ShareJunction - Stock Forum Messages

Entertainment

Fellowship of the Shares

Why did Rome Fall?

There are adherents to single factors, but more people think Rome fell because of a combination of such factors as Christianity, decadence, lead, monetary trouble, and military problems. Even the rise of Islam is proposed as the reason for Rome's fall, by some who think the Fall of Rome happened at Constantinople in the 15th Century.

Causes of the Fall of Rome

Here are some of the explanations for the Fall of Rome:

http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/romefallarticles/a/fallofrome.htm

similarily u may google for the fall of Greeks

Can someone tell me how did the great Roman and Greek empire fell?

Foreign Policy, American-Style: You have two cows. The government taxes them and uses the money to buy a cow for a poor farmer a country ruled by a dictator. The farmer has no hay to feed the cow and his religion forbids him from eating it. The cow dies. The man dies. The dictator confiscates the dead man's farm and sells it, using the money to purchase US military equipment. The President declares the program a success and announces closer ties with our new ally.

Bureaucracy, American-Style: You have two cows but you have to kill one of them because the government will only give you a license for one of them. The license requires you to sell all your milk to the government, which uses it to make cheese. The government pays lots of money to store the cheese in refrigerated warehouses. When the cheese spoils, the government distributes it to the poor. The poor get sick from the cheese, go to the emergency room, and are turned away because they have no health insurance. The President declares the program a success and reminds us that we have the finest health care system in the world.

American Corporation: You have two cows. You sell one to a subsidiary company and lease it back to yourself so you can declare it as a tax loss. Your bosses give you a huge bonus. You inject the cows with drugs and they produce four times the normal amount of milk. Your bosses give you a huge bonus. When the drugs cause one of the cows to drop dead you announce to the press that you have down-sized, reducing expenses by 50 percent. The company stock goes up and your bosses give you a huge bonus. You lay off all your workers and move your production facilities to Mexico. You get a huge bonus. You contribute some of your profit to the President's re-election campaign. The President announces tax cuts for corporations in order to stimulate the economy.

Foreign Policy, American-Style

Good thinking cathylmg.

Need ppl like u to guide stipidfool around....lol.

Think i will own a flat and invest the profit.

The next qn is invest in what counters?....hahaha.U tell me lah.

Keke...You can still own a flat and invest with the profit. Or keep the rental income for a second property.

Cathylmg,hehe....i see ur point of view.

Just for pure discussion purposes can i present another angle.

If 10 years ago i have 157k.I decide to invest in equities and managed to get averaging 12.5% return a year(dividends plus growth).This mean in today value,the 157k will be 510k.

Taking off 350k that is wat the flat is worth in today's value,i am left with 160k in front.

So is owning a flat really so good?

Personally i think besides $$$,it is the ownership of the flat and the ease of mind and no landlord chasing u for this and that.

i will still go for ownership of flat,just one flat will do me fine....hahaha.

This is a real case. You bought a 5-room flat 10 years ago at 157k. Now its price is at least 350k. If it is your only asset and you live in it, you own rental is free. Considering a loan repayment of $480 per month, which is offsetted by rental collect from 2 rooms which comes out to be conservatively about $780, you net off $300 per month. That is calculated on a deposit of 60k. $300 x 12 months=$3600. Which is more then 5 % return p.a is much better than any banks could offer. Plus free lodging and profit in market value.

stupidfool ( Date: 14-Apr-2008 08:10) Posted:

This is the way stupidfool see things,so excuse me.

From statistics,it is shown that total returns from equities,that is dividends and capital gains,has over the long term(more than 5 years) always been better than real estate.Total returns from real estate being rent collection and capital appreciation.

The reason for better total returns in equities is because it is more risky than say real estate.

Both can be used for gearing.Good equities can be used in margin lending just like real estate can be used for collerteral.

Having said all of the above,it is always good to have own a house for own residence,to have a roof under your head.

Just that for investment wise,for long term , for "total returns" and for ease of collecting dividends,I go for equities.

Just some personal thoughts from a stupidfool.

Hehehe... very good post!

Let me add one more -

US democracy - You have two cows. One cow doesn't produce enough milk. You blame someone else and declare war on him. To fund the war, you sell the other cow.

baseerahmed ( Date: 18-Apr-2008 19:04) Posted:

Humour : Cows Explain Politics

Feudalism: You have two cows. The lord of the manor takes some of the milk. And all the cream.

Pure Socialism: You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else's cows. You have to take care of all the cows. The government gives you as much milk as you need.

Socialism: You have two cows. The government takes one of your cows and gives it to your neighbor. You're both forced to join a cooperative where you have to teach your neighbor how to take care of his cow.

Fascism: You have two cows. The government takes both, hires you to take care of them, and sells you the milk.

Pure Communism: You have two cows. Your neighbors help you take care of them, and you all share the milk.

Communism: You have two cows. The government seizes both and provides you with milk. You wait in line for you share of the milk, but it's so long that the milk is sour by the time you get it.

Dictatorship: You have two cows. The government takes both and shoots you.

Pure Democracy: You have two cows. Your neighbors decide who gets the milk.

Representative Democracy: You have two cows. Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk.

British Democracy: You have two cows. You feed them sheep brains and they go mad. The government gives you compensation for your diseased cows, compensation for your lost income, and a grant not to use your fields for anything else. And tells the public not to worry.

Capitalism: You have two cows. You lay one off, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when she drops dead.

Singaporean Democracy: You have two cows. The government fines you for keeping two unlicensed farm animals in an apartment.

Hong Kong Capitalism (alias Enron Capitalism):
You have two cows.
You sell three of them to your publicly-listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute an debt/equity swap with associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax deduction for keeping five cows.
The milk rights of six cows are transferred via a Panamanian intermediary to a Cayman Isands company secretly owned by the majority shareholder, who sells the rights to all seven cows' milk back to the listed company.
The annual report says that the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more.
Meanwhile, you kill the two cows because the Feng Shui is bad.

Japanese Corporation: You have two cows. You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. You teach the cows to travel on unbelievably crowded trains. Your cows always get higher test scores than cows in the U.S. or Europe, but they drink a lot of sake.

German Corporation: You have two cows. You engineer them so they are all blond, drink lots of beer, give excellent milk, and run a hundred miles an hour. Unfortunately they also demand 13 weeks of vacation per year and are very expensive to repair.

hahaha ! : )

I think this video was reported in the news on AsiaOne.

pikachu ( Date: 19-Apr-2008 10:48) Posted:

See this youtube video of a Pontainak in Malacca

I can't see much in the video but the weeping sound and the white ghostly shape flying is quite scary.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-7RxQJfnas

Humour : Cows Explain Politics

Humour : Cows Explain Politics

Feudalism: You have two cows. The lord of the manor takes some of the milk. And all the cream.

Pure Socialism: You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else's cows. You have to take care of all the cows. The government gives you as much milk as you need.

Socialism: You have two cows. The government takes one of your cows and gives it to your neighbor. You're both forced to join a cooperative where you have to teach your neighbor how to take care of his cow.

Fascism: You have two cows. The government takes both, hires you to take care of them, and sells you the milk.

Pure Communism: You have two cows. Your neighbors help you take care of them, and you all share the milk.

Communism: You have two cows. The government seizes both and provides you with milk. You wait in line for you share of the milk, but it's so long that the milk is sour by the time you get it.

Dictatorship: You have two cows. The government takes both and shoots you.

Pure Democracy: You have two cows. Your neighbors decide who gets the milk.

Representative Democracy: You have two cows. Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk.

British Democracy: You have two cows. You feed them sheep brains and they go mad. The government gives you compensation for your diseased cows, compensation for your lost income, and a grant not to use your fields for anything else. And tells the public not to worry.

Capitalism: You have two cows. You lay one off, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when she drops dead.

Singaporean Democracy: You have two cows. The government fines you for keeping two unlicensed farm animals in an apartment.

Hong Kong Capitalism (alias Enron Capitalism):
You have two cows.
You sell three of them to your publicly-listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute an debt/equity swap with associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax deduction for keeping five cows.
The milk rights of six cows are transferred via a Panamanian intermediary to a Cayman Isands company secretly owned by the majority shareholder, who sells the rights to all seven cows' milk back to the listed company.
The annual report says that the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more.
Meanwhile, you kill the two cows because the Feng Shui is bad.

Japanese Corporation: You have two cows. You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. You teach the cows to travel on unbelievably crowded trains. Your cows always get higher test scores than cows in the U.S. or Europe, but they drink a lot of sake.

German Corporation: You have two cows. You engineer them so they are all blond, drink lots of beer, give excellent milk, and run a hundred miles an hour. Unfortunately they also demand 13 weeks of vacation per year and are very expensive to repair.

hahaha ! : )

It is true that in our local context we have to factor in CPF in the equation.With CPF in the equation,it make property investment more viable.

But for me,i like to be hassle free from tenants problems,so i go for less stress and collect dividends instead.

Timing is everything in life.Buying properties is location,location,location.The same goes for buying equities,have to pick the right counter(s).

Happy for u to make $$$ from investment properties,i am also happy that i also make from equities.

I also have no complains about property as the house i am residing in have grown since i bot it years ago.But that is the only real estate i got....LOL.

In our local context, the CPF system is a form of enforced savings but with alot of rules, regulations and restrictions (RRR)attached. The bulk of our CPF in the OA attracts a mere 2.5% (30 years ago CPF used to distribute 6.7%)...which is insufficient to keep up with inflation.....i.e. when you retire in 20/30 years time, the money you have in the CPF is less than its value today.

The CPF RRR restricts the amount you can invest in equities. What I was trying to drive at is, if you have excess CPF OA balance and monthly contributions which you cannot touch for equities investments, rather rhan leave it there to shrink in value, properties is a good option to ensure you get a better return than the 2.5% as CPF's RRR allows you to use all of your OA for property purchase.

So, if you can balance your downpayment and monthly mortgage repayment (using mostly from CPF) with your potential rental income, you will end up with positive cashflow.

Another point....you said that equities give better returns than properties. Well, begining of 2007 I invested in a property. I put down 50% and mortgaged 50%. Today, I have unsolicitated offers of 1.5x the purchase price of the property. So, my ROI is 100% plus rental income....Granted, 2007 was an exceptional year for property price appreciation but it all boils down to timing, timing, timing and location, location, location.

This is the way stupidfool see things,so excuse me.

From statistics,it is shown that total returns from equities,that is dividends and capital gains,has over the long term(more than 5 years) always been better than real estate.Total returns from real estate being rent collection and capital appreciation.

The reason for better total returns in equities is because it is more risky than say real estate.

Both can be used for gearing.Good equities can be used in margin lending just like real estate can be used for collerteral.

Having said all of the above,it is always good to have own a house for own residence,to have a roof under your head.

Just that for investment wise,for long term , for "total returns" and for ease of collecting dividends,I go for equities.

Just some personal thoughts from a stupidfool.

Sorry, error in calcs

Say you take a 65% loan, and the property appreciates 20% over a few years, your ROI in this period is 40%.

The capital outlay is 35% of the property. The ROI should be 20/35 = 57%

Like all investments, the vital elements are:

TIMING. This is all important.
Another other factor is financial prudence - i.e. don't buy something that will stretch you financially.
Quality of the property......in property terms, there is a saying - the 3 things to consider are....location, location, location.

Assuming you have satisfied the above criterias, property investments have one other tool to improve your ROI......i.e gearing with mortgage loan. But, be careful not to stretch it too much. Say you take a 65% loan, and the property appreciates 20% over a few years, your ROI in this period is 40%.

For downpayment and monthly mortgage repayment, you can use the excess CPF which you cannot touch cos of all the CPF rules, regulations and restrictions.

The tenancy of the property should improve your cashflow........i.e. the protion of CPF that is 'untouchable' is used to pay the monthly mortgage but you collect the rent every month in cash.

Property investment is for long term (min 5 yrs)....don't try to contra.....if you work out your finances properly and do your homework, it can certainly improve your cashflow.......with high possibility capital gains when you sell it.

Yes, getting tenants may be a little troublesome ....but choose your tenant properly and once a tenant is secured, you will enjoy rental income for average of 24 months.

My personnal experince has mostly been positive. Smiley

Hehehe....good to know that a supreme sporegal also agree with stupidfool on investment properties decision.

Anyway,saw on video about craddle mountain in Tasmania,it is indeed beautiful place and very serene.Nice choice to go there.

Also,i would rather NOT go through a tough time ....LOL

I tend to agree with you.

You're open to many risks - tenant problems (or lack-of tenants!), falling housing prices, loans, maintainence...

It may not be worth the effort.

stupidfool ( Date: 10-Apr-2008 14:21) Posted:

In general,buying investment properties to rent out for rental income is not a good choice.

Cos if u work it out,the returns is low....maybe 3% a year.And subject to many tenants problems.

Ur oni gain from property investment is from capital gains,that is,if u are lucky.

Think shares dividends is better and easy to collect.

What I've Learned : Donald Trump

Going through tough times is a wonderful thing, and everybody should try it. Once.

I was walking down Fifth Avenue with Marla Maples in 1991. This was at the peak of the bad market. Across the street I saw a man in front of Tiffany with a tin cup. I looked at Marla and said, "You know, right now that man is worth $900 million more than I am."

When I told Marla this, she didn't run away. Of course, I would have saved a little money if she had.

I had a lot of friends who went bankrupt and you never hear from them again. I worked harder than I'd ever worked getting myself out of it. Now my company is much bigger than it was in the eighties -- many times.

The Guinness Book of Records gave me first place for the greatest financial comeback of all time.

http://www.esquire.com/features/what-ive-learned/ESQ0104-JAN_CEOS

Login Register

Fellowship of the Shares

Causes of the Fall of Rome