Separated by a Common Language

One of the strangest phenomena in the magical world of social media, are random Americans from Trump country having issues with my English.  How it hurts my feelings, and devastates my self-esteem, knowing I will never be able to spell as well as these fine creatures from the dark side of redneck reality.  How it diminishes me, and emasculates me, that I will never have the eloquence and mastery of language, as these intimate lovers of their sisters and mother.

I have been told it is “program”, not “programme”; that it is “kilogram”, and not “kilogramme”; and that it is “monogram”, not “monogramme”.

I have advised that words like “sanitise”, “evangelise”, and “romanticise” should be spelt “sanitize”, “evangelize”, and “romanticize”.

I have been harangued on how “colour”, “humour”, and “neighbour” should be “color”, “humor”, and “neighbor”.

I have been lectured on how, “analyse”, “paralyse”, and “catalyse” should be “analyze”, “paralyze”, and “catalyze”.

I have been reprimanded that it is “apologize”, not “apologise”; “organize”, not “organise”, and “recognize”, not “recognise”.

I have been rebuked on how it should be “defense”, not “defence”; “license”, not “licence”; and “offense”, not “offence”.

I have been reproached on the evils of “analogue”, “catalogue”, and “dialogue”; instead of “analog”, “catalog”, and “dialog”.

I have been corrected that it is “leukemia”, instead of “leukaemia”; that it is “maneuver”, instead of “manoeuvre  “; that it is “estrogen”, instead of “oestrogen”; that it is “pedophilia”, instead of “paedophilia”; that it is “diarrhea”, instead of “diarrhoea”; and so many, many, many more.

It is attributed to George Bernard Shaw, that Britain and America are two nations divided by a common language.  For this, I must squarely blame Noah Webster Jr., and his jihad against “English” English, and for a distinctly American spelling.  Of course, I fully deserve this for taking miseducated English lessons from people who can scarce tell the difference between “their”, “they’re”, and “there”.  I am amazed at people who know only one language, and yet cannot speak it well.

AIA Hospitalisation Plan Revisions, November 2019

The following are some revisions for AIA’s HealthShield Gold Max, and its riders, which were implemented on the 11^th November 2019.

AIA HealthShield Gold Max

Up to S$2 million limit per policy year, which is the highest in the market.

Up to 13 months pre- and post-hospitalisation benefits, which is the longest in the market.

Extra coverage of up to S$100,000 for 30 critical illnesses per policy year.

Coverage for 26 pregnancy complication conditions, which is the most comprehensive in the market.

AIA Max VitalHealth

Complimentary early detection screening from age 40 onwards for Plan A, which is a first in the market.

Emergency and Outpatient Care Booster optional add-on for Plan A: Covers outpatient treatments due to dengue and HFMD; Covers post A&E Treatment; and Covers Emergency Medical Evacuation and Repatriation.

Minimise the out-of-pocket expenses with competitive premium rates

Enjoy up to 15% discount on renewal premiums depending on the Vitality status.

Additionally, AIA Singapore provides holistic solutions for our Shield customers from diagnosis to recovery:

White Coat – AIA’s exclusive telemedicine partner that lets customers visit a doctor on demand, at their convenience, at a preferential rate.

AIA Quality Healthcare Partner (AQHP) – Consists of 200 Specialists across 26 medical disciplines, carefully handpicked for their industry experience and professionalism.

AIA Hospital & Surgical Pre-approval at selected hospitals, day surgery centres and clinics – a hasslefree process providing worry-free payments for the hospital treatments / surgery

Medix – AIA’s exclusive personal case management that draws from medical knowledge worldwide to tailor treatments for serious conditions for customers insured under AIA HealthShield Gold Max with rider.

Quora Answer: Under Singapore Law, is It an Offence to Criticise Foreign Politicians?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “Under Singapore law, is it an offence for a person to criticise, or slander, foreign politicians, and heads of states, such as Queen Elizabeth II?” 

No.  Singapore has no such legislation, covering lese majeste, for either external or internal dignitaries.  In the case of a foreign dignitary, there is the Defamation Act, Cap. 75.  However, any such legal proceedings much take place in Singapore, and filed in country.  I seriously doubt someone truly important and powerful would want to fly in simply to sue an ordinary citizen, and undergo the legal process here. 

Defamation and slander is often difficult to prove and even more difficult to quantify in terms of damages.  If the slander is serious enough to impact a foreign head of state, then there has to be some basis of truth or a malicious campaign that would entail the use of laws other than defamation. 

On a related note, the Head of State of Singapore has very stringent laws protecting the dignity of the office.  As per the Penal Code, Section 121A: 

121A. Whoever compasses, imagines, invents, devises, or intends the death of or hurt to or imprisonment or restraint of the President, shall be punished with death, or with imprisonment for life and shall, if he is not sentenced to death, also be liable to fine. 

Essentially, merely fantasising a violent BDSM tickle-fest of the President’s person could carry the death penalty.  And if they have not hanged you, but merely incarcerated you for life, you will be fined. Such an indignity.

Quora Answer: Will Singapore Invade West Malaysia in the Future?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “Will Singapore invade, and occupy, West Malaysia in the future to stay relevant?”

What has occupying Malaysia got to do with staying relevant?  War is seldom the economically viable option.  Militarily, Singapore would likely win every battle because it has a vastly superior military.  And then we will proceed to lose the war because occupation would sap all our resources, and resistance would kill more people than the battles themselves.

Such an act of aggression would isolate us internationally, dissipate any political goodwill, disintegrate ASEAN, and cost us a major trading partner.  Additionally, many Singaporeans have friends and family across the border.  That means we can discount this being a national unity exercise.  This would likely lead to the collapse of the government, and punitive international sanctions.  We are a trade hub.  Without trade, this country will swiftly decline.

The continued growth and development of the region is a good thing.  When Malaysia prospers, we prosper.  We have a larger, wealthier market for our goods and services, we can take advantage of their hinterland by restructuring our financial services and economic expertise to invest in them, and work towards closer economic cooperation.  That is how we stay relevant.

Being Retirement Ready

The average Singaporean has not prepared adequately for retirement.  Most people do not fully consider that their standard of living may drop, with reduced income; or that their lifestyle choices will be constrained by their lack of planning.  Retirement planning is, thus, one of the major areas we should look at.

Diamonds are Not "Forever"

Diamonds are not as rare as people believe.  They are the most common of the precious stones.  The price of diamonds is artificially raised by monopolies such as De Beers, and advertising campaigns that condition people to believe that diamond engagement and wedding rings are tradition.

Keep Calm & Brexit

The near-term outlook of Brexit is grim for the UK economy.  There has been capital flight, a drop in productivity, and reduced foreign direct investment.  The thing is, none of the major parties truly give investors confidence.  Any sort of investment in this market has to be long term, and part of an overall diversification strategy.

Quora Answer: How Do Companies Invest in Each Other?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “How do companies invest in each other?”

There are several way that a company may invest in another.  The simplest way is to take an outright equity stake in the other company by buying shares in the other company.  By buying a certain number of shares, the investing company can gain a seat of the board of the company invested in.  Such a purchase can either take place over the counter where a company builds its position gradually, or it can be via a direct deal between the boards of both companies. Such a deal involves the transfer of funds or equity instruments such as special share placements.  A company can also take equity in another if the latter is in debt to the former.  The creditor company takes an equity stake in lieu of debt.  But this is only likely if the debtor company is projected to provide a decent return on investment, and the creditor company is taking advantage of the situation.  In such a scenario, funds may not change ownership.

Sometimes, to secure a business proposal, two companies will take equity positions in each other.  This may involve issuing new shares, diluting existing holdings, swapping equity, or variations along these options.  Such a scenario does not typically involve fund transfer.  Another common scenario is when a company, by design, takes a majority stake in a company that is a major shareholder of another company.  This is an indirect way of gaining control of a potential strategic partner or competitor.

As can be seen, in the vast majority of scenarios or their variations, actual funds seldom change hands.  Nobody writes a proverbial cheque.

Churn & Burn

Churning is a term applied to the unethical and illegal practice of a broker conducting excessive trading in a client’s account mainly to generate commissions.  It may also refer to insurance advisors getting clients to constantly change their policies to the same effect.

Surviving a Trump Presidency

A Donald John Trump presidency surprised the market.  Nobody predicted most of the things he did, considering we are used to having reasonable, or at least, predictably self-serving jingoists in the White House.  Whilst the market is volatile, it is still navigable, and there is still money to be made.

Quora Question: What are the Best Options to Invest around $10,000 Monthly for the Next 30 Months?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “What are the best options to invest around $10,000 per month, for next 30 months?  I am interested in getting moderate returns, but am averse to high-risk.”

The “best options” depend entirely on what you want to do with that money at the end of this period.  30 months, however, is a very short investment horizon, but $10,000 monthly is a substantial amount.  Since you are averse to high risk but you have a short investment horizon, that means you require something that is relatively liquid with returns that are adequate enough to at least be higher than inflation.  This limits your options.

Putting such a sum aside monthly means that you can take advantage of dollar cost averaging.  That being the case, put the funds into mutual funds or a collective investment scheme.  Put, perhaps, 40% of it into debt securities for a limited form of capital guarantee.  Put the other 60% into equity securities to ensure that you have adequate returns so that it is worth investing.  The reason why I suggest mutual funds or a CIS is because they allow you to spread the risk across various sectors and markets.  This will also lower your exposure risk since your fortunes are not tied to a single market.  This creates an immediate balanced portfolio.  Also, this investment is relatively liquid.  That means you can take it out at the end of the period.

At low to moderate risk, you are looking at an ROI of between 4.5% to 6.5%, if this is managed properly.  Get the advice of a good financial services consultant to ensure that you put your money in the proper funds.  In general, I tend to recommend a pivot to East Asia, excluding Japan.  It takes effort to screw this up and lose money if this is done properly.

Invest Beyond a Lifetime

With the right sort of planning, and the correct insurance plan, it is quite possible to plan for three generations.

8 Things about MediShield Life

MediShield Life is the basic universal health coverage for all Singaporeans.  However, it would be best to complement it with an integrated hospitalisation plan, and further insurance.

Common Sense is Not so Common

Isaac Asimov wrote, in “I, Robot”, “It is the obvious which is so difficult to see most of the time.  People say, ‘It’s as plain as the nose on your face.’  But how much of the nose on your face can you see, unless someone holds a mirror up to you?”

The Art of the Insult

Have you ever had a time, when you wanted to tell someone off, but were constrained because he was your boss, or, she was your customer, or she was your wife and you did not feel like sleeping on the couch?

An insult is a disparaging remark.  It is verbal riposte, a play on words, and an exaggeration of attributes.  To really hurt, there must be an element of truth.  An insult need not be obscene, profane or vulgar.  Where is the challenge in mere abuse?  There is no class there.

Insults have been used throughout history, in our literature, in our diplomacy, and even in our scripture.  In Ancient Greece and Rome, insults were a genre of plays.  They were both social and political commentary.  Even the works of William Shakespeare were replete with insults.

Closer to our time, from the Romantics era, we have people like Samuel Langhorne Clemens, better known as “Mark Twain”, and Oscar Fingal O’Flahertie Wills Wilde.  For example, Samuel Clemens once said, “Last week, I stated this woman was the ugliest woman I had ever seen.  I have since been visited by her sister, and now wish to withdraw that statement.”

Oscar Wilde once observed, “Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go.”

In the Industrial Age, John Montagu, 4^th Earl of Sandwich, from the House of Lords, verbally sparred with John Wilkes, from the House of Commons.  So, there is a class element here.  Montagu allegedly said, “Sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox,”

Wilkes is reported to have replied, “That depends, my lord, on whether I embrace your lordship’s politics or your mistress.”

Closer to our time, we have the apocryphal exchange between Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, and Viscountess Nancy Witcher Langhorne Astor, who sat on opposite sides of Parliament.  She once exclaimed, “Winston, if you were my husband, I’d poison your tea.”

Churchill replied, “Nancy, if I were your husband, I’d drink it.”

Lady Astor said, “Sir, you are drunk.”

Churchill retorted, “That may be so, Madam.  But tomorrow, I will be sober, and you will still be ugly.”

The art of the insult sharpens our wit.  It requires knowledge of the one being addressed, their context and quick thinking.  These are the traits of thinkers, of ponderers and of contemplators.  It moves the masses, and a witty reply lives on, long after people may have even forgotten our names.

How does this apply to us?  A witty retort is better than the ache of swallowing a thousand hurts.  It allows us to have our say before power, without facing the full consequences.  After all, English is a language where “ingenious” is very clever, and “ingenuous” is very stupid.  And knowing the difference between the two, lies the art of the insult.

Not My Fault

To win an argument, it is important to anticipate where the discussion is going, and prepare the contention by setting the parameters.  This is possible because people are eminently predictable, and tend to respond emotionally.

Calvin’s Artistry

Done properly, fine art appreciates at an extraordinary rate.  The certificates have a secondary market, and donations to the right institutions affords you a tax break many times the appraised value.

Guidelines for Buying Insurance & Investment Products

The following are brief guidelines for those buying insurance and investment products.

Firstly, the product must be suitable for you.  It must meet the following criteria:

1. Financial needs;

2. Budget;

3. Investment risk level;

4. Financial objectives; and

5. Complement your existing portfolio of investment and insurance products.

You should have been appraised of the following information:

1. Identity of the insurer or the investment manager;

2. Terms and conditions;

3. Benefits and risks; and

4. Premium, costs, expenses, and fees.

The financial consultant’s advise must be congruent with the recommended product in the following areas:

1. Premium or investment amount;

2. Payment frequency;

3. Payment duration;

4. Guaranteed and non-guaranteed returns;

5. Early-termination clauses;

6. Product risk;

7. Maturity date; and

8. Veracity and accuracy of policy documents and contract.

The following are considerations for product switching:

1. The possible benefits;

2. Termination penalties for the original product;

3. The possibility of fewer benefits at higher or same cost; and

4. The possibility of the same benefits at higher cost.

After you have made a decision to buy, and commit, you have to note the following considerations:

1. The free-look period; and

2. The finer points of the contract.

It is important to never purchase a product you do not fully understand.  You should clarify everything.

Yahoo! & the Art of Failing Spectacularly

Yahoo! was originally founded, in 1994, by Jerry Yang Chih Yuan, and David Robert Filo.  It was an early mover in the early internet era of the 1990s, and its search engine was ubiquitous.  The company was formally incorporated on the 02^nd March 1995.

From being one of the largest internet companies, Yahoo! declined, beginning in the late 2000s, was acquired by Verizon Communications, in 2017, for US$4.48 billion,  This acquisition excluded its stakes in Alibaba Group and Yahoo! Japan.  These were transferred to Yahoo!’s successor company, Altaba.  In business, the story of Yahoo! is an interesting case study, and an Exhibit B, on how to ruin a promising business.  It is a tale of bad management, spurned opportunities, and believing too much in their own marketing.

There are many reasons why Yahoo! declined rapidly, but we can look at several events that best encapsulate why.  Yahoo! was in a position where it could have acquired what became Google, Facebook, YouTube, eBay, and Snapchat, amongst many others.  It had all the advantages.  That behemoth would have been worth hundreds of billions of dollars today, and control the market.

In 1998, Lawrence Edward Page and Sergey Mikhaylovich Brin, two PhD students from Stanford University, California, offered to sell their start-up to Yahoo! for US$1 million.  Yahoo! wanted people to spend  more time on its own platform, which offered more advertising opportunities for them.  This contrasted with the PageRank system, which directed people to the most relevant web site based on its links, and connections.  Accordingly, Yahoo! declined.  Prior to that, Alta Vista had declined the same offer.  That company was eventually incorporated as Google, on the 04^th September 1998.

However, that ship had not truly sailed.  In 2002, Terence Steven Semel, the CEO of Yahoo!, began negotiations to buy over Google.  In the initial round, it is aid that Yahoo! proposed buying Google for US$1 billion.  Google’s founders counteroffered with US$3 billion.  When Semel came back with a US$3 billion offer, Page and Brin wanted US$5 billion.  Yahoo! declined.  Today, Google is worth well over US$500 billion with an annual operating revenue of almost US$70 billion.

In 2006, Yahoo! began negotiations to acquire Facebook.  Semel had up to US$1.2 billion to play with.  Mark Elliot Zuckerberg wanted US$1 billion, which was within that mandate.  However, Semel tried to give a lowball offer of US$850 million.  Zuckerberg stopped negotiations, and that opportunity was lost.  Today, Facebook is worth over US$80 billion.  Lessons were not learned.

In 2008, Microsoft gave an unsolicited offer of US$44.6 billion for the entirety of Yahoo!  This was a premium of 62% over Yahoo!’s closing price, an about US$31 per share.  Microsoft was looking at expanding into the online advertising market.  Yahoo! turned down the offer.  In the end, it still ceded its search business, at no gain to itself, and gave it up to Microsoft’s Bing.

Jeremy Ring, a Yahoo! sales executive from 1996 to 2001, and currently a politician, wrote “We Were Yahoo!” which gave an insight on the boardroom failures that lead to this.  In an interview, when asked to sum up the Yahoo! saga, he said, “Yahoo! owned the Earth, but never looked at the sky.”

Quora Answer: Why Would Someone Want to Create an Irrevocable Trust as Opposed to a Revocable Trust?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “Why would someone want to create an irrevocable trust, as opposed to a revocable trust?”

Unlike a revocable trust, an irrevocable trust is a distinct legal entity from the grantor.  All assets managed under the trust, like that of a company, is taxed after expenses, not on gross earnings.  This mitigates the tax liability of the grantor or settlor.

Secondly, the assets managed under trust are protected from creditor action upon the grantor since they are considered distinct from his personal assets and liabilities.  This makes it useful for preserving an estate even when a business venture fails, or the grantor assumes liabilities that are more than his stated net worth.

Finally, since the trust is a distinct legal entity, assets under trust are not ordinarily part of the marital estate.  This is important in the event of an acrimonious or contentious divorce.

Quora Answer: Why Has Singapore Still Not Fully Democratised?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “Why has Singapore still not fully democratised, where the ruling party loses an election, and agrees that it has lost, and enacts a peaceful transition of government; given that Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines have done so?”

Your question assumes that for Singapore to be a democracy, there must be a change of government.  That is not part of the definition of what a democracy is.  A democracy is a system where the electorate have the opportunity to vote.  In our case, we vote in our parliamentary representatives, making us a parliamentary democracy.  This right to vote is guaranteed under the Constitution, once every five years, at the longest.  This is why we are a democracy.

To date, we have always voted the incumbent, the PAP, back into power.  That, in itself, does not make Singapore less democratic.  Rather, that is because, while the incumbent has always had inherent advantages, just like anywhere else in the world, the PAP, by and large, have performed.  There are disagreements on several points of policy.  The government is responsive, and this is why they have been voted in again and again and again.  It does not help the opposition parties when several of their candidates are idiots, judging by their social media postings, and public comments.