是否考慮到這點?

— 根據文件的表一 (第五頁), 當局是用乘客數目, 而不是乘客中的香港人數目, 去估算可量化的經濟效量.

— 那么乘客是否全數為香港人 (或能屬於香港生產力的人士)? 當局看似沒有在文章中交待. 但以當局一直強調無高鐵不行的態度來看, 乘客當中香港人 (即屬於香港生產力的人士) 與其他人, 應該各有千秋. 再者, 香港即使有一千萬人, 每年約有 365 萬人次乘搭高鐵 (99,000 x 365)? 這也太誇張了吧.

所以我肯定, 這個所謂量化評估, 所謂經濟效益及內部回報, 極其量只是高鐵對世界的經濟貢獻. 要說成是對香港經濟的效量, 簡直是天方夜譚.

(6) 有什么結論?

第一, 當局所評估高鐵對香港的經濟效益, 由於混淆了乘客與屬於香港生產力的人士, 肯定被高估. 文件中第四至第七頁, 只是一個錯誤地支持興建高鐵的評估. 可以不理.

第二, 當局提供那個, 不過是高鐵對世界的經濟效益.

第三, 鄭汝樺說遲一日起好高鐵, 香港損失五百萬, 那是個高估的數字. 也可以不理. 那是世界的損失.

第四, 當局應該重新作出評估, 切實地估算高鐵對香港的可量化經濟效益. 否則, 香港人不知道原來自己是在做善事, 出錢興建一條對世界有利的鐵路.

<Chart of the Day> 

From MingPao

— Since most youngsters can get higher education (either degree or sub-degree), the remaining entering the labor market should have less human capital, thus earning less than their counterparts in 1997. This is particularly true for the 15-19 age cohort.

— What is surprising, is the 20-24 age cohort. On average, these young people should have higher education attainment. But they earn less than their counterparts 11 years ago.

— Since the article covers so-called “80 後”, it should also cover the age cohort 25-29 in 2008 (most in this age cohort are born after 1980). There was some rise in pay over time (roughly +4%; from $9,600 to $10,000)

— Whenever you look at long-term data, you can point out the income mobility. The change over time, which to me is more important, is often missed.

Caveats : I admit there is 11 years between 1997 and 2008 (so not all 15-19 in 1997 becomes 25-29 in 2008). Also, the composition of them are a bit different (for example, in 1997, the 15-19 cohort will consist of mostly F5 graduates; but in 2008 the 25-29 cohort will consist of university graduate as well). So some earning $8,000 in 1997 might still earn $8,000 in 2008, but due to influx of high-income earners in the group, the average/ median income turned higher in 2008.

But roughly speaking, it remains extremely legitimate to say these are the two age cohorts with the highest gain in income in the past decade.

This represents (1) over time there is still upward income mobility for young people in Hong Kong (2) given that you study well. This is a strong case for supporting there is still abundant upward mobility in Hong Kong. (I repeat so many times that the Gini Coefficient, a static measure, is totally useless in measuring income mobility over time).

<的士/ 小巴死火 : Some facts and thoughts>

According to RTHK :

——-

1. According to Transport Department’s statistics (PDF file), there are a total 18,000 Urban and NT Taxis (For information, only 50 taxis in Lantau). So roughly, one of out 3 taxis suffers from breaking-down.

2. Combining the information from EMSD and a website here (excel file), I manage to obtain the price of LPG (石油氣) for each station and its operator (there are only 2 operators in HK)

3. (First part) Why Sinopec’s price is lower? According to EMSD,

So basically, Sinopec is able to undercut ECO via putting a lower B, which in principle, represents its lower operating costs and profit margin.

4. (Second part) Why Sinopec’s price is lower via cutting its B?

By and large, by offering you inferior products (meaning goods with poor quality; not the goods with negative income elasticity), Sinopec is able to offer you a lower price.

The unknown tradeoff? Engines breaking up.

Recall that there is no such a thing called free-lunch.

5. I am not saying government is wrong, but supposedly, it should make sure LPG at different stations has the same quality. Sometimes it is very difficult to have quality assurance all the time.

Also, it takes 1 to 2 weeks to test the LPG? Com’on…

<Compare and Contrast>

—————-

(1) For Hong Kong, 2009 was a year of great change and challenge.

Managing change successfully is the single biggest challenge facing any government in today’s world — and I believe this is the main lesson we learned in 2009.

At this time last year, we were still in the thick of the financial tsunami. We didn’t know how severe it would be, or how long it would last.

Our economic performance in the first quarter seemed to confirm our fear: Gross domestic product declined 7.8 percent year-on-year, the biggest drop in a decade.

To the surprise of many, we began to see signs of a recovery not long after. Our economy rebounded in the second quarter, with the year-on-year decline tapering to 3.6 percent, and then to 2.4 percent in the third quarter. On a quarter-to- quarter basis, GDP grew 3.5 percent in the second quarter, and rose a further 0.4 percent in the third quarter.

The labor market showed a similar trend. After a 1.1 percentage point increase in the unemployment rate to 5.2 percent in the first quarter, the rate rose to just 5.4 percent in the second quarter, and has since been on the decline.

Hong Kong’s rebound had much to do with a more stable external environment, coupled with a rapid resumption of fast growth on the mainland. Domestically, our strategy to “stabilize the financial markets, support enterprises and preserve employment” went a long way toward holding up business and consumer confidence when the crisis hit Hong Kong hardest.

Since last year, we have introduced a series of relief measures amounting to HK$87.6 billion ($11.3 billion), equivalent to 5.2 percent of our GDP and way higher than the average of the Group of 20 economies. They have helped stabilize the local economy and abate the surge in unemployment.

Although the external environment is still fluid, Hong Kong is poised to return to positive year-on-year growth in the fourth quarter. The government’s heavy investment in infrastructure projects will add impetus to the economy and generate jobs over the next five years.

Even with the dark clouds of the financial crisis, we are always confident of a silver lining. The crisis has radically changed the landscape of the global economy. The mainland has emerged as a prominent economic powerhouse. This, in turn, will present new opportunities for Hong Kong.

The past year has seen a rapid expansion of the yuan business in Hong Kong. We became the first place outside the mainland where cross-border trade may be settled using the yuan, and where the central government issued yuan bonds.

Moreover, for the first time, mainland branches of our banks are permitted to issue yuan bonds in Hong Kong. All this has strengthened Hong Kong’s position as a global financial center, as well as our unique role in the internationalization of the yuan.

We are also making full use of opportunities generated by increasing integration between Hong Kong and the Pearl River Delta, a national strategy endorsed by the central government. Hong Kong and Guangdong are pushing ahead with cooperation on many fronts. In terms of hardware, construction of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge has just started and we are seeking funding approval for the Hong Kong-Guangzhou Express Rail Link. Both of these mega-projects will enhance the efficient flow of people and goods and further deepen economic integration.

The speed at which cross-Strait relations have improved this year also exceeded the expectations of many. While this has posed major challenges for us, in terms of reduced passenger and cargo traffic via Hong Kong, it has allowed us to develop deeper economic and cultural cooperation with Taiwan. We are working hard to enrich these links.

The global financial crisis also galvanized our thinking on economic diversification. We have identified six promising industries where Hong Kong enjoys competitive advantages, including education services, medical services, testing and certification, environmental industries, innovation and technology, and cultural and creative industries.

It will take time for these industries to flourish, but an initial push by the government is often all it takes for an economic sector to get off the ground and gather momentum.

The spirit of Hong Kong is to do our best, don’t lose heart, look for opportunities and grasp them when the time is right. This will continue to inspire and guide us as we embrace the new changes and challenges awaiting us in 2010.

—————-

(2) The year 2009 has turned out better than feared. Decisive responses by governments, and the coordinated efforts of the Group of 20, succeeded in averting financial disaster and restoring confidence.

While the worst is behind us, global prospects will depend on governments drawing the right lessons from the crisis, and taking effective and coordinated steps to address more difficult problems.

What have we learned from this year of ups and downs?

First, we live in a completely global economy. All countries are linked together – from Asia to Europe to the United States. There is no haven to hide from global storms. Governments can and must take steps to stabilize their economies, protect their citizens and prepare their countries for recovery.

Second, Asia’s dynamism is intact. Notwithstanding the crisis, Asian countries continue to transform themselves. China is re- orienting its economy toward domestic demand. It isn’t just stimulating consumption, but pursuing major infrastructure investments to enhance productivity, especially in rural areas, while reining in industries facing major overcapacity.

Third, protectionism remains a threat to recovery and future growth. In times of economic doubt and high unemployment, we must expect workers to be anxious, and countries to seek to protect their own industries and jobs. The US political mood is hostile to free trade, and Europe faces similar pressures. Fortunately, so far countries have largely avoided self-defeating protectionist measures, or worse, trade wars. They must stay the course as unemployment stays high.

Fourth, after having witnessed a spectacular failure of untrammeled free markets, we must not swing to the other extreme. Governments and regulators clearly need to improve how they set the rules, supervise financial institutions, and monitor risks to the system as a whole.

What of the future? Next year should see modest but positive growth. We have to use this respite to tackle deeper issues in the world economy. As the United States unwinds its reliance on consumption and debt, countries must find new sources of global growth. They must also spread the benefits of growth more widely among their citizens. One important way is through education because knowledge is now the basis for growth everywhere.

Countries must also work together to meet major common challenges, including climate change. The Copenhagen meeting was a disappointment, but countries must persevere. Few can afford to reduce carbon emissions at the price of a drastic reduction in economic growth or living standards, but all must strive to slow global warming.

In the Asia-Pacific region, stable ties between the United States and China are critical, but fortunately the two countries are off to a good start with President Barack Obama’s recent visit to China.

Elsewhere there are the dangers of nuclear proliferation in North Korea and Iran, and the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. These problems won’t be solved in 2010. But they have to be managed, so that countries can continue to devote their talents and energies to peaceful and productive purposes.

—————-

The first article is by HK’s Chief Executive; The second is by Singapore’s Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong

<Carmelo Anthony vs Kevin Durant>

Here is the performance of Carmelo Anthony, the current NBA leading scorer, during his third year in NBA (2006-07; he was 21 then)

Avg. pt : 28.9
Rebound : 6.0
Assist : 3.8
Steal : 1.2
Block : 0.4

Look at Kevin Durant‘s performance during this year (he is now 21)

Avg. pt : 28.7
Rebound : 6.7
Assist : 3.0
Steal : 1.6
Block : 0.8

They are surprisingly similar. Not only the statistics, but they have many similar background : in a mediocre team featuring no stars (2006-07 Nuggets : washed-out Iverson; 2009-10 Thunderstorms : I do not even know any player-not-named-Durant); fair team records (about 50% winning percentage).

Carmelo Anthony is a very special player. I watched NBA for so many years, and I cannot think of other player like him in the past. He can just score so smoothly, and easily. The only closest player, I believe, is the living legend Larry Bird, but a version without good leadership (Lebron James) andstrong eagerness to win (Wade in Miami).

If Thunderstorm could trade a big man to support Durant (unfortunately, they were simply no good and big players in NBA anymore), I think Durant could build himself into a star no less inferior to Anthony. Maybe Thunderstorm should trade everyone to Phoenix for Stoudemire?

By the way, records say both weigh 230 lbs. Obviously, Carmelo looks much heavier than Durant.

(Photo source : Getty Image; Espn)

By the way 2, a trade is likely for the highest paid (but seldom play) Tracy McGrady. Oh, who will pay $23 million (US$) for someone who (1) is already 30, (2) totally washed out in his prime years, (3) played only 35 games last year, and (4) NEVER gets out of round 1 in playoff?

Maybe McGrady should follow the path of Penny Hardaway for backing to Orlando (where his cousin Carter is playing in as well)

<The Curse of Gillette?>

So we have Henry’s handball and Wood’s infidelity in 2009.

Next, Roger Federer in 2010?

My wild and irresponsible guess : Use of inappropriate drugs.

(上圖 : 喂, 一齊剃頭為僧咧喂~~)

(亨利 : 用過呢個牌子既剃鬚刀, 你就知領野!!)

<Which will come first?>

After chatting with one of my best friends (total number : 2), I come up with the following 4 options, and you can guess (and probably bet) which will arrive FIRST.

(1) A (true) end of Japanese Comic Hunter X Hunter (aka 全職獵人). Oh yes, 富慳 re-re-starts drawing it again.

(2) China Mobile will climb back to its record-high HK$160. Currently at around $70, the worst performer in Hang Seng Index so far in 2009, when HSI has already doubled from its recent low

(3) A good seat (probably the middle of row J and K) in iSquare Imax in TST, for 3D version of the movie Avatar

(4) Genuine universal suffrage for Chief Executive in Hong Kong…

<不想回憶, 未敢忘記 : 我們的2003 年>

我會記得那年的一切.

(置頂至 2010 年)

<何日君再來>

The four arrows denote the price of Yen (HK$ per 100 yen) in my previous visits to Japan (specifically, Tokyo)

So when I am thinking to visit Japan again in January 2010, I have such strong hesitation. It is just so expensive.

In USD terms, the graph for yen will be like this :