Lik

But it doesn't mean I would agree with the opinions of other people who would only demand the government to give out cash and believe that is the solution.
rockypath 發表於 2011-11-25 14:42

In an ideal world, I would not demand the government to just hand out cash to the citizens either. But HK is far from an ideal world, and the HKSAR admin has repeatedly demonstrated that they have no vision, no leadership, and worse of all, no ability to do anything right at all. They only thing they sort of know and is reasonably good at is to suck and lick Grandfather's toes.

With that in mind, would you want to see them try and put together any sort of government program in HK? With new generally elected leadership, that would be an idea worth pursuing. But given the current crop of useless morons, I'd much rather see them attempt nothing at all and just return the money that rightfully belongs to HK people instead. Give the HK folks their money back, and let them use it as they see fit to save themselves. In general, HK folks are still smart enough to do that.

-Lik

Lik

同你講度理其實係完全徙氣，但唔緊要，我都會同你講。

你根本就避開晒我上面個post所講嘅野。特衰正苦無能至始，做果樣衰果樣（就連派錢都派得衰過人），再唔係就只會益地產商、有錢佬、銀行、fund佬。叫佢派錢就係因為深知佢無能，乜鬼野都做唔到，所以先至寧願現兜兜咁叫出磅水。個特區政府又唔係無錢，現今嘅財富儲備就算四年政府都完全無收入都一樣足夠營運。咁唔叫佢派錢等啲錢就咁坐響庫房收果1、2％嘅息呀？

而且，我枉你仲敢睇為民請命嘅議員。飯民前後提出過幾多修訂、議案等等，如果唔係保皇黨+功能組別否決嘅話，9萬幾樣野做就做晒出來啦？政府官員是面瞢心精lu喎？精到好似唐唐咁醒目呀嘛～

歪理為阿爺護航你就識。

-力

Lik

政府有錢就更要為將來謀劃，難道要等到庫房沒有錢香港競爭力下降之後才去做啊？ 你覺得到時還來得及嗎？
rockypath 發表於 2011-11-27 23:16

全世界除咗特區政府之外，仲邊度有任何一個政府會好似特區政府咁庫房水浸，儲備多到4年無入息到可以繼續營運？！人地唔記得係IMF定係邊度都只係 recommend 你有18個月左右嘅儲備就已經好足夠。呢啲錢全部都係納稅人嘅血汗錢，你個政府hog住晒唔係叫做未雨綢繆，而係叫做守財成奴！

將呢啲錢退還返晒落人民身上，派錢又好，有效地搞project又好，錢滾錢出來嘅成效遠遠高過你收晒落美國債券賺返來果1、2%利息！

同你講咁多簡直係徙我時間！

-力

Lik

香港政府現在有錢，但你能保證香港一直會如此富裕下去嗎？ 香港的競爭力不會被其他城市和國家的挑戰嗎？  ...
rockypath 發表於 2011-11-27 23:54

你今日有工做，但你能夠保證你一直都會繼續有工做咩？一般嘅 financial planning 都係叫你儲 3至6個月嘅 rainy day fund就已經足夠。最多我都只係見過叫人儲1年錢（嘅 rainy day fund）。照你咁講，你依家成份糧儲起晒佢，連飯都唔可開，等你儲夠4年嘅 rainy day fund 先至再諗啦？唔記得邊條茂利官仲夠薑話財政儲備梗係越多越好，咁呢世都唔好使呀，笨？！

我第三次同你講：今日嘅特衰政府，有能力去發展新嘅經濟同提高香港市民勞動競爭力咩？有嘅話回歸14年來已經做咗啦？又點會成個香港越攪越衰？！明知你個政府無能，所以先至有聲音叫你乜都唔好搞，就咁磅水等我自己救自己。

淨係識得徙我時間！

-力

Lik

well, 其實我我知道政府無能, 但我有自知之明覺得自己比政府更無能, 所以選擇比佢搞好過. ...
mcjohnjohn 發表於 2011-11-28 00:25

你咁做就無問題，因為係你自己用你嘅個人意志選擇將啲本來就係屬於你自己嘅錢交俾基金工公司打理。但現行強迫金卻剝奪咗人民嘅呢個選舉權。

-力

Lik

啲廢柴無恥之極。我唔該佢地唔好扮睇唔到：

http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5 ... #.E6.89.B9.E8.A9.95

有批評認為強積金剝奪僱員自行選擇投資意向的自由。2008年立法會選舉，甚至有候選人以「取消強積金」為政綱。而亦有部份僱主為減少支出，強迫僱員轉為「自僱人士」；亦有僱主拖欠供款，使僱員得不到應有保障。另有批評指強積金管理人收取的管理費太高，假設投資回報是每年5%，而基金管理費是每年2%，一個月入2萬港元的人供款40年後，累計的管理費加上複利作用，會導致最終可收取的退休金比起「零管理費」的情況少收超過3成，即少收超過100萬港元。直至2010年，累積的強積金總值已達三千四百億港元，但行政費仍然偏高。股評人胡孟青指強積金市場形成寡頭壟斷局面，雖然認可的基金信託機構有十九間，但管理基金總值最高的五家已佔整體市場近七成，只要幾家龍頭大行不減價，其他信託人亦無減價的誘因。十年過去，一眾信託人已坐收逾六十六億港元打工仔血汗錢。

-力

Lik

請問阿力你在加拿大投資基金，基金會收你幾個巴仙管理費？

忘了問你有沒有投資過基金。 ...
rockypath 發表於 2011-11-28 01:09

講咗咁多N次你都唔明，我真係唔知你係死蠢呀？扮唔明呀？定係無恥？
最大嘅重點係，強迫金係政府立法迫你買，而所得既利益就送晒俾班已經好疊水嘅大行、基金佬。咁樣唔係政府製造同加劇貧富懸殊又係乜？我自己去買 funds 嘅話，呢個係我選擇嘅自由意志。啲錢係我嘅，我鍾意點使同俾邊個賺係我嘅事，你個政府做做乜要迫我送錢俾啲大行同基金佬去使？
第二係，我真係唔知你石仔點解咁廢，呢度啲基金嘅管理費又邊度有香港垃圾強迫金收果啲咁高？
一如已往，你一直都無會應我指出嘅問題所在，但我就全部KO晒你所講嘅垃圾論點。
收皮啦你～
-力

Lik

Why don't you just answer my question directly coward?  

Ask you one more time - what is the perc ...
rockypath 發表於 2011-11-28 11:04

Why should I tell you about my personal finance info?

In the market, I have seen funds that range from no service charge to 1.something %. MPF, on the other hand, used to have service charges as high as 2.something percent. It was widely acknowledge that MPF service charges were excessively high compared to other funds. The fact that they are mandatory only adds more insult to injury.

It goes back to the same 2 questions:

1) why is it mandatory?
2) why are the guaranteed profits funnelled to the rich banks and fund managers, who are already extremely wealthy? What does that do to the wealth disparity?

Why don't you answer my question directly, huh?

-Lik

Lik

Why don't you just answer my question directly coward?  
rockypath 發表於 2011-11-28 11:04

And I must point out, your use of the word "coward" already constitute "personal attack / insult". Not that I care, but since you started this, at least I am entitled to start throwing insults back at you. But hey, I'm just gonna ask the admin to deal with it.

Insulting people intelligently is a art and a skill that you have clearly not mastered. Too bad you are obviously unable to learn it. Ever.

Lik

And I quote:

Ask you one more time - what is the percentage the mutual fund will charge you in Canada.
rockypath 發表於 2011-11-28 11:04

For anyone that knows proper English, which part of "you" in the above sentence doesn't refer to me, Ah Lik? So how is it that you were not asking me for my personal info?

And someone said they were educated in some US engineering school wor~ Makes me wonder if his degree was obtained from one of those wild chicken buy-a-degree university~

HK folks may have "control" in selecting which financial institution manages their funds, and the investment profile of their funds. But it doesn't change the fact that the profits are channelled to private banks / financial institutions and fund managers that are already much closer to the top 1%.  Being private institutions, they are only responsible to their investors, but not the public. CPP, on the other hand, is managed by a crown corp (CPP investment board). Being a crown corp, it is accountable to the public.

Clearly, your post has shown that you have zero understanding of how CPP works. Stop embarrassing yourself la.

If you think your 2.35% management fee is low, gum all I can say is -- congratulations la~ It's funny how some people still think they are getting a deal when they are clearly getting ripped off.

-Lik