Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!

又是4年

这届世界杯是妖事辈出的一届，历史上进球最少的冠军，第一次小组赛首场失利最后夺冠的冠军，4人同时夺得金靴奖，8猜8中的章鱼哥……令人遗憾的是高质量的进球不多，连任意球直接破门都没几个，还被小日本囊括了。当然最令我痛心的还是意大利的糟糕表现。世界杯之前当里皮确认他们的二流阵容以后，我就对他们前途不抱希望。继续沿用上届世界杯的老阵容，同时损失了托蒂，内斯塔，托尼等创造性球员。除了德罗西和皮尔洛，这届意大利基本没有可以控球的人，后者还有伤在身。加之年龄问题，本来素质还可以的卡纳瓦罗，赞布罗塔和卡莫拉内西全部降档次，打得那么烂简直是合情合理的。可怜了里皮08年意大利惨败欧洲杯后临危受命，接了多纳多尼的烂摊子，也接了命中注定的又一次惨败。

 

我记得梁文道曾经写了一篇文章分析过世界杯的球队情节。大致是说，之所以一支球队变得再烂我们也会对它有幻想是因为在我们童年，第一次接触足球的时候，我们看到了一些队伍夺冠的或者至少是非常优秀的，他们在我们初涉这个足球世界的时候，给我们并不具备理性分析能力的大脑留下了深刻的影响，以至于以后即使他变得再没落，只要有它的比赛，你都会支持，即使从理性和观赏性来说，其他的球队打得更好。

 

基于这个理论，你就可以看得出哪些人是从什么时候开始看足球的了，比如说我是从94年初涉足坛。当然之前有《足球小将》的误导，让我觉得一场世界级比赛可以平均有5个以上的倒勾射门，经历了世界杯以后，我觉得现实中的足球是如此的不具有观赏性，加之那届世界杯进入决赛的巴西和意大利打了个0比0，于是我坚定地认为，一只好球队靠的是稳固的防守。包括以艺术足球闻名的巴西在那届世界杯上也受到巴西功利足球派代表扎加洛、佩雷拉的影响，招了一批如邓加、马经霍等工兵型的中场。当然，功利足球在这届世界杯上最终获还是得了胜利，意大利在一流的后卫，二流的锋线，三流的中场的带领下夺得了亚军也是属不易。出于“同情弱者”以及“外貌协会”的深刻心理影响下，我走上了坚定的支持意大利的道路。同时特别讨厌巴西。

 

98年世界杯，我本来对法国队这支球队毫无感觉，因为94年他预选赛就被淘汰。但是自从它点球大战淘汰了意大利以后，我对之深恶痛绝。原因是它和意大利有一样优秀的后防，可却有比意大利奢侈100倍的中场，关键是，它还赢了意大利。基本和我一辈的球迷，没什么喜欢法国队的人，而且我们还特别不齿喜欢法国队的人。最经典的例子是我们玩PS得winning eleven。我们明知道法国数值是最强的，甚至有些赖皮性质的强悍，但是没有人会选法国队。我一直引以为傲的一点就是，从97年开始玩PS，13年了，我从来都是选意大利。每一个版本的意大利要么是中场一塌糊涂，要么是前锋一塌糊涂，我只能用坚固的防守和对手周旋。水平差不多的玩伴都觉得和我打起来特别累，因为整场比赛大多数时间都是消耗在拼抢和远射上面，最后精神一不集中，被我打一个反击，然后开始骂娘。即使最后赢了我，也觉得赢得特别恶心。

 

韩日世界杯是一个世界杯历史上的耻辱。该骂的大家都骂了这么多年了，没啥好说的，只可惜那一届意大利的黄金前场，被棒子给潜规则了。托蒂-维埃里-皮耶罗，意大利很难再出现这么完美的三角了。06最终胜利了，因为意大利终于有了20年以来最好的中场人员配置，每个位置的助理和替补都是世界级的，后卫线上虽然较02已经退化，但是靠着老马和老卡一高一快，以及中场的防守能力，7场比赛失两球最终捧得了大力神。决赛那天，我还在埃及培训，回到villa以后召集一帮南美球迷聚会饭厅，当格罗索罚进最后的点球的那一刻，我是真的鼻子酸了，像是等了这么多年终于等到她说：“Yes, I do”

 

这届世界杯结束了，我敢肯定从今天开始，会诞生很多今后10年，20年的铁杆西班牙球迷。历史就这样不断地被创造，让我们的记忆变得越来越丰富多彩。我还将继续支持意大利，尽管从我认识她那一届开始，所有熟悉喜爱的球员都被替换，但是支持她已经变成了一种习惯。所以，静心等待，四年后再见。

 

How should education be

Just read an article about how education should be, and share it here with you guys. It is not necessarily to believe in every word he says, but Doug is some one has great common sense in general. I would not agree homeschooling could even possibly achieve most of the education purpose, but still his opinions broaden my horizon, especially the statement about "liberal" arts, "mechanical" arts and "training" education.

 

Doug Casey on Education

(Interviewed by Louis James, Editor, International Speculator)

L: Doug, in our recent conversation on global warming, you made some critical remarks about modern education. I know that wasn’t mere drive-by disparagement – can you tell us why you’re so hard on teachers today?

Doug: Sure. Since the school season started recently, it’s probably a good time to talk about schools and education.

L: School season? Is there a bag limit on how many schools you can take down?

Doug: [Laughs] Well, I think that most of the money that’s spent on so-called education is, if not wasted, definitely misallocated.

There was a book written a few years ago called something like All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten. I have to admit I never read the book, but the title resonated with me – I think there’s a lot of truth behind the notion. To me it implies that a person should have absorbed basic ethical values, and an understanding how to relate to other people and animals, by the time he’s six years old. Those are the most important things anyone can learn, and should be the first things one learns. But it doesn’t seem any institution, and fairly few parents, think to teach them.

But the first thing to do is to ask: What is education?

L: Okay, I’ll bite. What is it?

Doug: Education is the process of learning how to perceive and analyze reality correctly. That would include subjects like ethics, science, history, and important literature.

L: What about logic? You’d have to include logic.

Doug: Yes, definitely. All things of that nature. The ancients developed the idea of liberal arts, which had a different meaning to them than our current usage. The root of “liberal” is “liber,” meaning free. So the liberal arts were subjects that a free man – as opposed to a slave, or a menial – was assumed to be acquainted with. They were divided into the arts and the sciences. The idea was, these things gave you the tools of thought and the building blocks of culture. They were distinct from the mechanical arts – which were means of earning a living. You’d learn the mechanical arts as an apprentice.

Put it this way. The quality of a person can be determined by how he relates to three critical verbs: Be, Do, and Have. The classical liberal arts show you how to “be” – they help form your essence, your character, your will. The mechanical arts show you how to “do”; they are important, but really are just acquired skills. As a consequence of what you are, and what you can do, you “have” – acquire goods and money and reputation.

But it seems pretty clear that most people have the sequence totally backward. They want the “have” part, the material goods, but they don’t understand it flows as a consequence of being something and having the ability to do something. Having things is trivial. It’s why trailer park trash will win a million-dollar lottery and wind up back on the dole a year later.

I fear that most of what kids get today, whether in grade school, high school, college, or post-grad, is not education. It’s training.

Entirely apart from that, it seems to me that most institutions degrade as time passes. They naturally and inevitably become constipated, concrete-bound, and corrupt. That certainly appears to have happened to education in the U.S., and probably most other countries.

I’m sure you’ve seen that eighth-grade test from 1895 that’s been floating around the Internet for some years. Snopes.com has a go at debunking it, but they don’t claim the test isn’t real, and it does cover a lot of basic stuff few people today know anything about. What every educated person should know may change from age to age, but the basics of thinking, and its application to language, science, etc. are enduring. And there are certain minimums of knowledge that everyone should have. The U.S. education system is not delivering these basics, which are the tools for living.

Training is different. Training is rote learning with a view towards productive behavior in the future. It’s what you’d learn on the job, as an apprentice laborer. This would cover most high school and college courses, which are not designed to produce educated young people but useful employees, ready to enter the labor force. But they don’t even do that well.

I’ll go further. Most schools today are state schools, or if they are not state schools, they teach state-approved curricula. There’s an implicit orientation to train the kids to be good little cogs in the wheel, as in obedient subjects, and as opposed to independent thinkers and citizens. That’s probably the most important reason not to send your kids to a state school.

Homeschooling is a great alternative, though so many homeschoolers are religious fanatics, they’ve given the whole idea an unfortunate and undeserved aura of nuttiness. And in my view, filling your kids’ heads with all sorts of religious superstition is no better than filling their heads with statist superstition. What they need is a classical education in the liberal arts – starting in grade school.

L: Do you really think homeschooling has such a bad reputation? Aren’t homeschooled kids burning up the track at the spelling bees, geography bees, etc.?

Doug: Perhaps it depends on which circles you travel in. You homeschool, and you’re not religious, so maybe you see things differently. But my sense is that the media portrayal tends to emphasize the religious homeschoolers, and perhaps rightly so, since they constitute (I believe) the majority of homeschoolers.

But I’ll give you a good reason to favor homeschooling, regardless of who most homeschoolers are. I had a good enough time in school and I generally enjoyed the social interaction with the other kids. But it was a misallocation of my time; there’s little of value you can learn from other kids. It’s simply a bad idea to put your kids in an environment where they spend most of the day associating with young yahoos, many or most of whom have a lot of bad habits. The average school is full of unrefined young chimpanzees. Sure, kids need to learn how to work together and socialize, but school is not the only, and certainly not the best, place to do that.

Another reason is that every class, like a group traveling together, tends to move at the pace of the slowest kids in the group. An environment tailored for the lowest common denominator bores the smart kids to tears – or trouble. I was perpetually bored and distracted by the “one size fits all” program of my schools.

It’s the same in college, which was an even more serious misallocation of four years of my time – and a bunch of my parents’ money. And it’s much worse today, in either current or constant dollars.

Like most of my friends, I’d end up cutting a lot of classes, because I’d stayed up too late the night before. When I did go to class, I’d fall asleep half the time. And even fully awake, my mind would wander and I wouldn’t take good notes, so then I wouldn’t bother reading the notes. Of course you learn stuff, but I think it’s mostly through osmosis. Entirely apart from the fact that the profs varied greatly in quality.

Most people go to college today because they actually think someone is going to give them an education, when in fact, an education is something you have to give yourself.

You absolutely do not need a college to do that. The old saw about “Those who can, do, and those who can’t, teach” is all too true. Professors can’t educate anyone, though a few of the good ones can help motivated students educate themselves. But the college business is now structured like a manufacturing business; Aristotle and Seneca wouldn’t know what to make of it.

L: My Webster’s dictionary says the word educate has two roots: e-, “out,” and ducere, “lead, draw, or bring.” In other words, to draw out, or bring out what’s in the student’s ability to grasp and remember – not to cram whatever the teacher thinks is important into the student’s head.

Doug: That’s what “education” today fails to do – and why it’s such a waste of money. There is no point at all in going to a college today, unless you’re looking to learn a trade. Or, perhaps, because the people you meet in college might be of some future benefit to you. In other words, it’s pointless unless it’s Harvard, Princeton, Yale, or the like. Because of the classes? No. It’s because the kids that go to such schools are the most intelligent and ambitious “up and comers” – so the connections you make and the patina you get at these places can open a lot of doors.

But if you look closely, the very best and brightest – people like Bill Gates or Steven Jobs – drop out, or don’t even go.

I would suggest that a parent thinking of allocating $40,000 to $50,000 per year for four years of college education instead grubstake their kid with that same money. You could even make it a fraction of that, to be put into actually doing something, like starting a business or trying out different investment strategies, and get a lot more experience and knowledge for your kid as a result.

You certainly don’t need a college to gain knowledge. For example, there’s an outfit called The Teaching Company that hires the very best professors in the world in all sorts of subjects to deliver superb audio courses. I listen to these things all the time in the car. I watch the ones that have important visual components on my computer, and I can go back and repeat anything I don’t understand clearly – when my mind is receptive to it. It’s much more effective than going to college would be, and it’s vastly cheaper. Superior in every possible respect.

Another thing I’d do if I had a college-age kid is plan out a travel schedule. He’d have to spend at least a month in a dozen countries and report on what he does there. Travel may be the single best type of education, at least if done with a method and an objective.

There are many ways to get an education besides going to college – and going to a second-rate, third-rate, or community college is a complete waste of time and money. It serves no useful purpose whatsoever.

L: I’ve long thought similarly about what we call a “liberal arts education” today. Paying lots of money to read literature with friends seems patently silly, and to have someone tell you what some long-dead artist really meant seems arrogant to boot. But there are also things like physics, chemistry, and medicine. When I was a physics major at RPI, I was glad to have all sorts of laboratories and machine shops at my disposal – stuff I could never have built in my backyard…

Doug: I totally agree with you on that. Aside from the patina and connections I’ve been talking about, there are two valid reasons for going to a university. One is to study a hard science. You can still learn these on your own, but you’re right; it helps a lot to have the labs and so forth. That’s worth paying for.

The second reason is if you need a piece of paper that shows you’ve jumped through hoops other people recognize. In other words, if you’re going into a trade, like doctoring, lawyering, or engineering, for which you need a certificate in order to be able to hang a shingle without getting arrested, that’s okay because it’s necessary.

Well, maybe not for lawyering – we have entirely too many lawyers in the world today. They’ve turned from expert helpers to parasites at considerable risk of overwhelming the host body.

Another degree I would strongly advise anyone against getting is an MBA, which has, regrettably, become a very fashionable degree. In our shop, if anyone applies for a job, an MBA is an active strike against them. They’d have to come up with a really good explanation for why they spent all that money and two years of extra time to get something that serves no useful purpose whatsoever.

It’s amazing, when you stop and think about it. The professors who teach MBA courses are not successful business people out making millions in the economy – they’re academics! Successful business people with proven track records wouldn’t work for their wages. These academics have no hands-on experience and are teaching theories, most of which are based on completely phony and fallacious economics.

Don’t get conned into this gross misallocation of time and money. An MBA is worse than useless. Only a fool would rather have one than the $100,000, the lost income, and the two years of lost time and experience it costs.

L: I guess that explains how I got this job, with no relevant papers.

Doug: Of course – you’re not a dog or a horse, for cryin’ out loud. We don’t need pedigree papers to identify talent we can see.

L: Another example in which training is desirable, and not a corruption of education, would be the military schools. Generals like rote, conditioned behaviors.

Doug: They do indeed. And soldiers need to learn practical skills, deeply ingrained, that can keep them alive under very difficult circumstances. Military academies are like advanced trade schools.

I very nearly went to West Point. The only reason I didn’t is because I went to a four-year military boarding high school. In those days, military boarding schools were rather gruesome. I decided that I’d had quite enough of shining shoes, marching in squares, and saying “Yes, Sir!” to people I had no respect for.

L: Is that why you’re an anarchist, Doug – was your response to that training to go as far in the opposite direction as you could go?

Doug: [Laughs] Well, let’s not say that I have a problem with authority. I just have a problem with people telling me what to do.

L: [Laughs] Okay, well, I get the criticism of higher education, and I see the broad strokes of your proposed alternative educational strategy, but what about younger children? You seem to be saying that the very idea of the classroom is a bad one, public or private.

Doug: As a matter of fact, when I got out of college in 1968, I needed a job – and I got one: teaching sixth grade in Hobart, Indiana – the heart of Blues Brothers country. I only did it for one semester, but one thing really impressed me deeply: most of my co-workers were complete morons. They were people Jay Leno would feature on his J-Walking videos if he’d ever met them. They had so little knowledge of the world and anything that matters, I was embarrassed to be called a teacher.

There are exceptional teachers, of course, but by and large, they are not the best and the brightest, they’re losers. I wouldn’t want to expose my progeny, if I had any, to a random collection of people who want to be government employees imprisoning kids for six hours a day.

L: Does that apply to private schools as well?

Doug: As I said, I went to a private military high school. Were my teachers any better than others? I suspect they were – but can’t prove it. I’m sure they are at some places, like Exeter Academy in New Hampshire, that pay more and probably attract a better grade of teacher. But if anything is worth doing, it’s worth doing well, and in education, that means doing it yourself. Which means read, read, read.

L: So, your general view is that homeschooling is the way to go for younger children?

Doug: Exactly. Though I’m sure you’ll sympathize with me when I say that I think toddlers ought to grow up for a couple years with wolves, so they can toughen up a bit and learn some survival skills. Kids are way overprotected these days. They are so isolated and insulated from reality, it’s totally counterproductive. Sadly, it’s hard to find a good wolf today.

So it’s homeschool, then college only for technical trades and for the advantages of an Ivy League pedigree. For most people, just reading books and then going out into the real world and doing stuff is way smarter, cheaper, and more productive. The difference between a properly educated kid, and one subjected to conventional training, is the difference between the Arnold Schwarzenegger character and the Danny DeVito character in the movie Twins.

And for God’s sake, don’t send your kids to business school. Better they should try some real businesses instead. Whether they succeed or fail, they’ll learn much more.

L: But this would unemploy hundreds of thousands of people in the education business, who, according to you, are ill equipped for productive work. It doesn’t sound like a politically viable reform plan, Doug.

Doug: The ones who are any good would rise to the occasion and do something better with their time. And those who are not… well, we need people to clean toilets and sweep streets. At least they’d be away from our kids.

And all this dead weight is expensive. I understand that the per-pupil cost of public schooling in the U.S. is running $10,000 to $12,000 per year. And college is $40,000 to $50,000 per year. There’s no reason, no excuse, for it to cost so much.

Teachers who are any good could do as they did in ancient Greece and Rome, and solicit students. They could teach in their houses, or in rented facilities, and compete with each other. They’d have every incentive to strive for the lowest-cost and highest-quality service – and they’d make more money, because most of the money spent on so-called education these days goes to administration and overhead. Not towards getting superstar teachers.

L: I can imagine a future in which the best teachers are celebrities, rich superstars. People would compete for spots in their classes. What would someone with a real passion for astrophysics pay to be able to study with Stephen Hawking?

Doug: That’s exactly what I mean. And instead of having reason to conform, as teachers do now, being members of unions, they’d have reason to excel. Unions have a well-established interest in making sure no one stands above the average, so they foment a culture that guarantees mediocrity. The whole educational system in the U.S. needs to be flushed.

Unfortunately, just the opposite is happening. The Obama people want to give everyone a college education, probably including really useful mandatory courses in Gender Studies, Global Warming, and Marxist Economic Theory. Why stop there? Everyone ought to have a post-grad education as well.

L: Like Luna, in Woody Allen’s Sleeper, who has a Ph.D. in oral sex?

Doug: Yes. It’s insane. It’s another sign that the whole system in the U.S., not just education, is upside down and overdue for collapse.

L: There’s no reforming such an entrenched system, supported by such powerful unions and a population that believes it can and should be fixed. On the other hand, the education system in the U.S. is such a dismal failure, people are opting out their kids in droves. So, with reality-reality vs. political reality, it could actually collapse. Maybe there is hope for a future in which there’s real education, simply because the old system implodes and disappears.

Doug: It could happen. The U.S. Department of Education should be abolished. The National Education Association building in Washington DC should be boarded up or dynamited. No, better yet, cleaned out and sold on the market, so some entrepreneur can put it to some useful business purpose.

L: It could be turned into a brothel. It would be more honest.

Doug: It would – you’d actually get value for your money.

L: Investment implications?

Doug: I expect I’ll expand on this theme in this month’s Casey Report, with an examination of publicly traded online universities. They represent an interesting trend. And our newest letter, Casey’s Extraordinary Technology, is written by Alex Daley, who is something of a polymath. He has deep expertise in all areas of technology, as well as lots of practical experience in venture capital. I think he’s got a lot to say about the implications of the continuing – and accelerating – computer revolution on education. But we truly try to make all our publications educational. We don’t just tout investments. We think it’s critical our readers understand why we think something – not just take our word for it.

L: And when you can understand why something is happening, and pick out predictable trends, there are opportunities to profit. Understood. Okay, well, thanks for another interesting talk.

Doug: My pleasure.

Technology is the number one industry in the United States… and a great investment. Just imagine finding the next Google at the startup stage. For opportunities in the next hot tech sector, look no further than to Alex Daley, former senior research executive at one of the world’s largest technology firms and the senior editor of Casey’s Extraordinary Technology. Learn more about the profits tech stocks can give you by clicking here.

那一刻

长久以来，我一直觉得那一刻应该是颤颤巍巍的，寂静的。静的你连对方微弱的呼吸都能听得到。四目直视，微笑，最后从两对激动的眼角泛出幸福的泪花。网络不是个好东西，肆意的传播着一个个有心人，耗费漫长的时间，庞大的人力，甚至无法企及的智商所策划出来的，令毫无相关人员都痛哭流涕不能自己的场面。你们这些有心人让我等心灵颤动，体会生活的美好，可是你们有没有想过这样一来给大家的生活造成了多大的压力和瓶颈…… 更不要说基本不存在个人生活计划的斯伦贝谢工程师了……

 

当我踏上经历无数特赦才到手的假期，怀揣着经过无数盘根错节的小事故才弄到的小T，我终于来到了人家家楼下，满头大汗，面带憨笑，傻头傻脑的拨通了电话。可是，可是，可是……人家却在加班…… 等着人家满头大汗，面带憨笑，傻头傻脑的奔回来，我的汗都干了。腆着脸，笑一笑，汗渍还粘着皮肤，绷得得生疼。“我来求婚啦”，多么朴实的一个孩子，啧啧。当那个小圈滑落到无名指的底端的时候，人家终于开口了，“咦~，好大”。于是，我们俩就傻笑了一会儿，看了看小圈，又傻笑了一会儿，上楼了……

 

总体上来说，人家和我的感觉一样，就是还没有反应过来这件事情已经发生了。而我这个筹划者所然历经磨难，苦尽甘来，但是还是如此平静的走过了那一刻。我后来在想，我不是真正想要这么一个惊心动魄，感人肺腑的过程，而是我希望去努力完成一些我的另一半觉得重要的事情。一辈子就一次，我们要让它完美。

 

直到走进浦东民政局的那天，拿到两本皱巴巴的小红册子，我们才恍然大悟的说：“完蛋呢，我们终于结婚呢……”

 

What is love about? 1. Communication 2. Support 3. Trust 4. Making each other happy.

 

我觉得我们都做到了，所以，我们结婚啦

 

 

2010年5月23日，写于Miri, Malaysia。

 

小文的故事

从前有个姑娘叫小文，小文后来找了个男朋友小Z，小Z总是想把小文变成小吝，终于有一天他成功了，那天他发现小文竟然还是小合，小Z欣喜不已……
随着两人关系的发展，小文变成了小拿，小文很喜欢这种感觉，因为她总是觉得自己一会儿变成了小氽，一会儿又变成了小汆……

 

时间进一步推移，小文第一次变成了小个。小Z趁热打铁，小文又变成了小舍。小文渐渐喜欢上这种感觉，终于变成了小六……
小Z经常观赏X国文艺片，并且喜欢上了工具，他尝试着让小文变成小仝。后来他又学会了绳子和酒杯，所以那时候小文也会变成小纹或者小盒。但是小文总觉得不太习惯，她总是会喊stop和no，这时候她是小企……

 

小Z不知道什么原因居然要和小文分手，小文伤心不已，变成了小禽。她一度非常冲动，想要和小Z同归于尽，每天傍晚她都带着家伙四处寻找小Z，那时候她变成了小刘。可是小Z好像人间蒸发了一样，小文怎么样也找不到他，小文受到了沉重的打击，慢慢的走向堕落……
小文企图麻醉自己，于是她第一次变成了小齐，那种堕落的感觉让小文沉迷于小介，从此以后小文泥潭深陷，终于变成了小亦……

 

后来小文干脆去了XX bathing center，她穿着各种颜色的丝wa，成为了小紊。在那里小文无聊时会和自己的姐妹一起游戏，那时候她们是小众，她们一起赚钱，被称为小鑫。工作时小文也偶尔会和姐妹合作，那时候她俩是小卒……

小文经常要站在center的橱窗里成为小佘，center里经常光顾小文的有王老板和云经理，小文面对他们的时候分别是小全和小会。当然，有的时候他们3个人也喜欢待在一起，小文这时候是小交，有时候他们还会去野外的草地，这时候小文就又变成了小芥，但不幸的是三个人最后变成了小疥。

还是关于房子

先说几个人。

 

我以前在美国工作的地方叫Abilene，一个在Texas属于中等还偏小的城市，12万人。硬要和中国的某个城市比较的话，应该属于像是山东威海，河北秦皇岛，浙江台州这一类，二线和三线城市之间的范畴。

 

***我们当时负责安全事务的经理，48岁，是从芝加哥来得，前海军陆战队成员（Marine），10年前加入我们公司。退伍之后可以回芝加哥一个Marine Reserve的机构当教官，薪水尚可，而且还有Marine的退休金，一个月下来7-8000美元应该没啥问题。他的老婆是芝加哥一所小学的教师，薪水不祥。我去过芝加哥，并且告诉很多人哪个城市是我假如要定居美国的唯一理由，非常美丽、健康，宁静而不失繁华。我很奇怪他为什么放弃那个美丽的城市，来到Texas这个灰头土脸的石油城，而且我们公司给的薪水还比Marine少一些，他老婆还不一定能找到工作。他的理由很简单，消费低，可以买大房子，除了没有芝加哥繁华，其他的基本城市设施，医疗，餐饮都不错。况且离达拉斯只有两个半小时，奥斯丁3个小时，什么时候想去体验繁荣了，开个车就上路。

 

***我手下的一个operator，小黑，和我一般年纪，费城的大专毕业（Associated Degree in Electronics）。以前在Texas空军服役，退伍后就在我们的城市找了这个工作，每个月收入加上奖金4000-4500美元，离婚，有一个女儿。我问他为啥不回费城去生活，那里还有你的很多亲戚朋友可以帮你照顾孩子，而且工作机会也多。他说，想换换环境，Abilene消费低，竞争小，而且很安全，在这里可以用便宜的房租省下来的钱买自己喜欢的电子用品。

 

***我们基地的Mechanic，35岁，新泽西人，原来在纽约周边的一个Toyota汽车售后维修部门工作。6年前来到Abilene，在朋友办的body shop里面工作，后来被我们公司招进来坐mechanic，月收入4000美元，老婆在餐厅做散工。他身上很有东部人的特点，健谈，有大城市的人的优越感，但是他告诉我他不喜欢大城市的浮躁和昂贵，他希望他的子女在一个单纯的环境中成长，有自己的家庭，等到他们长大了，再让他们自己选择。

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

说两个个我感兴趣的观点。

 

***中国的城市居民是世界上个人住房占有率最高的国家，达到85%。乍一听你会不相信，但是仔细想想这确实是一个令很多人觉得好笑的事实。在十几年前，中国政府在改革国企，在把楼市推向市场化的时候，让很我们很多家庭以几千元或者上万元的价钱买断了现在值上百万元的房子。和发达资本主义国家的不到50%的私人住房拥有率来比，中国确实算是一个为老百姓安居乐业做出了杰出贡献的国家了。

 

***中国85%的人，按照现有的工资，一辈子供不起一套房子。这个是我们很多人愿意相信的事实，但我们忽略了这个事实背后的故事。在那里买？买什么样的房子？我一直很同意的一个观点就是，优越的物质生活是给那些有创造力，愿意努力工作并且能把握机遇的人准备的。血淋淋的经济学原理就是，假如没有能力在竞争激烈、资源丰富的大城市过上幸福的生活，同时又想过上幸福的生活，那就应该去竞争没有那么激烈、资源也相对欠缺的二线或者三线城市去寻找。假如由于个人意愿或者为了奋斗，一定要留在大城市，那就应该降低生活标准，为将来可能的幸福生活作牺牲。

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

再说两个生活中的例子。

 

***我一个很好的朋友，舅舅在纽约的高盛总部的Hedged Fund做部门经理。前两年和我朋友一道去纽约玩，短暂的在他新泽西的房子逗留了几天。他舅舅每天花两个小时，自己开车然后坐火车外加地铁去曼哈顿上班，他的年薪对于我们大多数人来说是天文数字。我问他为啥不在纽约买房子。他说：贵。不贵的感觉要么太小要么生活环境不好。在新泽西，他们一家子可以住在富人区，拥有数量宝马不需要停车费，孩子上学也方便，何乐而不为？唯一需要牺牲的就是上下班的时间。当然，在火车上，他就直接开始办公了。

 

***我们很多人都爱看美剧，不知道大家有没有发现，美国人好像特别喜欢一群人住在一起瞎闹，30几岁了，依旧如此。《Friends》，《Big Bang Theory》，《It’s always sunny in Philadelphia》……比比皆是。为啥这些美剧深入人心呢，因为这就是他们的社会现实。大多数人，凭一己之力是无法在美国的大城市生活的特别幸福。买房子更是一个难以实现的愿望。

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

最后说两点我真正想说的。

 

***关于社会*** 一个社会应该是有层次的，让更多的财富落在有能力并且愿意付出更多的劳动的人。这样的社会才有竞争，才能发展。同时为了这个社会的公平原则，也应该用价值来区分有限的资源，让更有能力并且愿意劳动的人得到更好的资源。这样，这个社会就会有了选择性，也同样会有流动性。

 

一个礼拜以前，看到一条新闻，说三央企拍的北京“地王”，于是中央马上出台央企不予参与与业务无关的地产投资。消息一出台，多方的反应是大快人心，觉得国家还应该出台更多的打压措施，最好楼价尽快大幅下跌。这个报道其实看着有些令人心寒，一方面反映出来中国国进民退以及资源分配的严重不均匀，另一方面让我看到的是中国人民严重的“仇富”心态。难道我们再回到以前平均分配的大锅饭时代最好么？

 

打压楼市不是解决“民怨”根本的解决办法，打压央企更只是对楼市杯水车薪的控制，最应该解决的问题是增加社会的流动性，以及如何“富民”。国家应该通过舆论把大城市中过剩的人才以及物质资源导向地方，让更多的地方发展起来，从而让人民有更多的选择。同时，要建立完善的社会最低保障制度，这样才能让最弱势的群体也能有生活奋斗的可能。

 

***关于我们*** 一个巴掌拍不响，假如只是房产商和地方政府一味的炒作楼市，局面也不会这么热闹。中国人在住房购买的时候，很别无选择的受到一些传统观念和攀比心理的制约。“宁做鸡头不做凤尾”得精神很少在公众舆论中受到肯定。我们的目标永远是“吃的苦中苦，方位人上人”。对于婚姻，“两情相悦”无能为力，“安居乐业”方显未来。最后，人们在一种浮躁的氛围中，变得越来越追求物质，目光短浅。然而，有限的资源是不可能平均分配的，于是大多数没有办法实现“梦想”就演变成了“仇富”和“民怨”。

 

不知道大家有没有发现，对房价怨恨最深的可能属于我们75-85年出生的这批人。或者用一个比较流行的词语来说就是“80后”。我们这批人现在恰巧面临着这种进退两难的局面，被给予了太多的希望，而现实却又不能让我们得到我们想得到的。于是很多“怨恨”被发泄在网上，各路“80后”群雄纷纷响应。恰逢我们这批人现在刚刚开始成为社会的主体，在各个领域中承担着不同的责任，而且我们也是网络中作活跃的分子，于是我们的言论主导了媒体。加之我们父辈由于受到中国的传统观念左右，倾囊资助我们的“房产事业”，最后他们也变成了“民怨”的生力军，对我们的“怨恨”推波助澜，于是这个话题一发不可收拾。

 

 

 

关于上海的房子

早就想写点关于上海房价的东西了，只怪现在越来越懒。最近同事问来，挺好的关系，拖不了了，于是就写了，现在就贴上来吧。

 

Marat Kurbanov January 16 at 8:08am

Siming, how are things there in Malaysia. Would very appreciate if you could give me your impressions of a country as in my wild mind I am thinking now about possible move to there.

Also was thinking about properties in Shanghai and all the people i trust and follow are actually thinking real estate in Honk Kong/Shanghai is in bubble right now and likely to go bust some time in near future. One of them actually selling his apartment in Honk Kong.

 

Siming Luo January 17 at 7:03pm

 

Hey, Marat, sorry about the late replay. I just got to here Malaysia about a week ago and was getting ready for my first job plus tons of things have to be done as a new comer.

Malaysia for sure is a wonderful country even my time here is not very long, and I have already been impressed by the people, food and beautiful coast line. Labuan is a small island, not too much to do, but it is still great comparing to what I had in US (Maybe because of more Asian culture, anyway, it is just good).

Malaysia is a country mixed with Muslin, India and Chinese culture. People are generally very nice, and a lot of them can speak at least a little English due to the colonial history. Therefore, you will never get lost in this country if you can speak English. Major cities in Malaysia are all very westernized, and you can find whatever you want but with a lot cheaper price than US.

I dont know too much about housing investment in this country, but like I have already said, Malaysia is definitely a good place to live. Good food, good people, good medical system, and good international school also. If you want to move here, however, I would suggest moving to one of the big cities, so that your wife and kids will have a lot more things to do.

OK, now it is the time for talking about China. I just bought an apartment in Shanghai, which was brand-new 118 m2 apartment (not even close to the down town) with good furnishing put by the owner, and it costs me xxxxxx USD. I had to get housing loan from the bank, and most likely I will be owing debt for the next 3-4 years.

For sure, it has the bubble, which was the reason that our government will be issuing a series of controlling policy after Chinese New Year. But, to be honest, the housing price in Shanghai will not be declining drastically like some experts expect.

China’s fast GDP growth these years has heavily relied on the infrastructure projects that provide tons of jobs for all the businesses and industries. Housing, as a very important infrastructure project, is always a key point for the GDP growth. If China would have lost this economic growth point, thousands of thousands of people will lose their jobs. This will obviously create the instability of the society, which would not be tolerated by the Chinese government. So, the government will for sure try whatever way to smoothly convert this bubble to the real estate.

China, different from those capitalism countries, albeit has been capitalized quite a lot, is still controlled by the central government. It is not a 100% free market, and hereby the market will not crush like what Japan experienced back to 20 years ago. The powerful central government will try at full blast to bailout the unhealthy housing development we have been building up for many few years.

A very good example was the housing price decline in the first quarter of 2009. The government released reduced interest rate policy for the loan right after the shrinkage of the housing market, and pushed the developers to come out with many discount policy for those ones who buy the house for the first time. As a result, the housing price started sky-rocketing in the second quarter, all the way to a ridiculous level today. Now the government has to come out with other policies to oppress the price otherwise the bubble will go bust soon or later if the market is let go free.

What is worth mentioning is that in China, the culture also plays a very important role on the housing price. Usually, wife’s family will not allow the husband to marry her if there is no apartment for their future life. This is a very stupid way, but it is actually the invisible reality that pushes the market to go crazy. "A good place to live" is a very important item for Chinese people to evaluate the life quality, and it must be the prerequisite for a lot of marriages…..

Well, to summarize, I would say, Yes, the housing price might decline a little bit in the short term, but for the long term investment, it is definitely worth it. And if you choose the right area to buy the apartment, it is not even going to degrade at all even after the controlling policy is released. Remember, the housing in big cities, especial right now, is still the rigid demand. All those people were born from the baby boom are getting married and Shanghai is the place that a lot of Chinese people want to move to in order to show their social status (We were always educated to rise the head and shoulders above others, which is culture thing again… Stupid…..). Plus, the preference of all the foreigners and international business, Shanghai will soon become another New York, Tokyo or whatever you wish to call.

My friend, Shanghai is not a bad choice as long as you have the money. Hong Kong I am not very familiar with, but I would think it is too mature and too expensive, and does not have too much room for the increment.

 

At last, very friendly suggestion, our government is also controlling foreign investment as part of housing controlling policy. To prevent the influence of "hot money" flows in the real estate market, regulations concerning the foreigner can only make real estate purchase for own use, which means that you will have to provide documents like work permit, residence permit as proofs. So, my friend, welcome to China and become a “real Chinese” before you make money out of us. Haha…..

All in all, I hope you good luck in your investment, and see you some day in Asia! Keep in touch. I will show you around if you come by.