Minibonds Octave Constellation

Obama's budget headed to Congress - Yahoo! News

2012-02-14T08:00:00.000-08:00

Obama's budget headed to Congress - Yahoo! News

President Barack Obama has sent Congress a new budget that seeks to achieve $4 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade through cuts in government spending and higher taxes on the wealthy. At the same time, he wants to boost spending in key areas such as transportation and education.

Morgan Stanley will be sued in US for selling false RMB bonds in Hong Kong with mainly Bank of China

2012-02-11T07:05:00.000-08:00

Bank of China will sell RMB and their bonds in London with approval of British government while Hong Kong government is still covering up Bank of China was selling false RMB bonds created by Morgan Stanley with US sub-prime CDS inside in the year 2007,8 without punishment.

Octave Notes 21,22 created by Morgan Stanley were sold in Bank of China Hong Kong as false RMB bonds. Others were Octave Notes 15,16,17,18 and were mostly sold by Bank of China as false banks notes but underneath there were US sub-prime CDS.

Also :

Chinese Bank Declares RMB Business War Around the World

China continues to expand the global reach of renminbi RMB (also called CNY, or simply Yuan) amidst allowing direct RMB trading in Russia.

In December 2010, Bank of China (BOC) became the first China state-owned bank to offer RMB trading services for US companies and individuals. Before that, US companies and individuals can already buy and sell RMB through Western banks such as the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC).

Although this BOC move can promote the use of RMB in international trade, it still has quite a long way to make RMB an alternative reserve currency because Chinese government ultimately controls the RMB liquidity taps in offshore markets and investing in mainland assets is also under strict control.

HSBC has been very aggressively expanding its offshore RMB services around the world and already completed its first US cross-border RMB trade settlement transaction earlier on 30 September 2010.

Further on 8 October 2010, HSBC even settled trading of its first offshore RMB-denominated currency option, a better risk-hedging tool than RMB Non-Deliverable Forward (NDF) or Non-Deliverable Option (NDO) which are typically settled in USD rather than RMB.

With the RMB clearing bank status, BOC will be able to exert influence on RMB liquidity, exchange and interest rates in the US. Otherwise, we are afraid that Chinese regulators may not have enough confident to further accelerate the pace of RMB full liberalization.

The RMB business war is of course not limited in the US, as BOC's overseas branches including London, Frankfurt, Tokyo, Canada, Singapore and Malaysia etc also began offering similar RMB services since early 2010.

Particularly in London, British customers can exchange for RMB not only in international banks like HSBC and BOC. Even the UK Post Office has also started providing RMB services with a daily exchange limit of GBP 5K since January 2011.

Demonstration in front of Bank of China

2012-02-11T05:39:00.000-08:00

Letter to Bank of China, the directors has committed financial crimes of China by selling US sub-prime products to Hong Kong people together with Morgan Stanley and also hide these derivative products structure to Hong Kong staffs working in BOC HK.

Photos of the letter

港一季近千金融精英失業三星證券撤港 130人裁剩20人

2012-02-01T08:30:00.000-08:00

港一季近千金融精英失業三星證券撤港 130人裁剩20人

Hong Kong financial centre is now starting to lay off bankers and brokers from LG financial, HSBC. Morgan Stanley & UBS

Protestor gets beaten by Oakland Police

2012-02-01T08:25:00.000-08:00

Wall Street controlled police is doing what bankers and their politicians ask for in USA :

Bill Gates I don't pay enough tax.mp4

2012-01-26T06:52:00.000-08:00

To non-Lehman Octaves Notes victims

2012-01-21T08:50:00.000-08:00

The following was my message three years ago to LBV :

"Most of victims I think will sue the banks only since all of us put our money in banks. So the government should help us to get our money back because all of them are guilty to introduce these high risk structure products to bank to sell to us so they should help us to get our money back. But only the banks are responsible in lying to us that these are bonds."

Now it is time for others non-Lehman related structure products to join together for the continue fight against bankers.\

緊急呼籲精明債券系列18及20
苦主登記
不幸的事始終發生了，但時間很不恰當，在一片歡樂的新年氣氛中，忽然傳來苦主最不願聽到的消息。近來價格的大幅下跌，也預示可能很快發生爆煲。各位苦主不要太傷心，我們都是過來人，你們可依循我們走過的路途，向老千銀行和大魔追討血汗錢。

我們先組織起來，再商討日後的行動。請你們立即行動，點繫此網站的 ” 聯絡我們” 留下你們的資料，

姓名
手機

電郵 (如有)
或致電以下任何3個電話：

每天上午 10 時至下午10時致電

陳小姐 96635311或
曾先生 91671433 或
黄先生 97419185

我們會盡快回覆你

HK SFC is covering up BOCHK in breaking SFC ord. 107

2012-01-21T08:22:00.000-08:00

HK SECURITIES AND FUTURES ORDINANCE - SECT 107 as committed by Bank of China that sold US related CDOs, securities, bonds related to US housing markets to customers that refused to buy any US related bonds from Bank of China for I had explained to the banks that any securites, bonds and any products I wanted from their should not related to US market but only to Asia and Europe market products.

Even in Legco sessions, Directors of Bank of China told Legco members that the bank had checked with the distributors of these structure products that no US market CDOs were involved with their structure products that they were selling. But I had sent these CDOs informations to Legco members involved with these structure products with CDO's mis-selling many times before. So all Bank of China staffs should know about these CDOs involved with their structure products during their trainings especially nowadays the special independent team that investigate my case.

Since I knew in the year 2008 or later and after that Octave Notes were related to US housing market CDOs from documents sent to me by Bank of China that I got US housing market related CDOs that I did not want to buy, and after many investigations by Bank of China of these CDOs experts that should knew these products in order for them to investigate their cases never told me and hide the reason I got these CDOs in my structure products that I bought from them so they could cover up their bank crimes of misrepresentation. So all of them are now involved with fraudulent misrepresentation (Bank of China) and reckless misrepresentation (for the staff that sold me the products) for the purpose of inducing me to subscribe Octave Notes from the bank of China, at the time when it is made, is to the knowledge of its maker false, misleading and deceptive crimes as they all should know the Bank of China were committing mis-selling at that time for Bank of China never revealed to me that what I bought had US market CDOs with their relevant documents that I told the staff that I did not want even thru the bank sent me the documents that I had US related housing market CDOs in 2009 to disclose their crimes.

SFC now refuses to investige these crimes as SFC now is irresponsible to investigate structure crimes of the whole HK banking system.

Legco investigation of non-Lehman Octaves Notes

2012-01-21T08:13:00.000-08:00

Concerning today Legco meeting on 22nd Nov. 2011, there are still mis-understanding of non-Lehman Octave Notes with Legco members that Octaves Notes are the same as ELNs that are private placement products. In fact, non-Octave Notes are the same as Minibonds that are approved by SFC to be sold in HK. So from SFC/HKMA agreement with HK banks, non-Lehman Octave Notes should get at least 60% - 70% payment from banks same as Lehman products, but in fact the banks such as Bank of China is paying nothing. So many banks such as Bank of China , Wing Hang Bank have not followed the agreement with SFC and HKMA and there should be punishment for SFC and HKMA for making such a agreement with the banks in order to cover up the banks mis-selling frauds and to harm victims of these products.

Mis-selling of Octaves Notes

2012-01-21T07:36:00.000-08:00

We have known for more than two years that BOCHK misled its customers when it sold them so-called Octave Notes as bonds issued by Victoria Peak. But the leaflet said “Not Principal Protection Notes” . Now, according to a handful of victims during discussions and in court hearings in BOC mis-selling frauds, it turns out the firm also used its own sale managers to sell a lot of these Octave Notes saying these notes were safe but hide the facts that BOCHK rated these notes as high risk.

Since shortly after Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy in September 2008, we have been hearing essentially the same story from thousands of customers from banks to banks. These were conservative investors, many with a long history of investing in term deposits, HK issued bonds and the like. Their bank managers came to them with a pitch for so-called Octave Notes that similar to bonds. This was a very safe proposition, they said. The customers could potentially link to seven large companies and Chinese government, and the worst that could happen was that all seven companies and for Chinese government had credit events which is impossible, then they would not get their principal back which would likely not happened. Many customers were never even told that Morgan Stanley was the issuer of the notes, let alone that the notes were just a structure products of Morgan Stanley invested into all kind of CDS, CDOs kind of derivatives.

We all know what happened next. These deceptively named notes were just synthetic bonds, and investors’ entire principal went to Morgan Stanley which bought sub-prime related CDOs and others high risk companies with bribery that rated as AAA. While BOCHK, the largest seller of all these structure products, rated the Octave Notes as high risk, pocketed tens of millions in underwriting fees on the Octave notes it helped to sale thru its bank sales managers. But these sale managers are now being sued in court for not telling their customers these notes were high risk for they got their shares of bonus for this mass mis-selling frauds.

Also BOCHK executives consistently issued training documents and CDROM to their sale managers for each products, encouraging their financial advisors to continue selling these notes to their best customers and lulling them into holding the notes even when alarm bells began to ring in the spring and summer of 2008. And let these sale managers to read the fine details themselves in English and all of them did not for BOCHK does not even hired any of their staffs with good English.

Sale managers have showed that in court that senior management told them to read the ratings agencies’ “A marks” for these linked seven companies and themselves had to reassured their customers that their due diligence were thorough in the training documents. Their bank managers did not have to check them but sale managers themselves counter-signed these risk forms for each others, these actions would pretend that the BOCHK did preformed the due diligence as required by SFC to sell the notes. Meanwhile, the higher-ups investment department of BOCHK must have tracked the market’s true measure of default risk: credit default swap spreads (in short, the price of insuring against hundred of companies default) without sale managers knew anything. Even as most major US companies’ spreads exploded, the executives apparently soft-pedaled the impact of this information, only to tell their sale managers that the Octave Notes were not linked to US sub-prime housing market in many cases and these were all lies. But to those who sold Octave Notes that had US housing market CDOs, the sale managers never remind their customers to sell off their Octave Notes.

According to these disillusioned sales mangers inside court, when they told their customers that these seven companies were A rated, the witness and the sales managers had proved that these sale manager sometimes used the BOCHK training documents photocopies that did not have disclaimer to hide the high risk nature of the Minibonds. In truth, they must have seen and worried about the parallels in court being asked by the judge how they can sell AAA rated CDOs but high risk to customers to be a secure investment. That why in many cases the Octave Notes victims of BOCHK never got the sale documents from BOCHK sales managers for these managers ticked the high risk box in the sale documents and refused to give the form to their customers. In some cases, the sales manager folded the sale form hiding the high risk ticks and put the form inside the envolope so to let the customers not to read the form when they get home.

Many BOCHK sale managers got their customers in 2008 for catastrophe while many other smaller banks stopped sales of Minibonds in 2008 and Octave Notes in 2007 due to high risk level but all these banks never warned their customers. For most, they bit on their company’s pitch hook, line and sinker. They remained in the dark until it was too late and now are being sued in courts.

About Bank of China bank frauds as conducted by Chan H F, Jeffrey / Bank of China

2012-01-21T07:22:00.000-08:00

In his letter about mis-selling of Octave Notes, the staff records from HKMA show that the seller was not bank staff of Bank of China after 2009, so the letter as attached shows no evidence of investigation of the cases by BOC Jeffrey Chan and no proof of investigation were done by Bank of China and the bank is committing bank frauds during the so called investigations.

There were no mentioning of suggestion of subscription of Trust fund with relavant documents before sales of false bonds.

There were no evidence the bank got true documents ready for sales of these products as no real documents were mentioned in the letters but copies.

There are no explaining of what is the risk of the products even in their reply letters and where were the relevant documents secretly hidden in the banks for CCB to search these document thru court order.

There were no mentioning of risk of product being told by any bank staffs against my complaint statement in the telephone with bank which they should have recording this year under the old and new codes by HKMA.

There are no mentioning of how the investigation told me the risk of the products being explained to me (thru hands, eyes or body?)

From my knowlege with other banks customers of many banks about their investigation of mis-selling of Minibonds and other related products, Bank of China replied letters are different from all other banks and these letters contained many evidence that these investigation people are still committing banks frauds on their own letters.

摩根士丹利

2012-01-21T07:19:00.001-08:00

不爆不爆還需爆！摩根士丹利網站在1月18日，即兔年的最後一個星期，宣布精債系列18和20已爆煲，這個當然不是一個意外的結果，而本網站也曾多次提醒苦主做好心理準備。這次爆煲，估計受波及的苦主有數百人，在債券稍後被正式贖回後，苦主只會得近乎零或甚至零，即是近乎100%本金的損失，對苦主過年將蒙上陰影。
總括來說，精債共18個系列中有一半爆煲！而全部爆煲事件都是在雙數的年份發生。系列17和19在沒有延期下以100%贖回而逃過一劫，可說是不幸中的大幸，現精債全部系列已基本上塵埃落定，繼迷債和星債的兩個烙印後，精債又成為苦主不能磨滅的烙印，悲哉！這都是拜兩個無能的監管機構所致。
兩廢柴監管機構只會浪費公帑，應做的事就完全沒有做，爆鑊就卸責並要苦主以一生的血汗錢來彌補她們的過失，還不知羞恥地說她們已為苦主爭取了不少賠償，簡直是香港之恥，實在是罪過！所謂慾知後世果，今生作者是，壞事多做必折福，切記！切記！

www.morganstanley.com/octavenotes/pdf/series19-20/Octave20_Notice_to_Distributors_180112.pdf

2012-01-21T07:09:00.000-08:00

www.morganstanley.com/octavenotes/pdf/series19-20/Octave20_Notice_to_Distributors_180112.pdf

www.morganstanley.com/octavenotes/pdf/series17-18/Octave18_Notice_to_Distributors_180112.pdf

2012-01-21T07:06:00.000-08:00

www.morganstanley.com/octavenotes/pdf/series17-18/Octave18_Notice_to_Distributors_180112.pdf

More on Octaves Notes related to HK banks frauds

２０１２年１日１３日唐英年評論雷曼事件

2012-01-18T06:56:00.000-08:00

２０１２年１月１３日梁振英評論雷曼事件

2012-01-18T06:54:00.000-08:00

２０１２年１月１３日何俊仁評論雷曼事件

2012-01-18T06:52:00.000-08:00

Structured Products

2012-01-17T07:43:00.001-08:00

Investment products that consist of different derivatives
are often called “Structured Products”. Equity-Linked Deposits, or Currency-Linked Deposits, are common examples of “Structured Products”. Most of these
structured products consist of a mixture of derivatives;
that is, a combination of different derivative products, some of which are “principle-protected”, and some of which are “non-principle protected”. Therefore, when you invest in “Structured Products” which are mixtures of derivatives,
a clear understanding of the detailed contract provisions is particularly important, for example, whether it is “principle-protected” or, “non-principle protected”? Of course, when trading structured products, you will always need to bear in mind the risk of significant market price fluctuations, which may result in losses.

Key Risks Associated with Derivatives

2012-01-17T07:24:00.000-08:00

In this section, we will explain the risks involved in derivative products. These are (1) Counterparty Risk, (2) Investment Risk of the Underlying Asset, (3) Early Redemption & Potential Capital Loss Risk, (4) Liquidity Risk, (5) Interest Rate Risk, and (6) Leverage Risk.
(1) Counterparty Risk
Derivative products are issued by third parties, such as listed companies or financial institutions, which we usually refer to as “issuers”. If these organizations encounter financial problems and this leads to a decrease in their credit rating, or if they collapse because of solvency problems, the derivative products’ values will be affected and may even lose all value.
(2) Investment Risk of the Underlying Asset
The prices of derivative products’ depend on the value of their underlying assets. Normally, fluctuations in the underlying assets’ price will directly affect the prices of their derivative products.
(3) Early Redemption & Potential Capital Loss Risk
Regardless of whether the investor chooses to redeem early, or the issuer has to terminate the products because of early redemption, this action may cause the investor to lose money because they may receive an amount less than they invested. Therefore, attention should be paid to the early redemption provision, and consider if it would affect the amount you invest.
(4) Liquidity Risk
Generally speaking, this risk is related to whether or not the derivative products can be easily sold and converted into cash. Before expiry, some derivatives products may be harder to sell and subsequently converted into cash. If it is not possible to sell them, you will have to wait until the derivative products reach their expiry date before you can get your funds back. If your funds have to be ready to use at any time, please pay special attention to this risk.
(5) Interest Rate Risk
The fifth risk is the Interest Rate Risk. Any derivative
products are ultimately exchanging an “asset” and “money”, or exchanging two currencies. The fact is that “money” is necessarily linked to interest rates; therefore, interest rate changes will affect the prices of derivative products.
(6) Leverage Risk
Consider that although you may only observe small movements in the stock market (or foreign exchange market), their derivative products’ prices may exhibit more drastic changes

Tilt Shift Ep001 Part2 移軸人生第一集佔領中環第2節

2012-01-15T07:52:00.000-08:00

Tilt Shift Ep001 Part1 移軸人生第一集佔領中環第一節

2012-01-15T07:47:00.000-08:00

Occupy Wall Street's Livestream Operators Arrested - National - The Atlantic Wire

2012-01-03T18:13:00.000-08:00

Occupy Wall Street's Livestream Operators Arrested - National - The Atlantic Wire

Occupy Wall Street is in the middle of one of its day-long marches in New York Tuesday, protesting the National Defense Authorization Act, but for those following along on the Global Revolution livestream, the real action is happening in the broadcast studio itself. That's because police have apparently just raided the Brooklyn studio of Globalrevolution.tv and taken some of the project's key volunteers into custody.

The raid Tuesday follows a notice to vacate that police delivered to the Bushwick studio on Monday night. Victoria Sobel, a Global Revolution volunteer, said Vlad Teichberg and a guy named Spike, both of whom maintain the live feed aggregator, had been taken into custody by police, along with four or five others.

In Manhattan, about 100 Occupy protesters (according to Animal New York's Twitter) marched to the offices of New York senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer, where they told stories and made impassioned cases for the wrongness of the NDAA. They plan a final rally at Grand Central station at 5 p.m., which should make for some fun interactions with hurried commuters. Lots of people were watching the proceedings on live feeds operated by Globalrevolution.tv, but now that site has stopped broadcasting the New York protest and is showing footage of Occupy Maui.

If you were following along earlier today, you may have been startled at about 1:45 p.m. to see the live feed cut away from the street-level action and to the face of Vlad Teichberg, one of the main organizers of Global Revolution. The new shot showed a large, graffittied space where Teichberg and a couple of colleagues were confronting a man they identified as the landlord, who had apparently broken in their door. They put the camera on him, he threatened to call the police, they said he had no right to come into the space by force, and he eventually left.

But Sobel said that was just the start of the day's conflict. Shortly after the confrontation, the police arrived. "Within the past hour, the police came in and removed people that were inside the studio," she said. "I believe the police just began knocking on the door and saying they would kick the door down and saying they would arrest people on the spot." The Global Revolution studio is now locked, Sobel said. The live feed has finished its Hawaiian broadcast and is playing a pre-recorded video. "The message is that even if they take the space, the [broadcast] will continue to be maintained," Sobel said. But right now, it seems to be out of commission.

政情：傻強死撐非金融獨大 - 東方日報

2011-12-31T16:45:00.000-08:00

政情：傻強死撐非金融獨大 - 東方日報

煲呔曾不只一次洋洋得意話，香港單靠金融業可以養活千萬人，其他行業畀佢講到好似不值一提咁。不過，財經事務及庫務局局長陳家強（傻強）尋日喺電台節目，疑似同煲呔曾唱反調，表明自己唔認同「金融獨大」嘅評論，反指此講法以偏概全，忽略咗金融業推動其他行業嘅發展喎。其實本港經濟「金融獨大」，甚至出現「金融霸權」，已經係不爭嘅事實，傻強點死撐都改變唔到。

不速之嚇　嚇窒龍豬

2011-12-21T15:56:00.000-08:00

2011年12月19日聲討唐英年造勢大會

2011-12-20T17:50:00.000-08:00

2011年12月19日聲討唐英年造勢大會

追擊示威　登門抗議　將墮法網

2011-12-20T16:15:00.001-08:00

追擊示威　登門抗議　將墮法網
纏擾法打壓社運尚方寶劍
2011年12月21日

【本報訊】政府建議訂立纏擾法，不但會影響新聞自由，社運人士亦指出，現時示威方式已有別於以前，不少都採取追擊或長期抗爭的做法，擔心纏擾惡法一旦生效，將成為政府打壓遊行示威的新工具，長遠會影響表達自由。政制及內地事務局副局長黃靜文昨仍「耍太極」，表示新聞採訪活動能否豁免，仍要諮詢公眾意見。　記者：譚靜雯
雷曼苦主過去幾年持續長期抗爭，不時到中環的銀行門口抗議、拉起橫額，或在銀行外播放錄音帶等，爭取賠償。雷曼苦主大聯盟前主席陳光譽表示，若政府訂立纏擾法，無疑是打壓言論及示威自由，「苦主受銀行銷售手法誤導，佢自己去銀行追討，表達不滿嘅機會、自由都唔得，真係好有問題。」

Savantas Policy Institute

2011-12-20T04:00:00.000-08:00

Savantas Policy Institute

a vote for Tang will undoubtedly be a vote for the status quo - whether in public sector management or distribution of interests within business, professional and welfare circles.

Yet, he is likely to rely on pork-barreling and the handout of favours to his core supporters (including those from the civil service and most important, the evil bankers and land developers that stole money from middle class to put into their pockets) to sustain his rule. It is unlikely that there would be any real effort to tackle Hong Kong’s “deep-rooted problems”, highlighted more than once by Premier Wen Jiabao.

The gap between the rich and poor is unlikely to ameliorate. Not will there be much hope for the young and restless.

How Corporations Destroyed American Democracy - Chris Hedges.

2011-12-18T16:12:00.000-08:00

Why TIME Chose 'The Protester' as 2011 Person of the Year

2011-12-17T07:36:00.000-08:00

"I'll Occupy" Recruitment Song: The 99 is Pissed and We Will Not Be Dism...

2011-12-16T17:48:00.000-08:00

唐氏綜合政語錄 - 唐英年政壇精采演說 Tang's speech

2011-12-10T07:00:00.000-08:00

Speech of evil behind Minibonds that allowed Bankers to sell derivative products as bonds thru Hong Kong banks.

Occupy Wall Street comes to Capitol Hill | Capitol Hill Blue

2011-12-08T08:34:00.000-08:00

Occupy Wall Street comes to Capitol Hill | Capitol Hill Blue

Occupy Wall Street activists brought their cause to Capitol Hill Tuesday, invading Senate and House offices and prompting the arrest of at least one protestor.

Capitol Police arrested a protestor in the office of Tea Party Republican Vicky Martzler (R-MO) on a charge of illegal entry but police reported office sit-ins at other offices, saying “we’ve been monitoring activity all over the Hill.

Other targets included Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH).

“We respect their right to voice their opinions,” a spokesman for Boehner told Capitol Hill Blue. “The Speaker understand the American people want a government that listens to their concerns and works together to help create a better environment for job growth.”

Boehner’s attitude wasn’t shared by Hartzler’s office where aides called Capitol police with anguished claims that a “mob” had invaded the Congresswoman’s office.

“Rep. Hartzler overreacted,” a Boehner aide confided to Capitol Hill Blue. “That was unfortunate.

The sit-ins were part of a planned “Take Back the Capitol” campaign that grew out of the “Occupy” movement that began on Wall Street in New York. The protestors planned to carry their campaign Wednesday to Washington’s K Street, home to the town’s lobbying industry.

AFP: Judge paves way for Lehman Brothers liquidation

2011-12-08T08:29:00.000-08:00

AFP: Judge paves way for Lehman Brothers liquidation

NEW YORK — A US judge on Tuesday approved plans to end Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy and move it toward liquidation, three years after the firm became a poster child for the global financial crisis.
Liquidators running what remains of the company said a US bankruptcy court in New York had approved a plan for the now infamous firm to exit Chapter 11 protection.
"This case has required compromise and common sense, diligence and determination, and the reconciliation of complex positions that at times seemed irreconcilable," said Bryan Marsal.
Although the firm collapsed with ignominy in 2008, its full dissolution depends on settling creditors' claims worth around $450 billion.
The judge's approval of a bankruptcy plan moves that process toward conclusion.
"Confirmation of this plan is a testament to the enormous efforts of the many stakeholders who recognized the value of an economic compromise plan and did yeoman's work to achieve it."
According to Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. the bankruptcy was "the largest and most complex in history," involving 7,000 legal entities in 40 countries, and 75 distinct court proceedings.

Los Angeles City Hall

2011-12-02T17:01:00.000-08:00

Movers And Sheriff’s Deputies Refuse Bank’s Order To Evict 103-Year-Old Atlanta Woman

2011-11-30T17:24:00.000-08:00

Movers And Sheriff’s Deputies Refuse Bank’s Order To Evict 103-Year-Old Atlanta Woman: pYesterday, a Deutsche Bank branch in Atlanta had requested the eviction of Vita Lee, a 103-year-old Atlanta woman, and her 83-year-old daughter. Both were terrified of being removed from their home of 53 years and had no idea where they’d go next. But when the movers hired by the bank and police were dispatched to [...]/p

立法會否決修訂專業投資者定義的議案

2011-11-30T07:50:00.000-08:00

立法會否決修訂專業投資者定義的議案
[16:15] 2011/11/30

【on.cc 東方互動專訊】立法會否決甘乃威議員提出，修訂證券及期貨規則有關「專業投資者」定義的決議案。修訂建議「專業投資者」為每年進行交易不少於40次，並且活躍交易2年以上。甘乃威指，部分雷曼迷債苦主因被界定為「專業投資者」，未能在回購方案中受惠。多名議員認為證監會正就修改定義作諮詢，反對有關修訂。

財經事務及庫務局局長陳家強反對修訂，指建議可能導致要在證券及期貨條例作相應修訂，且由於有關修訂會導致刑事制裁，草擬條文要與法定條文水平相符，以提供高度法律確定性

Occupy’s next frontier: Foreclosed homes

2011-11-30T07:47:00.000-08:00

Occupy’s next frontier: Foreclosed homes

匯賢智庫

2011-11-30T07:28:00.000-08:00

匯賢智庫

一個標榜人權法治的政黨最近在區選大敗，於是有人擔心港人的核心價值有變，不像過往一樣重視法治和人權。我認為並非如此，相信大部分港人仍深明法治乃香港繁榮穩定的基石，只是不願支持一些擴大少數人利益而影響大多數人以至整個社會的舉措。

法治（rule of law）無疑對社會十分重要，因此應該認真探究其意義，而非把「法治」當作教條或口號。我不曾修讀法律，幸好最近史丹福大學法學院院長Larry Kramer 教授訪港與校友交流，我也有參加。

史丹福法學院學生人數比哈佛法學院少，但總是名列美國最佳法學院三甲。Kramer 教授於布朗大學以優等成績畢業，之後在芝加哥大學完成法學博士課程。他專長研究憲法和法律史，亦為美國哲學學會成員，博學多才。

Kramer 教授跟校友談到法治的意義。他認為，法治對不同人來說具有不同意義（it means different things to different people），沒有一個放諸四海皆準的界定方法。然而，法治有幾個不可或缺的特質。首先，法治應保障人身安全（physical security）。去年史丹福法學院師生到東帝汶協助推動法律教育，體會到當地社會仍然不穩。東帝汶於2002年獨立後，流血事件隨處發生，軍人和警察未能維持社會秩序，士兵甚至索性躲在軍營不管。一方面，法治不彰，社會秩序難以維持；另一方面，局勢動盪，法治難以建立。法治制度和社會秩序（law and order）其實互為因果，缺一不可。

此外，法治應保障私有財產。現代英美法治萌芽，與產權概念有莫大關係。法治的作用之一，是保障私有財產和合約履行，促進經濟發展。

當然，法治亦用以保障其他權利。

至於包括哪一些權利，以及誰人享有哪些權利，則往往因時因地而異，但也有一些是基本人權，Kramer 教授特別強調不同性別都應享有與生俱來的同等權利（gender equality）。

若要實現法治，政府必須嚴謹遵守法律規範（legal norms），例如維護正當法律程序（due process），確保所有人獲得尋求公義的機會（access to justice）。早前有議員問到近年司法覆核所涉及的法援金額，一些法援個案訟費不菲。儘管如此，為了確保缺乏經濟能力的人可以尋求公義，法援制度有必要保留。不說不知，原來訴訟繁多的美國在這方面的表現並不理想，僅處於已發展國家的中下游。

匯賢智庫

2011-11-30T07:24:00.000-08:00

匯賢智庫

人權法治面面觀（下）

作者:葉劉淑儀女士
來源:明報
2011年11月27日
早前，史丹福法學院院長Larry Kramer 教授訪港，分享他對法治的看法。席上有人問到，普通法（common law）和大陸法（civil law，或稱continental law）有何分別。
有些人誤以為普通法比大陸法更符合法治精神。Kramer 教授指出，兩大法系在這方面並無分別。1066年，法國諾曼第公爵攻佔英格蘭，由於管治者遠少於當地人（即Anglo-Saxons），不能把歐洲大陸的法制硬搬到當地，於是在建立法制時沿用許多當地慣例，成為普通法系的雛形。扎根於當地人習俗的法律便逐漸發展為普通法。

院長認為，不論行哪一種法制，若要建立健全法治，均需從文化和教育著手，法律專業教育是極其重要的一環。基於這個信念，史丹福法學院到發展中國家協助推行法律教育，為當地培訓法律人員。Kramer 教授強調，到外國參與發展法治的項目時，絕不能抱持高高在上的心態，因為每個地方都有其獨特的歷史和價值觀，法律制度也不可能一成不變，所以應該保持求同存異的態度，和當地人衷誠合作。這位法律學者的確胸襟廣闊。
另外，Kramer 教授深信法律人員需要跨學科知識。我非常同意。在美國，大學生通常先修讀哲學、政治科學等本科課程，奠定廣闊的人文學科基礎後，方才接受法律教育。例如要了解英美法治精神，不得不看兩位英國思想家的著作。霍布斯（Thomas Hobbes）在1651 年寫成《利維坦》，指強大的政府是維持社會秩序所需的「必然之惡」；而洛克（John Locke）則認為，政府只有能夠保障個人的自然權利，方可維持其合法性。這兩套學說闡明了法治的兩個主要作用——保障權利和維持秩序。

除此之外，科技知識對法律人員也有用處。舉例說，如果對科技發展一無所知，又怎能處理日趨複雜的知識產權糾紛？因此，Kramer 教授擔任史丹福法學院院長後，改革學院的法學博士課程，加入生物工程、環境科學、電腦科學等元素。

在香港以及許多地區，有志投身法律界的年青人，通常於中學畢業後就修讀法學士。Kramer 教授和我都認為，如果資源許可，應該讓大學生先修讀其他科目，本科畢業後才進法學院。律師處理的不光是法律問題，也是複雜的社會問題、家庭問題或商業問題。因此，累積一些社會經驗後，方考取律師資格，實較為理想。

訂立《競爭法》刻不容緩

2011-11-30T07:21:00.001-08:00

訂立《競爭法》刻不容緩
香港在英治年代奉行自由主義的管治哲學，對市場競爭採行「放任政策」，政府的角色是管得愈少便愈好。

經歷一百五十多年，英國本土的「自由放任」政策因為不受干預，造成的社會貧富差距已惡化到侵害政治安定，政府於是進行有計劃有系統的「社會福利措施」。

可是「放任政策」一發不可收拾，整個西方國家均爭先恐後效法，觸發了惡化競爭。1914 爆發的第一次世界大戰的其中一個根源，正是因為各國抗拒他國進入本國市場，紛紛制訂「關稅壁壘」，令到市場受到擠壓，甚而窒息；一些國家便希望藉戰爭打敗對手，佔有其市場。這辦法最終導致兩敗俱傷，1918 年只好匆匆停戰。

「消費恐龍」吞噬世界

在此之後，惡性競爭仍然有增無減，到1929 年發生的世界性「經濟大蕭條」，市場徹底崩毀，連最基本的糧食市場也全面停頓。這一下，世界被迫非要修正自由主義與其「自由放任」政策不可，由美國總統羅斯褔領導改革的「新政」（New Deal）終於出爐。在此改革下，原來政府採行「最少干預」的原則，修改為「在適當的時候作出適當的干預」。

不過，自由市場的困境由政府全不干預走到適當干預，由壓低工資來提高利潤，到提高工資擴大市場的改革，是否已經出現困境？美國與歐洲的金融破產危機，是全民大消費的惡果。問題是，富國破產，卻要由經濟落後的窮國救援，這豈非本末倒置？

了解過世界大局後，現在倒過來看看香港的「自由主義」。這主義源自英美，英美已經有了連串改革，香港卻依然給佛利民（Milton Friedman）譽為「自由市場的最後堡壘」。乍聽起來，不禁令人飄飄然。

當全世界都正在罵「芝加哥經濟學派」的今天，認為自「新政」之後再把「自由主義」還魂的正是這門學派，它提倡盡一切能量擺脫政府對經濟的干預，無孔不入地開發消費市場，終於把「消費恐龍」養大到為害世界。問題是，在全球「消費恐龍」再度絕後，香港仍能成為這恐龍的最後樂土嗎？

答案其實毋須多言。

香港討論制訂《競爭法》已有多年，就是始終議而不決。自「雷曼兄弟」這家奉行市場競爭、不擇手段的投資銀行闖下大禍後，港人受其害者的人數位居亞太地區的首位，有超過四萬多名香港投資者購買二百億港元與「雷曼兄弟」有關的結構性金融產品而蒙受巨大損失。

立法瞄準失序行業

這說明香港早已成為「經濟放任」之都，成為各行各業投機取巧的大本營；而普羅市民對「行業霸權」、「大財團」的印象也愈來愈差，甚至覺得政府偏向財閥利益。

歐美國家早已對此有所警惕，相繼制訂各款規範「競爭」的法律，例如美國著名的《反壟斷法》早於十九世紀末已開始一系列立法。雖然香港奉行自由貿易，但面對不斷增添的市場壟斷風險，以及由此伴隨而來的沸騰民怨，訂立《競爭法》實已刻不容緩。

制訂《競爭法》當務之急，須作針對性立法，找出市場競爭最失序的行業，訂出公平競爭應有的法則。過去長期以來，有目共賭的競爭失序行業，如超市壟斷、地產發展、金融投機、公共交通、飲食業集團化，以及眾多服務業的壟斷等等，都是由財雄勢大的集團「淘汰」同行，最後壟斷市場，對消費者予取予攜。

因此，如果能針對性地訂立《競爭法》，限制業界不理性地牟取暴利的現象，雖未必能一下子徹底解決，但長遠而言，香港社會和市民將會因此而得到一個更公平合理的營商競爭環境，以及一個更有選擇、更有活力的多元消費市場。

作者為大舜政策研究中心智囊

周廷鍔

PEACEFUL FEMALE PROTESTORS PENNED IN THE STREET AND MACED!- #OccupyWallS...

2011-11-27T18:21:00.000-08:00

失職唐英年

2011-11-25T07:30:00.000-08:00

唐英年有很多財金界朋友接獲的21,836宗雷曼兄弟相關投訴個案當中，631宗(包括迷你債券的投訴)正進行紀律程序；133宗個案的調查工作已完成，正在審議中；餘下的93宗個案仍在調查中，財金界重量級人物支持唐英年，至銀行將複雜的結構性衍生產品推銷給不合適的銀行存款客戶所至；是銀行在銷售過程中系統性地違反證券銷售的《操守準則》所至，也是證監會及金管局的監管失職所至。

93宗雷曼兄投訴個案仍待處理

2011-11-25T07:26:00.000-08:00

【on.cc 東方互動專訊】金管局宣布，就接獲的21,836宗雷曼兄弟相關投訴個案當中，超過99%已完成調查工作，包括逾1萬5千宗個案達成和解協議；超過2千9百宗透過加快投訴處理程序解決；逾2千2百宗證據不足；631宗(包括迷你債券的投訴)正進行紀律程序；133宗個案的調查工作已完成，正在審議中；餘下的93宗個案仍在調查中。

New Regime for Ascertaining Evidential Requirements for Professional Investor Status

2011-11-25T05:50:00.000-08:00

The Securities and Futures (Professional Investor) (Amendment) Rules 2011 (the “ Amended Rules”), which will come into effect on 16 December 2011 , allows greater flexibility for market participants to ascertain whether an investor meets the relevant assets or portfolio threshold so as to qualify as a professional investor.

Introduction

The definition of professional investor and the relevant evidential requirements to ascertain whether an investor meets the assets or portfolio requirements are mainly set out in the Securities and Futures (Professional Investor) Rule s (Cap.571D) (the “Rules”).

On 9 September 2011, the Securities and Futures Commission (the “SFC”) gazetted the
Amended Rules to implement proposals to refine the evidential requirements for ascertaining whether a person meets the relevant assets or portfolio threshold so as to qualify as a professional investor.

The Amended Rules were tabled before the Legislative Council for negative vetting on 12 October 2011 and will come into effect on 16 Decemb er 2011. This article sets out the major amendments under the Amended Rules.

The Consultation Paper issued by the SFC and the Amended Rules

The proposals under the Amended Rules are generally based on the proposals made under
and the public comments received on the Consultatio n Paper on the Evidential Requirements under the Securities and Futures (Professional Inve stor) Rules (the “Consultation Paper ”) issued by the SFC on 4 October 2011. The Consultat ion Paper includes the following proposals:-

1. adoption of a principles-based approach;
2. preservation of existing methods set out in sect ions 3(a) to 3(c) of the Rules;
3. use of “relevant date” as the time reference for ascertaining whether an investor meets the relevant assets or portfolio threshold to quali fy as a professional investor; and
4. extension of the scope of section 3(d) of the Rules.

Principles-based approach

The purpose of the adoption of a principles-based a pproach is to allow market participants to use any methods that are appropriate in the circumstances to satisfy themselves that an investor meets the relevant assets or portfolio thr eshold at the relevant date to qualify as a professional investor. Under the Amended Rules, market participants will be allowed to use any methods to ascertain whether an investor has th e required assets or portfolio so as to qualify as a professional investor in addition to the existing methods as set out in sections 3(a) to 3(c) of the Rules as long as those methods are appropriate in the circumstances and proper records of the assessment process are kept.

In addition, the SFC will not rule out the possibility of accepting self-certification or declaration by an investor as one of the assessing methods. However, this should be restricted only to occasions that are appropriate in the circumstances.

Preservation of existing methods

The existing evidential requirements as to how the value of the assets or portfolio is ascertained under sections 3(a) to 3(c) of the Rules, which include audited financial statements, custodian statements or third party certificates depending on whether the investor in question is a trust corporation, an individual, a corporation or partnership (“Traditional Documentary Proof ”), are to be preserved.

Use of “relevant date” as the time reference

Under the Amended Rules, the SFC uses the “relevant date” as the time reference for
ascertaining whether a high net worth professional investor meets the relevant assets or portfolio threshold. “Relevant date” is defined und er section 2 of the Rules.
For market participants using the Traditional Docum entary Proof to ascertain whether an investor meets the relevant assets or portfolio thr eshold, the Traditional Documentary Proof can be issued some time before the “relevant date”. However, it should be noted that for market participants who elect to use other evidenti ary methods to ascertain whether an investor is to be qualified as a professional inves tor, they should gather documents showing that the investor has the requisite assets or portf olio as at the “relevant date”.

Such amendment is in line with the principles-based approach as it creates flexibility for market participants to take steps that are appropri ate in the circumstances to satisfy themselves that their clients have the requisite as sets or portfolio levels at the relevant date to qualify as professional investors.

Extension of the scope of section 3(d) of the Rules

The scope of section 3(d) of the Rules is extended to include any corporation which is wholly owned by any one or more of any trust corporation a s described in section 3(a); any individual as described in section 3(b); or any cor poration or partnership as described in section (c).

Conclusion

As the principles-based approach is adopted, market participants enjoy higher degree of flexibility to use any methods that are appropriate in the circumstances to satisfy themselves that an investor meets the relevant assets or portf olio threshold at the relevant date. The Amended Rules also extend the scope of investors th at can be qualified as a professional investor.

Reforms to Public Offers of Unlisted Structured Products Regime

2011-11-25T05:35:00.000-08:00

Introduction

Following the Securities and Futures Commission (“SFC”)’s publication of the Consultation Paper and Consultation Conclusions on Possible Reforms to the Prospectus Regime in the Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32) (“ CO”) and the Offers of Investments Regime in the Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571) (“ SFO”) in October 2009 and April 2010 respectively, the Securities and Futures and Companies Legislation (Structured Products Amendment) Ordinance 2011 (“ the Amendment Ordinance ”) was passed at its Third Reading by the Legislative Council on 4 May 2011 and came into effect on 13 May 2011.

Regulation of Unlisted Structured Products under the SFO

Before the Amendment Ordinance was enacted, public offers of unlisted structured products in the form of a share or debenture are regulated under the CO regime, while public offers of unlisted structured products in a legal form other than a share or debenture are regulated under the offers of investments regime in Part IV of the SFO. After the enactment of the Amendment Ordinance, public offers of all unlisted structured products are now regulated under the SFO regardless of their legal form, while the offers of ordinary shares, preference shares and plain vanilla debentures (e.g. fixed rate bonds, zero coupon bonds, promissory notes) will continue to be regulated by the CO prospectus regime so long as they do not contain any derivative element.

New Definition of Structured Product

Under the new definition of “structured product” in the SFO, “structured product” means:
(a) an instrument under which some or all of the return or amount due or the method of settlement is determined by reference to one or more of-
(i) changes in the price, value or level of any type or combination of types of
securities, commodity, index, property, interest ra te, currency exchange rate
or futures contract;
(ii) changes in the price, value or level of any ba sket of more than one type, or
any combination of types, of securities, commodity, index, property, interest
rate, currency exchange rate or futures contract; or
(iii) the occurrence or non-occurrence of any specified event(s);

(b) a regulated investment agreement; or
(c) any interests, rights or property prescribed, or of a class or description prescribed, by notice under section 392 of the SFO as being regarded as structured products in accordance with the notice.
Examples of “structured products” under the new definition would include equity linked notes, credit linked notes, equity linked deposits and equity linked instruments.

The following are specifically excluded from the definition of “structured products”:

1. a debenture issued for capital fund raising purposes that is convertible into or
exchangeable for shares of the debenture issuer or its related corporation;
2. a subscription warrant issued for capital fund raising purposes that entitles the holder to subscribe for shares of the warrant issuer or its related corporation;
3. a collective investment scheme (i.e. funds);
4. a depositary receipt;
5. floating rate note(s);
6. employee incentive schemes; and
7. insurance contracts in relation to any class of insurance business specified in the First Schedule to the Insurance Companies Ordinance (Cap. 41). SFC’s Authorisation Required

Under the new Section 104A of the SFO (which is similar to Section 104 of the SFO for
collective investment schemes), all unlisted structured products that are to be offered to the retail public would need to obtain SFC authorisation. SFC authorisation will depend on compliance with the codes and guidelines published by the SFC, which include Section IV (Code on Unlisted Structured Investment Products) of the SFC Handbook for Unit Trusts and Mutual Funds, Investment-Linked Assurance Schemes a nd Unlisted Structured Investment Products.

CO Safe Harbours No Longer Available

Following the amendments to the SFO and the CO, the two commonly relied on “minimum
denomination HK$500,000” safe harbour and the “no more than 50 persons” private
placement safe harbour contained in the CO would no longer be available to public offers of unlisted structured products. This has caused uncertainty as to what constitutes “public offers” as the SFC has refused to give guidance on this matter.

Available Exemptions After Amendment

Professional Investors Exemption

Although the CO safe harbours are no longer available, there remains the professional
investors exemption under Section 103(3)(k) of the SFO which exempts any advertisement, invitation or document made in respect of securitie s or structured products, or interests in any collective investment scheme, that are or are intended to be disposed of only to Professional Investors.

Authorised Financial Institutions Exemption

Any advertisement, invitation or document made in respect of the issue of a currency-linked instrument, an interest rate-linked instrument or a currency and interest rate-linked instrument by an authorised financial institution ( Section 103(3)(ea) of the SFO) are also exempted as they are generally regarded as banking transactions or treasury instruments of banks.

慎防虛擬資本過度膨脹

2011-11-24T23:32:00.000-08:00

支持唐英年做特首任志剛對商業銀行金融產品的監管最為寬鬆，使海外「虛擬資本」的規模不斷膨脹，直接影響香港金融風險不斷增加

作為亞洲國際金融中心的香港，近年來「主體經濟」缺乏發展動力，反而投機性的「虛擬經濟」活動加劇，使「虛擬資本」的規模不斷膨脹，直接影響金融體系的穩定，風險也不斷增加。

銀行所發行的有價證券，例如窩輪、牛熊證、高息票據（ELN）、債務抵押證券（CDO）等，絕大部分都是一種「虛擬資本」，因為它們沒有黃金保證，也沒有資產作抵押，便能夠以「紙製複本」或「電子複本」不斷地進行複製，然後向投資者銷售。

「虛擬資本」的價格是由人們的「心理預期」所產生的，例如人們對股票看漲，股票的價格就會上升，從而衍生出股票期權、指數及期貨等合約，即同一套的「資產」其相對應的複本就有幾千套或幾萬套的「虛擬資本」，並可以在市場上進行交易。所以，對於銀行來說，創造及複製「虛擬資本」是幾乎沒有成本的，絕對是一種高回報的生意。

金融波動影響全局

所以，投資於窩輪、牛熊證、高息票據或債務抵押債券等，並不是投資於股票、黃金、債券等資產，而只不過是持有一種「虛擬價值」的權益。例如「窩輪」的相對應資產是股票，如果恒指上升，持有「認購證」就有錢賺，持有「認沽證」則會輸錢。

但是，由於「虛擬資本」只是由信用制度來支持，當市場上產生「信用恐慌」時，「虛擬資本」的價格就會發生波動，如果「信用恐慌」越滾越大，局部的金融波動，就會演變為全局的信用危機。如果銀行倒閉（例如雷曼兄弟破產），「虛擬資本」便會一文不值。

「信用危機」和「信用膨脹」在資本主義制度中，是一種周期性的循環。在「信用膨脹」時，「虛擬資本」是以倍數地增值及複製，把「虛擬資本」的價格推高到無以為繼的境地，並引發投機泡沫破滅，從而產生「信用危機」，「虛擬資本」的價格急跌及萎縮，並最後造成金融局面一片恐慌，銀行倒閉或公司破產，市場在付出巨大代價之後才恢復平衡。虛擬經濟是一個龐大的經濟體系，它包括銀行業、保險業、證券業、債券業及信貸業等，其間存在密切的債權及債務的聯繫，一旦某個金融機構出現問題，就會形成一種「連鎖反應」，從而引發金融危機的爆發。儘管金融危機的誘因和規模不同，主要都是由「虛擬資本」的過度膨脹所形成的。

追求快速致富是發生金融狂熱的原因，歷史的記載一次又一次地證明，投資者常常是非理性地追求「虛擬財富」。「虛擬財富」就是由虛擬資本所創造的一種「紙上財富」，它是基於一種心理預期和賭博心理所產生的。在相反的心理預期未形成以前，市場上就不乏「接棒者」，不少人就已經把風險拋諸腦後。

雷曼迷債教訓慘痛

雖然許多香港人在遭受「雷曼迷債」的慘痛教訓後，的確對金融投資變得更加小心謹慎了，可是一旦新的「投資熱」出現時，就無疑會把謹慎拋到九霄雲外，而近期的窩輪及牛熊證熱炒，就是一個明顯的例子。

本港窩輪及牛熊證的近期成交，竟然佔大市的41.37%，創下歷史新高，使香港成為全球最大和最多散戶參與「虛擬資本」買賣的地區。炒家只需用少量金錢，便可進行相關的買賣，也不用付印花稅，透過槓桿作用，有可能使回報高達5 至10 倍，甚至50 倍，這完全符合散戶「以小博大」的心態。

但是，窩輪和牛熊證不同於股票，它們只不過是一種「虛擬價值」的證券，股票跌價仍可以長，指望有日反彈回升。但是，「虛擬資本」的交易是有條件限制，例如發行商會設定回收價，如果市場在到期日前觸及回收價，牛熊證就會淪為一張廢紙。今年9 月26 日，恒指突破17000 點，就有7.9 億元的「牛證」化為烏有，發行商則袋袋平安。

截至今年8 月底，窩輪和牛熊證的數目分別達到4876 和652 隻，再加上ETF、ELN、Accumulator 和各式各樣的投資基金，使香港變成一個國際的「金融賭城」，投機活動不斷增加。

控制資本健全制度

銀行為了追求快速的盈利增長，也拋棄傳統業務中的謹慎原則，從而參與更高風險的「虛擬資本」之創造、分配、交易及銷售。「虛擬資本」的種類及規模之不斷發展，各種金融服務機構如雨後春筍，不斷湧現，誘使更多人對「虛擬財富」的追求，風險不斷增加。

香港目前是全球金融市場最自由的地方，對金融產品的監管最為寬鬆，因而吸引大批海外「對沖基金」的進駐，在市場上興波作浪。今年10 月1 日的黃金周，港股激烈震盪，先是大跌8%，而後又大漲9%，這種大上大落的波動，極容易造成金融體系的不穩定。

面對投機活動的不斷增加，有業界代表建議向窩輪及牛熊證等徵收「交易稅」，與股票印花看齊，同時要求禁止沽空，以防止港股繼續下滑。

但是，徵收「印花稅」就等於趕散戶離場，因窩輪及牛熊證等，都是他們目前唯一可以作為對沖風險的工具。此外，韓國在禁止沽空後，股票市場更是一片死寂。所以，港府最重要的措施，就是要控制「虛擬資本」的繼續膨脹，這包括：（一）降低及控制衍生工具的槓桿比例；（二）實施保證金制度，使發行商不能濫發證券；（三）禁止商業銀行向散戶銷售複雜而高風險的金融產品；（四）對大額沽空的交易徵收「交易稅」，以防止大戶的大量沽空；（五）要求發證的銀行提供資產抵押品，不能隨便複製虛擬資本。

作者為亞洲知識管理學院院長

Tang and Yam both allow derivative products to be sold in HK without supervisions in HK banks

2011-11-24T16:23:00.000-08:00

Both Tang and Yam were involved in sex scandal during the time they were working together and so Yam supports Tang the man, says Yam

Diana Lee HK Standard

Friday, November 25, 2011

Henry's the man for the top job. That's the verdict of Hong Kong's ex-banking chief Joseph Yam Chi-kwong on the SAR's next leader.
Henry Tang Ying-yen is an experienced helmsman who can steer the city through possibly stormy waters should he become the next chief executive, the former Hong Kong Monetary Authority chief said yesterday.

But Yam dismissed suggestions he may be appointed financial secretary, saying he is not prepared to take a full- time job in the private or public sector now he is retired.

"But if I have the opportunity, or if he seeks my advice, I would be willing to play a supporting role in his election campaign and his policymaking," Yam said.

"After all, my heart is with Hong Kong and the interests of the people of Hong Kong."

Yam - speaking after being conferred with an honorary doctorate in business administration by Shue Yan University - spent three minutes lauding Tang and pointing to the "seamless" cooperation they enjoyed when Tang was the financial secretary.

"He is a talented leader, knows how to choose the right person for the right post, has foresight and will be fully prepared to tackle any unexpected crisis," said Yam.

"More importantly, he is prepared to tackle difficult situations. I am sure he will be a leader who can fight for, protect and enrich public interest.

"In making and executing policy, Tang is also experienced and patient when solving controversial issues, facilitating consensus and arriving at the best deci
sion in the interests of the people of Hong Kong. "Also, I am confident he can lead civil servants in properly carrying out policies. He is a man of vision - especially global vision - and is experienced in handling crises." Yam agreed with Tang's earlier warning that Hong Kong might feel the impact of financial instability in Europe and the United States in the years ahead.

"Of course, I do not want to see Hong Kong in danger or crisis. But should this happen we need a helmsman to lead us through such turbulence. We need a stable, talented helmsman to lead Hong Kong. I believe Tang is such a person and I fully support him," Yam said.

He played down Tang's low popularity ratings as a period that every responsible leader has to go through, and dismissed suggestions that Tang was successful as a financial secretary only because the economy at the time was thriving.

"Such remarks are an underestimation of Tang's ability," Yam said. "You can look at his track record to find out how much he did. Also remember that it is always better to be prepared, and when he was the financial secretary we did many things to prepare for any unexpected crisis."

Yam's endorsement came a day after HSBC's local taipan Peter Wong Tung-shun backed Tang's proposed candidacy.

In response to the remarks by Yam, a cheerful Tang said they had been friends for many years. "We also had seamless cooperation with the Monetary Authority, therefore we also had team chemistry."

Tang refused to say if Yam would be a good financial secretary, saying he had first to focus on his election campaign.

Tang has yet to announce his candidacy in the chief executive election. Leung Chun-ying, former convener of the Executive Council, is set to throw his hat into the ring on Sunday.

Letter to HK LEGCO about cover up of banks misselling frauds

2011-11-23T03:01:00.000-08:00

THE BEST VIDEO ON "OCCUPY THE WORLD"

2011-11-22T16:04:00.000-08:00

Analysis: Wall St. banks wonder if they are shrinking for good

2011-11-22T04:16:00.000-08:00

By Jed Horowitz | Reuters –

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street bankers are used to vicious swings in fortunes - it is in their DNA. Make a killing in the good times, they say, because markets may turn against you tomorrow.
The job losses, bonus cuts and clampdown on the size of trading books this time around, though, seem different. It's not just the euro zone crisis, weak loan demand and volatile trading that has hurt profits, but a raft of new and proposed rules aimed at curbing risk and its sometime partner, reward.
Bankers say they can wait out the cyclical economic forces, but they're choking on fears that the new rules will fundamentally change their business models.
"We are constantly reassessing whether we're experiencing something that is secular or cyclical and under what conditions we would act to shrink or change businesses," Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman said in a quarterly earnings call last month, adding: "We're not myopically focused on our size."
An admission from the head of the second-biggest U.S. investment bank that he's okay with shrinking is an extraordinary recognition of regulatory and market realities, said Roy Smith, a former Goldman Sachs partner who teaches management practice at NYU's Stern School of Business.
A shrinking bank model has huge implications for many things in business - from how speculative and liquid the world's capital markets will remain to whether thousands of freshly minted MBAs -- not to mention veteran bankers -- will find or keep Wall Street jobs.
Gorman didn't expand on what he may do, but Morgan Stanley has joined other banks in outsourcing business functions, firing employees and slimming bonus pools.
He has also been trimming the bank's reliance on capital-consuming capital markets businesses by expanding his bet on the more stable world of old-fashioned retail brokerage. Fees from advising rich people on investments now fuel more than 40 percent of Morgan Stanley's revenue and should grow as the firm acquires full ownership of a joint venture Gorman engineered in 2009 with Citigroup's Smith Barney wealth unit.
UBS AG has gone further. Following some $50 billion of trading losses during the financial crisis and a rogue-trading scandal earlier this year that cost it $2.3 billion, the Swiss banking giant is reverting to a model in which investment banking and trading are becoming adjuncts to its wealth management operations.
Last Thursday, UBS said it will slash risky assets by almost half and cut its return-on-equity target to 12 to 17 percent for 2013 from its earlier 15 to 20 percent range in the face of tough new capital rules and turbulent markets.
"We have chosen to substantially reduce the risk profile of the bank by exiting and downsizing businesses which are not value added to our client franchise or deliver unattractive risk-adjusted returns," said UBS boss Sergio Ermotti.
CAPITAL CONSTRICTION
The number of new rules confronting banks is substantial.
Under new global capital rules, banks have to raise higher levels of equity to absorb potential losses from their risky assets. That can be achieved by either issuing stock and diluting current shareholders, or by reducing those risky assets, or a combination of the two. Either way, the chance of big returns (and big losses) is reduced.
For the biggest the restrictions are most onerous. Global regulators earlier this month named 29 banks so important to the world's financial system that they must have more capital and closer surveillance than rivals. The list, led by 17 lenders from Europe and eight from the United States, includes Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup.
The Volcker Rule embedded in last year's far-reaching U.S. financial reform law, the Dodd-Frank bill, is also reducing banks' profit potential by curbing trading for their own accounts, and limiting both their derivatives operations and ability to own private equity investments.
Banks with big retail lending operations face added constraints from recent rules restricting some credit card charges and capping "swipe fees" that merchants pay banks every time a customer buys something with a debit card.
Yet another threat is the "living wills" that big banks operating in the U.S. will have to write by the middle of next year. They will be used as blueprints for guiding regulators on how to break up the firms if they get into severe trouble. If unsatisfied with a plan, regulators can tell a bank to reorganize or even sell off certain lines of business.
Altogether it's a new world of lower risk and lower potential for reward for almost all banks.
"If you return banks to more fundamental products and edge away from risk, it likely means lower income," said Derrick Cephas, a partner at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP who served as superintendent of banks in New York from 1991 to 1994.
Behind the scenes, banks are telling policymakers that the new regime could make them more like low-risk utilities, which would reduce their ability to lend to businesses and consumers and keep global markets liquid.
Of course, Wall Street is no stranger to saber-rattling when government threatens more constraints, but veteran bank advisers say it's more than posturing this time.
"Banks are supposed to be financial intermediaries and risk takers, but it's almost impossible to conceive how they are going to be able to do that or return to former levels of profitability," said Robert Tortoriello, a partner at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton who specializes in banks' securities activities. "The weight of thousands of pages of new statutes and rules adds layers of cost and complexity that I haven't seen in 37 years of practice."
The new regulatory regime affects not only big firms but also regional and even community banks whose capital conditions are being closely scrutinized.
For the big Wall Street players, the Dodd-Frank derivatives regulations are another major profit vacuum that is expected to lower fees charged for derivatives trades and increase competition.
"I've never seen anything like this," said Thomas Vartanian, a partner at law firm Dechert LLP, who was general counsel of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corp, an agency that backed savings bank deposits, during the thrift crisis of the early 1990s. "The convergence of regulatory, government and economic forces is unprecedented."
BACKLASH
Critics say big banks have only themselves to blame for the new order. For thirty years, with encouragement from central bankers such as former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, the banks built massive trading inventories and profits on the misbegotten theory that they were the "real" economy, said Richard Bernstein, former chief investment strategist of Merrill Lynch.
"Wall Street sort of lost its way," Bill Gross, co-founder of Pacific Investment Management Co., said at a Charles Schwab conference this month. "Investment banking became a function not of allocating capital properly, but levering capital and levering the returns on capital as opposed to transferring capital to productive industries."
Sallie Krawcheck, who was fired as Bank of America's wealth management chief in September, minced no words at a securities industry conference two weeks ago. "Years and years ago, the markets went from being arenas for capital allocation to being betting mechanisms," she said. "We need to step back."
And while a slump in bank share prices can be partly pinned on the euro crisis, the much more restrictive playing field the banks face has been discouraging investors.
The world's ten largest banks that are involved significantly in capital markets activities such as trading have lost about $250 billion of market capitalization since March 30, according to NYU's Smith, as their stock prices have plunged to an average of half book value. Large banks for most of the past decade have traded at a premium to book value.
As of September 30, Bank of America was changing hands at 29 percent of its book value, Citigroup at 42 percent, Morgan Stanley at 43 percent and Goldman Sachs at 72 percent.
Uneasy bank investors are not biting at the values but instead questioning "the core earnings power for the industry," Guy Moszkowski, head of Bank of America Merrill Lynch's financial institution equity research group, said at the company's annual bank conference last Tuesday.
CUTTING THE CORE
Whether the problems are systemic or cyclical, banks are resorting to a familiar short-term solution: cost-cutting.
Bank of America Corp., saddled not only by new capital and consumer protection rules but a warehouse of bad loans and lawsuits, has been selling "noncore" businesses such as credit card operations outside the U.S. and begun a program to excise 30,000 jobs.
"We continue to focus our franchise greatly, narrowing in scope, making sure that everything we do is core," Brian Moynihan, chief executive of Bank of America, the second biggest U.S. commercial bank, said at last Tuesday's conference. "It won't be quite the same as it was at Bank of America and around the industry."
Some bankers, to be sure, say the setbacks won't be as enduring as their colleagues fear.
"We're managing our costs, obviously, but we're not thinking necessarily that there's such a radical, structural change," Goldman Sachs Group Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein said at the Merrill conference. "We think these businesses are cyclical."
Goldman, which boasted eye-popping returns on equity of more than 33 percent in 2006 and 2007, had a net loss last quarter that shaved its return to shareholders over the first nine months of 2011 to 6 percent. It is now seeking to cut $1.4 billion of annual expenses and is laying off about 1,000 of its 34,000 employees.
Blankfein insisted at the Merrill conference that Goldman can still thrive by using its advisory and market-making skills to help its clients.
Even banks like Goldman and Morgan Stanley with strong advisory muscle, however, are bracing for change.
"The business model is changing and everyone has to figure out how they'll make money in the future," said Vartanian, the former regulator. "Many old avenues of income and capital have been shut off."
(Reporting by Jed Horowitz; Editing by Martin Howell)

Obama deploying 20,000 troops inside U.S. to prepare for "event"

2011-11-20T23:10:00.000-08:00

雷曼苦主「佔領銀行街」第36日舉辦"中環大遊行"(5)途經「中國銀行(香港)

2011-11-20T23:03:00.000-08:00

雷曼苦主「佔領銀行街」第36日舉辦"中環大遊行"(5)途經「上海商業銀行」

2011-11-20T23:01:00.000-08:00

雷曼苦主「佔領銀行街」第36日舉辦"中環大遊行"(5)途經「上海商業銀行」

U.S. money funds seen at risk from Europe's debt storm

2011-11-20T08:11:00.001-08:00

U.S. money funds seen at risk from Europe's debt storm
By Mark Felsenthal | Reuters – 3 hrs ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - When Lehman Brothers collapsed in 2008 and shattered the belief that U.S. money market funds would never "break the buck," Washington rushed to limit the damage.
But as Europe's debt crisis threatens to put the U.S. financial system under strain again, U.S. policymakers are worried they cannot turn to those same, impromptu tools to shore up the $2.6 trillion money markets industry.
"We've done a lot to prepare the banking sector," Jeffrey Lacker, president of the Richmond Federal Reserve Bank, said on Wednesday. "I'm less confident about the money market funds and their ability to weather major problems at European institutions."
Senior U.S. officials are alarmed by the deepening of the European debt crisis. Its spread to Italy, the euro zone's third-biggest economy, is seen as inevitably leading to spillovers across the Atlantic, in part through the holdings of money market funds of European securities.
Many investors believe money funds are as safe as lower-yielding bank accounts even though it is common knowledge that that they are not backed by the federal insurance that protects bank deposits.
During the chaos of 2008, dozens of money funds struggled to maintain $1 per share, but only one, Reserve Primary Fund, reported a net asset value below that level.
Less well known, and of concern to U.S. officials, is that the money funds cannot count on the protection measures that were pulled together to help them in 2008.
NO EASY OPTIONS
The Treasury Department is barred from reprising a guarantee program under the terms of the 2008 bailout of the U.S. banking system. Congress, which agreed to the bailout only reluctantly, prohibited renewing the program on grounds that it was providing a false sense of security to investors who might expect government protection again in the future.
The Federal Reserve is also unlikely to dust off either of two facilities it set up in 2008 to ensure money market funds had cash to meet redemption requests -- the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility and the less-used Money Market Investor Funding Facility.
Today's rock-bottom interest rates and the fact that the government would need to charge fees for such guarantees mean that those types of emergency facilities would likely not be effective as a backstop.
Limitations on the Fed's emergency authority -- it can no longer intervene to protect individual firms as it did in 2008, but must provide aid to an entire asset class -- may further cramp the central bank's nimbleness in responding to a crisis.
Another Fed emergency liquidity facility dating from the U.S. financial meltdown depended on a promise that the Treasury would absorb some of the losses if the collateral financial institutions pledged lost value. U.S. lawmakers are now on a debt-cutting crusade and are unlikely to approve more bailout funds for the Treasury to use in that way any time soon.

NERVOUS INVESTORS

All this has left some investors nervous about their exposure to what they used to see as the safe havens of money funds, managers said.
Such funds "breaking the buck are far and few between, but nowadays, everyone is looking at Europe, and they are seeing things they thought wouldn't happen now happening," said King Lip, chief investment officer at Baker Avenue Asset Management in San Francisco.
The firm manages about $750 million in assets.
He said about 25 percent of the firm's investments are in money markets that had been carefully vetted.
"We've had clients asking us to move to cash," Lip said. "We're getting more and more requests to move to cash entirely rather than invest in money markets."
Top Fed officials have urged putting money funds on a tighter leash, saying they should be required to hold capital buffers to discourage clients from panic withdrawals.
"Given the systemic importance of the money market mutual fund industry, it is critical that one way or another we make the industry less susceptible to credit shocks and liquidity runs," Boston Federal Reserve Bank President Eric Rosengren said in September.
Strains in money funds re-emerged over the summer on concerns about their holdings of commercial paper issued by troubled European banks. Outflows spiked in July as investors worried about the fight in the U.S. Congress over raising the U.S. debt ceiling.
In response, some of the largest funds cut their European bank holdings and shortened the weighted average maturities of the assets they owned. Outflows ultimately stabilized after a debt deal was reached in the U.S. Congress.
Various academics and regulators have backed a shift to a share price that can fluctuate, as opposed to the current money fund practice of guaranteeing a stable $1 per share value. But many companies worry such a change would drive away customers.
Some industry counterproposals involve building up extra capital in some type of "buffer" to backstop money funds that run into trouble. Asset management executives also say that changes put in place by the Securities Exchange Commission at the start of 2010 already have made the funds much more robust than during the crisis, including tightening credit quality standards and imposing liquidity requirements.
Investors are watching the situation closely.
Evensky & Katz, a registered investment adviser in Coral Gables, Florida, with $700 million in assets under management, is considering whether to pull out of money market funds. But for now, it is leaning toward staying in, said Harold Evensky, the firm's president.
"We don't think any of the money market funds we use have significant exposure to Europe and if there was an issue, we have little doubt that they would cover it," he said.
(Additional reporting by Ross Kerber in Boston; Ann Saphir in Chicago; and Ashley Lau and Jessica Toonkel in New York; Editing by Dan Grebler)

#OccupyAirSpace: - Protesters Launch 'Robokopter' Drone

2011-11-20T07:00:00.000-08:00

U.S. banks should "undermine" Occupy protesters: memo

2011-11-20T05:25:00.000-08:00

By David Ingram | Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Occupy Wall Street movement is a big enough problem for U.S. banks that they should pay for opposition research into the political motives of protesters, said a firm that lobbies for the industry.
Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford, a Washington-based firm, proposed the idea in a memo to the American Banking Association, an industry group which said on Saturday that it did not act on the idea.
The four-page memo outlined how the firm could analyze the source of protesters' money, as well as their rhetoric and the backgrounds of protest leaders.
"If we can show they have the same cynical motivation as a political opponent, it will undermine their credibility in a profound way," said the memo, according to a copy of it on the website of TV news channel MSNBC, which first reported on it. (See MSNBC's report http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/19/8896362-exclusive-lobbying-firms-memo-spells-out-plan-to-undermine-occupy-wall-street-video)
Clark Lytle Geduldig counts the banking association among its regular lobbying clients, U.S. Senate records showed.
Other clients include MasterCard Worldwide and a banking coalition concerned about interchange fees.
The firm did not respond to requests for comment.
Its memo said it could deliver research, survey data and plans to use the information in 60 days at a cost of $850,000.
Banking association spokesman Jeff Sigmund told Reuters the memo is authentic, but his group was not interested.
"Our government relations staff received the proposal - it was unsolicited and we chose not to act on it in any way," Sigmund said.
The memo is dated November 24, five days after it became public. Sigmund did not respond to a follow-up question about the date. November 24 is also the Thanksgiving holiday.
The memo said U.S. financial firms should be concerned about comments that Democratic campaign consultants have made in the news media about trying to harness the energy of the Occupy Wall Street protesters.
"This would mean more than just short-term political discomfort for Wall Street firms," it said.
"If vilifying the leading companies of this sector is allowed to become an unchallenged centerpiece of a coordinated Democratic campaign, it has the potential to have very long-lasting political, policy and financial impacts on the companies in the center of the bull's-eye."
The memo is from Clark Lytle Geduldig's four name partners. Two of them, Sam Geduldig and Jay Cranford, are former aides to House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner, a Republican.
Using shorthand for Occupy Wall Street, the memo said:
"It may be easy to dismiss OWS as a ragtag group of protesters but they have demonstrated that they should be treated more like an organized competitor who is very nimble and capable of working the media, coordinating third party support and engaging office holders to do their bidding. To counter that, we have to do the same."
(Reporting by David Ingram. Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh)

UC Davis Protestors Pepper Sprayed

2011-11-20T05:08:00.000-08:00

Rise Up - Parachute Club against US

2011-11-18T17:07:00.000-08:00

Rise up against US Voodoo economy and Wall Street from Canadian band in 80

Woman Shows Court Order to NYPD, Gets Punched in Face. #occuppywallstreet

2011-11-17T09:05:00.000-08:00

US Wall Street police are lawless and against Human right to protest

為200 億雷曼案做「裁判官」看盡人生百態經驗難得

2011-11-13T19:29:00.001-08:00

為200 億雷曼案做「裁判官」看盡人生百態經驗難得

3 年前雷曼倒閉，曾幾何時，市民在電視熒光幕及報章上，追蹤政府官員及銀行大班出席立法會雷曼迷債小組的作證。原來，小組成員在過去3年，已為小組工作開了超過150 次會議，而身為小組主席的何鍾泰更開了300 多次會。問他是否值得？何鍾泰不假思索便說：「很值得，有43,700名事主，買了200 多億元的雷曼產品，有哪項工作可以有這難得的經驗。」

查找真相爭取資料公開

何經常掛在嘴邊的，是他擔任小組主席，有權像法官一樣，就銀行及監管機構提出的抗辯作出裁決。「我試過星期日晚出席完晚宴，還要回立法會寫裁決，寫20 多頁的法律文件，我的決定就是最後的裁決，連立法會法律顧問也不能左右我的決定。」

大班出席聆訊廿多黑衣人伴隨

他說聆訊期間，很多時銀行及監管機構，會請來一大班大狀，提出多項理據，要求豁免向小組提交資料。「有時他們會提出公眾利益豁免權，說要保密，又試過搬出銀行條例、證券及期貨條例等來要求保密。我聽了那些大狀的理據之後，就要做決定。」他說，基本上他的決定都是反駁他們的論據，希望盡量把資料在小組內公開。

在聆訊期間，他亦看盡人生百態。「試過有銀行大班來立法會作證時，來了20 多個黑衣人，原來是大班的保鑣，我從未見過有那麼多保鑣在立法會大樓出沒。」可見銀行相當擔心雷曼事件的事主，會對大班施以突襲。

事主送上感謝卡深感欣慰

調查雷曼迷債事件的工作，足足用了一屆立法會的時間。「雷曼在2008 年9 月爆煲，當時我們才剛剛上任。那年年底我們成立了雷曼小組，用特權法傳召了60 多人，開了150 多次會。現在已進入最後階段，在寫調查報告。為了趕在明年6月、今屆立法會完結之前提出動議，我已告誡小組成員，明年隨時要星期日也回來開會寫報告。」

為調查雷曼花了那麼多時間，何鍾泰亦有感到欣慰的一刻。「有一次立法會職員告訴我，有人在外面要向我請願。我出到去，收到一個事主給我一張過了膠的卡，上面寫『何鍾泰議員公平公正，Thank you』。」

聆訊期間亦試過有雷曼事主一行20 多人，來到舊立法會大樓外的停車場找何鍾泰，見到他便跪下哭訴。「其間我聽過很多事主的個案，但我知道小組不是去幫個別苦主，只是要找出真相，調查整件事是為何會這樣發生。」

We Are The Many - Makana

2011-11-13T14:12:00.000-08:00

Occupy Portland: Tensions rise between Portland Police and crowd

2011-11-13T13:59:00.000-08:00

Curbing risks of big banks

2011-11-11T08:16:00.000-08:00

China forum Xiao Gang

Global systemically important banks must fulfil their new requirements to ensure resilient world financial system

While the world kept a watchful eye on the results of the G20 summit in Cannes, France, with respect to the European crisis, it is important to note that the leaders of the G20 formally endorsed the list of 29 “global systemically important banks” (G-SIBs).

Recognizing the fact that neither low inflation and stable macroeconomic environments, nor micro-prudential supervision of individual institutions are enough to maintain financial stability, the 2009 London G20 summit launched the initiative of establishing a macro-prudential policy framework and accepted the concept of designating G-SIBs.

Despite heated debates on the process over the past two years, the selected G-SIBs will face a new and more intense regulatory environment, and will be required to have more capital and liquidity.

There is no doubt that failure or distress of a large or complex financial institution can have a greater impact on the financial system than a smaller, simpler institution. Hence, those institutions must have more capital to absorb losses and be subject to greater supervision, making it possible to close or restructure them if necessary without massive disruption to the rest of the financial system. In this way, no institution is too-big-to fail or too-connected-to fail.

Obviously, without a global framework for handling cross-border bank bankruptcies, the world economy is still vulnerable to a repeat of the disastrous collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008.

The methodology with which G-SIBs were identified is based on size, interconnectedness, substitutability, global activity and complexity. Such banks clearly can have a greater impact on the real economy, job creation and financial stability. However, since the mid-20th century managerial capitalism has been transformed into global financial capitalism and financial products and activities have exploded dramatically and become far removed from the real economy. For example, the assets of British banks now exceed 6,000 billion pounds ($9,654 billion), while lending to UK businesses — to farmers, manufacturers, retailers and construction companies etc — accounts for only about 3 percent of that total. Most of assets of UK banks represent financial institutions trading with each other. Such over-financialization should be adjusted, and the banking system returned to promoting the real economy.

There are worries that an increase in the minimum capital requirements for the G-SIBs may raise their costs and reduce their willingness to lend, further deepening the global recession. But the G-SIBs can meet the more stringent ratio requirements either by raising fresh capital or by shrinking their assets and should be carefully monitored to ensure they meet the new requirements and take the appropriate measures to change business models and adjust assets portfolios without any adverse knock-on effects to the real economy.

A transition period is necessary for banks to build up their capital base by retaining earnings, raising new capital, limiting dividend payments and keeping a cap on executive compensation.

After all, the long-term negative impact of higher capital on economic growth is relatively small, and the benefits far outweigh the costs. According to some studies, the balance of the benefits and costs of higher capital ratios peaks at a level of between 10 to 11 percent. G-SIBs must be responsible for preventing systemic risks from happening in global financial industry. A leverage ratio (Tier 1 capital/adjusted assets) introduced by Basel III forces banks to hold more liquid assets and cut back any reliance on short-term funding. This is an important instrument to curb excessive expansion and risk-taking so as to help contain the build-up of systemic risks. Moreover, as a backstop to banks’ capital, the leverage ratio can guard against possible miscalculations of risk during booms.

Fundamentally, G-SIBs can ensure their survival if they operate prudently. Although financial crises have had many complicated reasons in the past decades, often they are the result of banks lending money they shouldn’t have lent to borrowers who shouldn’t have borrowed. Borrower demand is almost certainly a bigger problem than lender supply.

The Royal Bank of Scotland is good case study. After 17 months of investigation, the UK regulator has concluded that no rules were broken by those who took the bank to the brink of disaster, what went wrong was the near-fatal decision to expensively acquire ABN Amro, largely with borrowed money, just before the global financial crisis.

The endorsement of the G-SIBs made by the G20 is a good start for establishing a new global regulatory framework. But there are a lot of things to be done to ensure its successful implementation. Given the eurozone crisis and the faltering world economy, different countries of course have different policy priorities, but maintaining the global financial stability that is so crucial to the world economy must be a common goal for the long-term.

The fact that the Bank of China, a 100-year-old bank, was included on the list of G-SIBs not only represents the bank’s international brand identification, it is also a recognition of the progress made in Chinese banking reform during recent years.

As the only G-SIB selected from emerging market economies, we are committed to undertaking greater responsibilities in supporting the economy and maintaining financial stability. That will surely bring many opportunities and challenges to our bank for further transformation, driving us to continue to innovate financial services, improve corporate governance and to strengthen both risk and human resource management.

Right now, all G-SIBs are allocated into four buckets with different requirements related to additional common Tier 1 equity — ranging from 1 percent to 2.5 percent of risk-weighted assets — Bank of China is in the last bucket with a capital surcharge of 1 percent, and its current capital adequate ratio has already met the requirement, so the impact on the bank is limited.

The world needs a safer, resilient financial system for promoting strong, balanced and sustainable growth, and thus the G-SIBs must undertake more responsibilities and make more contributions to the system

雷曼苦主「佔領銀行街」第19日，發言人接受「無線電視」訪問

2011-11-03T06:46:00.000-07:00

Two Oakland Police Provocateurs Caught on Video!

2011-11-03T06:41:00.000-07:00

Lawrence O'Donnell on Police Brutality at Occupy Wall Street

2011-11-01T08:30:00.000-07:00

Wall Street Police, tender of the Rich bankers in New York city.

高院第３５宗：雷曼苦主告中銀索償

2011-10-31T08:27:00.000-07:00

一名中銀香港客戶，５年前聽信女職員建議，以４６８萬港元購入雷曼相關衍生工具的高風險票據，及至２００８年雷曼倒閉，事主投資化為烏有，他入稟高院控告中銀香港作出誤導及違反證券及期貨條例守則，要求賠償損失。
未告知產品高風險

原訴人李仲波（譯音）在入稟狀指，他在２００２年已是中銀香港的客戶。０６年１０月２８日，他在中銀客戶經理謝小姐安排下，用６０萬美元購「精明１１Ａ系列」的票據投資產品，謝當時稱有關產品與做定期存款差不多，與中國多間大型國企掛鈎，低風險又保本，絕對沒問題。

稱無履行銀行從業員責任

雷曼兄弟倒閉後，證明有關產品是高風險，謝小姐完全沒有履行一名銀行從業員應有的專業責任，沒向客戶披露產品的風險及替客戶做風險評估。

中銀在事件中未有遵照證券及期貨條例守則規定，沒有盡力保障客戶利益和事先了解客戶承擔風險的能力，向客戶作出失實陳述和誤導。

入稟狀編號：HCA 1787/2011

How keen is my rally

2011-10-30T20:53:00.001-07:00

The Lehman Brothers minibond protesters set the benchmark in local activism, writes Stephen Vines

The protesters recently seen camping outside the Hongkong Bank headquarters had joined a global crusade against perceived corporate wrongdoing, known as Occupy Wall Street. But away from their demonstration, for several years now a local ad hoc protest group has been protesting against banks that sold defaulted Lehman Brothers minibonds.

Both movements have their supporters and detractors, but the minibond protests are an arguably more successful movement, and one that is all the more surprising for happening in the home of free markets and naked capitalism.

The problem for the global crusaders is that their targets, the elimination of market greed and reform of the banking industry, are too wide and imprecise to be met. They argue that this misses the point because the object of the protests is to raise awareness. But it begs the question of what comes next.

Other Hong Kong protests have been more sharply focused and far more successful in demanding - and getting - a result.

Most famous are the protests seen in Central over the past three years. They have been vociferous in calling for full compensation for the estimated 43,700 local investors, who bought so-called minibonds issued by the collapsed Lehman Brothers. They claim these complex leveraged products were anything but mini and certainly not bonds.

When Lehman collapsed in 2008 the investors faced a total wipeout of their investment (see Bonds Away).

These products had also been sold in Singapore and Taiwan. But there were only mass protests in Hong Kong. In Singapore, where protests are barely tolerated, the government told the bondholders they were on their own.

But it backtracked in the wake of the uproar in Hong Kong that forced the banks and the regulatory authorities into action.

Sixteen of Hong Kong's leading financial institutions had sold Lehman minibonds. Eddy Chan, the chairman of the investors group, has said many times, "the simple fact is these banks have deceived us".

This message of deceit attracted sympathy beyond the ranks of the bondholders. Legislators enthusiastically joined the clamour, media support also flowed and both the Monetary Authority and the Securities and Futures Commission launched investigations.

By 2009 the protesters managed to get some 60 per cent of their investments back.

But the tenacious demonstrators pressed for more, and last March a fresh offer was made, pushing up the recovery rate to a range of 85 to 96.5 per cent. Most of the bondholders accepted this settlement but a significant number continue to press for full recovery.

In the aftermath of the offer, The Economist magazine rather tartly commented that "the deal is seen as a consequence of shaming the financial institutions which sold the products into coughing up {hellip} Just how aggrieved investors had a right to feel is unclear: the products came with thick, and doubtless unread, prospectuses detailing the risks involved. But picket lines, clanging drums and acerbic signs focused the attention of bankers and regulators on the plight of people whose financial expertise amounted to spotting products with higher interest rates than low-yielding bank deposits."

The protests could hardly be described as lacking in self interest or "anti-capitalist". Indeed, as this commentary suggested, it was more a case of the so-called little man putting one over on powerful financial institutions.

But the minibond campaign caught a mood where suspicion surrounds big financial institutions and reflects a growing sense of unfairness in the way that the economy works.

No longer are the taipans of Hong Kong companies seen as heroes. Who now hears of Li Ka-shing being described as Superman, an admiring title that used to be frequently appended to his name?

Indeed, in recent times there have been unprecedented protests outside the offices of Cheung Kong, Li's parent company.

They also reflect the widespread sense of grievance that has been mounting over injustice in a society dominated by big cartels and an ever-widening wealth gap.

This summer the activists found an unlikely symbol of this injustice in the form of Ng Yuk-fai, an elderly egg waffle seller in Tai Hang who was repeatedly arrested for trying to make a modest living peddling his wares. Ng's case turned out to be rather more complicated than it initially appeared, but the image of a 74-year-old being repeatedly harassed by the government for trying to scrape together a subsistence living struck a definite chord with tens of thousands of people joining a Facebook group supporting his cause.

Earlier in the year the business community's decidedly most unpopular and most successful class of entrepreneur, property developers, took a direct hit when the builder of a luxury apartment block in Mid-Levels, called The Icon, was accused of supplying "rubbish dump" flats to the buyers. A litany of complaints was made over the state of flats when they were handed over to their new owners. These articulate middle-class buyers were quick to protest in a very public manner, attracting considerable media attention and support from members of the Legislative Council.

The voluntary guidelines for sales of new properties, laid down by the Real Estate Developers Association, were shown to be quite inadequate. In fact the developer, Winfoong International, was not a member of REDA and therefore not even covered by this form of flimsy self-regulation. As the dispute spread it soon became clear that the Estate Agents Authority, a statutory body regulating estate agencies in Hong Kong, was also powerless, or maybe simply not inclined to do anything.

But the storm of protest was growing and, in the end, the developer was forced to offer its customers the option of buying back their properties at 120 per cent of the original cost. Not surprisingly, most accepted and another victory for direct action was notched up.

There was less of a victory for residents of the Mei Foo housing estate, once a prime example of middle-class home ownership on a mass scale. Now they are up in arms over plans to build an adjacent complex, which they fear will degrade living conditions. It's an ongoing battle but the odds are heavily stacked against the protesters.

While property developers have long held pride of place in the pecking order of Hong Kong business, local people have also had an unusually high level of participation in the stock market and treated it with a mixture of awe and admiration, not least when new shares come to the market.

But even this halo is starting to crack. When Prada, the Italian fashion house, finally managed to secure a listing for its shares last June its debut was accompanied by small protests from women's rights groups proclaiming that "the devil is Prada", accusing the company of practising sexual discrimination.

It is impossible to say whether these protests had an effect on investors. But the IPO ended up priced at the lower end of its expected price range and experienced a weak debut, albeit in a weak market.

Protesters were also out on the streets at the end of last year for the debut of China Gold International Resources. The protest concerned its controversial activities in Tibet.

Unsurprisingly, most investors shy away from these protests and their success or otherwise is very hard to quantify.

But there is clearly a trend and it is changing the way that Hong Kong people view some of the icons of the local business world. In the case of Ng, the waffle seller even attracted the sympathy of the health secretary. Elsewhere, companies and their bosses are going out of their way to demonstrate their commitment to transparency and hearing the views of the public.

This is a sea change from the former emphasis on profits as the be-all and end-all of the story.

It is worth noting that not only were the Hong Kong anti-greed protests larger than in many other Asian cities that joined the global campaign, but in Leung Kwok-hung, Hong Kong has the only elected legislator who is a committed follower of Leon Trotsky.

But then again, Hong Kong is also home to a greater number of elected legislators who belong to the Democratic Alliance for Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong. The Alliance has its origins in left-wing politics and is one of the more enthusiastic cheerleaders for big business. In contrast, the predominantly middle-class, and decidedly non-socialist, Civic Party is more often than not on the barricades castigating big business. As ever, Hong Kong proves itself to be complex in interesting ways.

moneypost@scmp.com

Rebel without a pause：how the activists did it

2011-10-30T20:50:00.001-07:00

SCMP

If the Occupy Wall Street movement has a ring of dj vu about it for Hong Kong, that's because the city has its own version of street occupation in protest of "corporate greed" and "devil banks".

Almost every weekday since December 2008, the pavements outside various bank branches across Hong Kong have been occupied by disgruntled Lehman Brothers minibond holders seeking compensation from the banks that sold them the minibonds, which became worthless or nearly so after the unexpected demise of Lehman Brothers in September 2008.

The protesters, many of them over the age of 60, aired their grievances by drumming, banging on gongs, putting up banners with strident messages (for example, "The financial centre of Hong Kong is dead" and "Bankers are w**kers), and ceaselessly playing recordings about their plight through loudspeakers.

Mock-ups of funeral parlour altars were erected on pavements, with ghostly black-and-white pictures of Hong Kong finance officials.

The noise - literally and figuratively - of the campaign was remarkable. Many bank branches repeatedly called in the police; DBS Bank, the Bank of China and Chong Hing Bank had sought injunctions against protesters; and the media covered the campaign.

And it was effective. In May this year, 16 of the banks in question agreed to repay about 31,000 of the 40,000 "Lehman victims" up to 96.5 per cent of their investment.

The movement has faded since that agreement was announcement. But some protesters dissatisfied with the settlement are still lingering outside bank branches, and some have joined the Occupy Central campaign at the HSBC headquarters in Central.

Money Post pieces together an oral history of Hong Kong's protest movements, what has held elderly protesters together through years of campaigning, and what the minibond activists think of the Occupy Wall Street campaign.

Investor and activist Li Hon-ming, about 40 "We started off with street demonstrations and protests outside the Hong Kong Monetary Authority and the Legislative Council. Later we marched into bank branches, stopped customers in the queue and told our stories to them. This way, we managed to force the banks to close temporarily. We later moved outside the banks and stayed on the pavements.

"We used a lot of props, from drums to fake coffins to funeral wreathes. The idea was to grab the attention of the Hong Kong public and tourists. We wanted to show them what the banks and the government had done."

Eddy Chan Ho-wai, convenor of the Allied Victims of Lehman Products "We had one organiser responsible for each bank branch. We arranged for there to be a certain number of protesters at the banks, depending on the branch size, and we had about 100 volunteers who made calls and organised things. Drumming was particularly good for some granny protesters who had been sleeping badly since they lost their money. After a day of drumming, they got exhausted and would sleep better at night."

Investor Chan Biu, 66 "Initially, it was embarrassing to come out. I would wear a mask and a cap as I didn't want my relatives and children to know I had lost US$10,000. We also had strangers saying we were greedy. That hurt because I wasn't. Our courage and confidence grew gradually. Many of us were old people. We have weak bladders and need to go to the toilet frequently. That wasn't easy when you had to protest. Now here in Central I can easily tell you the closest place where you can relieve yourself."

Jonathan Mak, Mong Kok resident and advertising copywriter, 35 "For many months I saw an old lady protesting outside a bank near my home. Poor her. Imagine getting to that age and losing a big part of your savings to an obscure product promoted by an ignorant bank teller. It wasn't about greed. Everybody in Hong Kong wants to build up wealth. She's no different from us. It was unfortunate the banks' staffs had to endure the noise, but the protesters' actions were understandable."

A newspaper vendor in Central who does not want to be identified "They're still doing it across the road from my stall. There were days when the noise got so bad I lost my temper with customers. Now I'm used to it. But these people are a nuisance. When you invest, you know there's a risk. Besides, haven't they got 90 per cent of their money back already? Why are they so greedy?"

A group of finance workers in Central who took out a full-page advertisement in several Chinese newspapers in April "It seems Central has gone from being an international financial centre to a melting pot of funeral parlours.

"Did it ever occur to them that they have actually infringed upon people's freedom to make use of public space? Have they considered properly the idea that their way of seeking 'justice' has crossed the line and gone beyond what Hong Kong people can tolerate?"

Eddy Chan "[The minibond protesters and the Occupy Wall Street] are both against corporate hegemony, social injustice, and the greed of the movers and shakers. Obviously, the protesters in New York are younger, whereas many of the Lehman victims are elderly.

"The goal of the latter has always been specific: to get back their money. The objective of the New York protesters is ideological, with talk against capitalism. I understand their demands, but we wouldn't want to get into that kind of debate."

Chan Biu "We don't mingle with these young people, but I support their cause [the Occupy Central movement]. We Lehman victims are occupying a small area here [at the HSBC headquarters in Central]. The media gave the impression that all Lehman victims have got a 90 per cent payout, but that's not true. I only got 60 per cent, and I plan to keep on fighting.

"We protest during the day and come here afterwards. There's a sense of solidarity here, and it somewhat empowers us."

立法會調查雷曼迷債小組委員

2011-10-29T21:43:00.001-07:00

立法會調查雷曼迷債小組委員會運作，雖然絕大多數投資者都已經接受賠償，但這種「美國製造，香港傾銷」的結構性產品，當初為何會得到證監會批准，銷售予零售投資者，卻仍未水落石出。有熟悉《證券及期貨條例》的老友告訴老紀，證監名義上是獨立法定機構，但執董和非執董都是由特首委託財爺委任，怎樣能夠不去好好「配合」政府的政策呢？
老紀側聞，證監亦非毫無疑問便批准迷債上市，問題在於官員與證監高層職員沒可能全無「溝通」。老紀翻查當初的報道，便發現雷曼迷債推出市場的時間為2002年5月；而之前雷曼迷債抵港，向證監申請審批之日，亦巧合地是政府有意大力推動債券市場發展（雖然曾蔭權說迷債並非債券）之時，同時各銀行更巧合地因01年中取消利率協議而收入大減。
當時主管金融市場的兩名特區要員，分別是財政司司長梁錦松和財經事務局局長葉澍。雖然兩人都已離開政府，但老紀始終不明白，調查小組何以不傳召他們，以及當年在證監主理投資產品審批的執董作證？
證監處境不禁令老紀想起香港電台被「陰乾」，以至忍不住要問，現在的政府究竟是否懂得尊重arm's length bodies的權限，而不作干預呢？

雷曼苦主大聯盟舉辦「佔領銀行街」活動

2011-10-27T07:39:00.000-07:00

雷曼苦主大聯盟舉辦 Lehman Minibond Victim group
「佔領銀行街」活動 Occupy Bank Street, Central, Hong Kong

主題 Agenda: 精明苦主「佔領銀行街」繼續遊行和抗爭,分享集思會 Octaves Notes victim demonstration
地點 Place: 中環匯豐銀行總行外面 HSBC, Central 召集人:精明苦主自救組 Octave Notes victims
日期 Date： 2011年10月29日(星期六) 時間 : 中午 12時至 1時 Oct 29th, 2011
各位精明債券(Octave Notes)的苦主，不論你是雷曼(Lehman)或非雷曼類(Non-Lehman)，到現在還沒有半點解决的希望，金管(HKMA)証監(SFC)盡量淡化精明債劵事件，要求他們達成集體賠償方案只是妄想。因此苦主們必須自救。
精明債劵的設計者是摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)，奇怪的是它很少被提及和沒有被冲擊過，在此事件上很低調。但它卻是最關鍵的一環，例如它設計時的銷售對象，為何可以在零售銀行賣給大衆？如何訓練及監察零售銀行進行銷售等等一大堆問題。
請各苦主踴躍參加，取回全數本金。
HK government is now trying to cover up Octaves Notes Mis-selling by HK banks. The Octave Notes are designed by Morgan Stanley, an investment bank that not only HK government but also US government are fearful to punish these bankers. So Octave Notes victims should start our own demonstration against Morgan Stanley and all banking system in support of Occupy Wall Steet.

加強監管拋空有利股市穩定發展

2011-10-25T03:52:00.000-07:00

反對金融霸權浪潮一浪高於一浪，全球有98個國家超過一千個城市齊響應，是一場前所未有的金融革命。「佔領華爾街」行動也蔓延到香港，豐銀行地下和中環交易廣場平台分別舉行反金融霸權集會，他們質詢為何社會財富只落在少數人手上，為何政府政策向這些只顧追求個人利益，沒有社會良知的金融大亨傾斜。

　由歐美引發的金融危機，香港股市也受到嚴重衝擊，股價非理性地遭到大戶拋售，以套戥為名，實是單邊拋空，甚至發放不利消息降低公司評級，把股價舞高弄低，引起市場恐慌性拋售，來達到它謀取暴利的目的。我們擔心如果沒有禁止沽空機制，窩輪和牛熊證等的發行商有可能利用香港的積極不干預政策，大量拋空推低股價令到手上發行的窩輪和牛熊證即時死亡，這不是間接操控市場行為嗎？

　這些輸打贏要的國際大亨，賺錢時花紅以幾十個月計算，虧損時逼政府用納稅人的錢去解救他們，不然就好像「雷曼事件」讓它倒掉一走了之，把小投資者的血汗錢化為烏有。這些巧取豪奪的金融大亨，我們政府官員還要為它護航嗎？

　法國、意大利、西班牙、韓國等都有禁止拋空機制，除了保護他們本國利益外，還有對拋空圖利的投機倒把分子起了阻嚇作用。美國也是不容許無貨拋空，在2008年9月19日全球爆發金融海嘯時，美英兩國同時宣佈嚴格執行禁止某些股份拋空，美國禁令有效期至10月2日；英國則延至年底，並且宣佈調查拋空和散佈假消息的人士。

　可惜本港有些學者和業界各別人士對建議政府在非常時期禁止借貨沽空機制持反對意見，認為沽空不會有系統性風險，而且違反自由市場規律，擔心會影響香港國際金融中心地位，筆者則持相反看法。其一借貨拋空在本港只有大戶才能借到貨，而一般小投資者是借不到貨沽空作套戥，所以借貨拋空機制對小投資者不公平，變成了大戶專利。

　其二拋空不受監管將導致市場過分投機，對股市毫無益處，而且會擾亂市場，扭曲價格造成金融市場不穩。香港作為國際金融中心，如不能對本港經濟發展有所貢獻，不能保護本地金融核心利益，不能維護小投資者應有的權益，那麼國際金融中心的稱號便只是虛名而已，而且為祖國改革開放走向同世界接軌的金融安全埋下計時炸彈。

　現時香港股市充滿投機性，非主流的金融衍生產品據聯交所數據顯示已接近一半，再加上場外的ELN(高息票據)、ACCUMULATER(累計期權)股市已變成個大賭場與國際金融中心定義背道而馳。本港對於沽空並無明確的監管和披露機制，例如沽空者不必申報是套戥還是單邊沽空，MPF是否可以借貨給沽空者，借貨期是否有時間規定，沽空保證金是否有嚴格要求，有否風險評估，股票借出機構獲得的利益歸誰，虧損時責任誰屬，加上股票衍生產品不需繳付印花稅，間接鼓勵投機風氣，這些不明確的因素都可以構成系統性風險。

　股票市場的功能是給企業集資提供平台，讓資金帶動中小企業發展，增加就業職位對整個經濟發展社會穩定作出貢獻。業界並不是要排斥外資大行，我們歡迎的是國際投資者，但並非投機者，我們不是反對現有正常的沽空作對沖之用，只希望對非法拋空亂出口術的投機者加以嚴格監管，我們並不是財經官員所說的希望利用禁止拋空令股市上升來從中得益，而是希望加強對拋空和衍生產品的監管，增加市場透明度。

　過度投機，香港將會成為「大鱷」提款機，為保護本港社會和小投資者共同利益，對付那些沒有企業道德的金融大鱷是不容手軟，政府應出手就要出手，1998年港府對抗大鱷衝擊不是得全港市民的稱讚和支持嗎？維護香港經濟穩定健康發展，提防國際大鱷再次衝擊香港股市，港府應考慮效法歐美國家，當股市受到國際大鱷惡意衝擊損害本港社會利益時立法禁止拋空。

香港證券學會永遠榮譽會長、恒豐集團董事長張華峰

HOW THE BANKS AND GOVERNMENT ARE STEALING FROM YOU

2011-10-23T07:32:00.000-07:00

Hong Kong: Why Occupy Central?

2011-10-23T06:35:00.000-07:00

Hong Kong: Why Occupy Central? Oiwan Lam
A group of activists in Hong Kong have occupied the ground floor of the iconic HSBC building in Central District for almost one week since October 15, 2011, in response to the global call for solidarity with the Wall Street Occupation.

Although some people find the slogan “Down Down Capitalism” too ideological, the occupation does provide a reflective space for people to look into the problem of the existing economic system which has marginalized the majority.

There are so many social problems in Hong Kong. The Gini index is similar to African countries, income disparity is so extreme. The rich take all the wealth in their own pockets while the income of the poor can barely sustain their lives. The property developers control people's life, the property prices have increased to such a crazy level that people have to spend their whole lives working like slaves for the developers and the government officials take it for granted.

The issue at stake is where do all these problem stem from? Let us reinstate our study group's stand. All these problems come from the very structure of capitalism. The capitalists have to exploit the workers for capital accumulation… A radical solution of the problems is to abolish the capitalist system.

Perhaps we have been brainwashed by the spirit of the Lion Rock [a symbol of Hong Kong] for too long or perhaps we don't understand the root cause of the problems. That's why we never have heard any anti-capitalist statement nor have witnessed any anti-capitalist social movement.

The anti-capitalist circle is thus very weak and this Occupy Central movement is a great opportunity.

There are so many social problems in Hong Kong. The Gini index is similar to African countries, income disparity is so extreme. The rich take all the wealth in their own pockets while the income of the poor can barely sustain their lives. The property developers control people's life, the property prices have increased to such a crazy level that people have to spend their whole lives working like slaves for the developers and the government officials take it for granted.

The issue at stake is where do all these problem stem from? Let us reinstate our study group's stand. All these problems come from the very structure of capitalism. The capitalists have to exploit the workers for capital accumulation… A radical solution of the problems is to abolish the capitalist system.

Perhaps we have been brainwashed by the spirit of the Lion Rock [a symbol of Hong Kong] for too long or perhaps we don't understand the root cause of the problems. That's why we never have heard any anti-capitalist statement nor have witnessed any anti-capitalist social movement.

The anti-capitalist circle is thus very weak and this Occupy Central movement is a great opportunity.

It is difficult for mainstream Hong Kong society to stand by the side of the occupants. Blogger Birdlw's questions [zh] reflect common people's doubts:

The economy in Europe and the United State is very bad. Their debts, unemployment rate and social discontent are very severe. I can understand their action.
However, Hong Kong has a stable economy, our unemployment rate is just 3%, why still occupy Central?
I really don't understand.
What do the protesters want to express and strike for?
After they have occupy Central, what will be their next action? A radical reform of the financial system in Hong Kong?
How can that be done? How would Hong Kong people accept such change?
If the protesters do not have plan to reform the finance system, what is the point of this occupation? Just for the sake of protest? After this protest party, will they will look for another topic to protest about?
The finance industry is a very important sector in Hong Kong. Many people depend on it for a living. Once it has been shaken, many people will lose their job. Government tax income will shrink and social welfare will be cut. Have they thought about all these things?
Anthony Chung believes that [zh] income disparity is inevitable because people are greedy:

Even if the government redistributed all the wealth equally now, even if Li Ka-shing shared his wealth with every one in Hong Kong and each of us got one million and an apartment, in 10 years the majority of the wealth would fall back to the same group of people.
Some people would spend the money for enjoyment… the Central finance experts would induce people's greed with all the finance investment package and transfer the money to their own pockets. The business experts in Mongkok and Causeway Bay would introduce fashionable products to make money. The property experts would invest in property and get more and more apartments.
They win because they know the rules of the game and are good at managing their wealth. Income disparity? The government can do little, we have to depend on ourselves.
Chiu08112003 however, points out that the rules of the game are not fair in the first place, in particular after the handover of Hong Kong to China. He describes the situation in a sarcastic tone [zh]:

The post 1980s generation and alternative poor guys do not want to be squeezed into a meat roll. They miss Chairman Mao's redistribution of the landlord's land, and talk bullshit about strikes, revolts, robbing and revolution. They want to share the landlords' apartments and wealth, want the stock market to collapse, want the money to fall from the sky; the rich fight back. Like dragons, they strangle the central government, talk bullshit that if the government let them go veggie and stop eating meat with their shark-mouths, they would take all their money and migrate elsewhere. Hong Kong will be struck by thunder.

Since the handover of Hong Kong to China, the government has become a puppet controlled by the central government and the tycoons. They claim that they are protecting economic freedom in Hong Kong, but that's a cover-up of their monopoly and exploitative measures. They are foot-dragging in opening up the market to reinforce their monopoly status; or they use all kind of pretexts to get special favors for land development rights. The losers would never know how they make their profit. The capitalists are working hand in hand with the government in this monopoly system. The high land price has squeezed small developers from the market and the giant developers have controlled all the land resources and profit rate. They extend their influence to other areas such as the sales industry, by forcing the suppliers to give them monopolized rights to sell their products. The trend for big corporates to monopolize the market is getting obvious. The monopoly of supermarkets, the merging of railway companies and bus companies have excluded SMEs from the market.

The government ignore the monopoly and let the giant corporates control the market. The essence of monopoly is against economic freedom and harms the business environment and consumer rights. The so-called liberal economy is just a pretext to monopoly. The competition between giant corporates and small business is like a fight between an armed man and a kid, however when someone hands the kid a rod to defend itself the monopoly class feels unhappy and order their drummers and loquacious women to give lectures about “fairness”, blaming society for helping out the kid. Their bullshit is so stinky. Hong Kong is yet to pass its anti-monopoly law under the influence of monopolized capital, can we still say it is a free economy?

Hui Yuk believes that [zh] the greatest achievement of the occupation is the reflective space it has generated:

When people begin to accept an indefinite goal, they start imagining, which is a state of demanding. The occupation has disrupted our habit and opened up a reflective space. People are yet to understand and exclaim: occupation can happen in Hong Kong! We have to be aware that “occupation” is not just a pure resistant action like protecting one's home. The media only sees occupation as social struggle and cannot understand its multidimensional meaning. It has subverted the symbolic space, such as turning an office into a home and turning the workers into guests. People has to reconstruct the order of the space and the activists have to re-interpret such space. People within that space transform from as passive users or consumers into active interpreters and in the process they have reclaimed their autonomy.

李國英指公民黨對黨員法官的解釋不合理。

2011-10-22T20:25:00.000-07:00

Probably with CIA money given to 公民黨特委和暫委法官 ,法官 are also not trustworthy as they most likely to protect investment banks - Morgan Stanley, Citi Banks interest.

很多雷曼苦主都曾向公民黨求助嗎？那她們好像沒有什麼實質東西做過，作為律師，他們的責任不是要維護苦主的合法權益嗎？這可能與銀行霸權有關，律師有很多生意都是與銀行有關，還不是向利益低頭。特委和暫委法官與銀行霸權有關。

有特委和暫委法官加入公民黨事件曝光後，掀起法官可否加入政黨的爭拗。面對外界質疑會否影響司法公正，公民黨仍死撐特委和暫委法官加入政黨無損司法獨立，卻未能解釋暫委法官與特委法官的身份有甚麼分別，又轉移焦點指《公司條例》若純為政黨而修改是本末倒置，矛頭直指民主黨尋求修例，豁免披露黨員名單。民建聯則反駁公民黨有關黨員法官的解釋不合理。

Wealth and income in the top 1 per cent | rabble.ca

2011-10-22T20:15:00.000-07:00

Wealth and income in the top 1 per cent | rabble.ca

One thing I really like about the Occupy movement is that it is reclaiming mental space. I'm thinking of the overt focus on the riches gained by the top 1 per cent, and of naming and shaming capitalism. Two are one and the same, of course. It is in the top 1 per cent that we find the capitalists -- those who own large chunks of the economy as we know it -- as well as the chief beneficiaries of capitalist enterprise -- those who receive high incomes due to the proximity to the system's core, including executives, bankers, lawyers and other professionals who command high incomes but may not have an ownership stake (though they probably do).
With this in mind, I pulled together some numbers to get at how the pie is sliced. There is some Canadian data but it is patchy because we simply do not ask these impolite questions about who gets what. So to round out our understanding I draw on some U.S. data.
Statistics Canada generally does not release statistics on Canada's top 1 per cent. StatsCan's Social Policy Simulation Database and Model allows you to make a good estimate, as it draws on tax data, so I just crunched these out. For 2010, the top 1 per cent (works out to a household income over $366,717) took 10.5 per cent of total income (market income plus investment income plus government transfers). The next 4 per cent took 12.0 per cent. Overall, the top 10 per cent of households (income over $148,241) got just under one-third of the income (32.9 per cent).
The real action, though, is around wealth (who owns and controls what), not just the distribution of annual incomes (wages, salaries and bonuses made in a year). For wealth, we only have Canadian data for the top 10 per cent, and only as far back as 2005 (Morisette and Zhang 2006):

A key point is that wealth is much more unequally distributed than income. These numbers are striking, with 58 per cent of wealth in the hands of the top 10 per cent. But we hit a bit of a wall when it comes to looking further up. There does tend to be a bit of fractal pattern that happens with distribution, so if the top 10 per cent get 58 per cent of the wealth, a rough estimate is that the top 1 per cent would get 58 per cent of the income of the top 10 per cent, so about one-third of the total wealth. Meanwhile, the bottom half of households have a teensy 3 per cent of total wealth, with the bottom 10 per cent completely underwater (liabilities greater than assets, or negative net worth).
To probe the nuances of income and wealth maldistribution, U.S. data is more informative. While the distribution of both income and wealth tends to be worse in the U.S. than Canada, we have been racing hard to close that gap.
Advertising

There is a nice summary of research on who the top 1 per cent of U.S. income earners are and what they do here. But let's instead focus on Edward Wolff's research on wealth inequality in the U.S., which highlights the differences between the distribution of income, wealth and non-housing wealth:

Whereas the top 1 per cent garnered more than one-fifth (21.3 per cent) of American income, they held a bigger slice -- more than one-third (34.6 per cent) -- of total wealth (total assets less liabilities, or net worth). Because the middle class typically hold the vast majority of their wealth (to the extent they have any) in the form of housing, if housing is stripped out we get a better picture of the distribution of control over economic resources (or financial capital). Here, Wolff finds the top 1 per cent take more than two-fifths of the wealth (42.7 per cent).
The breakdowns from Wolff for shares outside the top 1 per cent are similarly revealing. It is striking that what we might think of as capitalism, the ownership of the private economy, is almost entirely locked up by the top 10 per cent, who hold 82 per cent of U.S. financial wealth. The financial return on that wealth feeds back into the distribution of income in any given year. As the richest have pushed their advantage, the distribution of income has become increasingly more unequal, even though the wealth share itself was about the same in 2006 as in 1983. The converse of this "top heavy" distribution is that the bottom 60 per cent of households getting about 20 per cent of the income, enough to stay alive but not enough to accumulate assets and therefore get into "the ownership society."
So changes in the distribution of income are a must, and that includes measures that strengthen the hand of workers, like unionizing the low-wage service sector and living wage policies in the labour market along with progressive income taxes for the top earners and greater redistribution of those revenues into public services and income transfers (like a guaranteed income). But we need to go further and challenge the inequitable distribution of wealth itself by taxing financial wealth, or minimally the transfer of that wealth through inheritances, bequests and gifts.

OWS香港第一

2011-10-22T00:35:00.000-07:00

OWS香港第一
在銀行區示威，香港人是先驅，雷曼苦主用「嗓音」攻擊銀行，比佔領華爾街行動（Occupy Wall Street，OWS）早兩年。

根據OWS 網站的資料，全球迄今有超過1500 次示威活動，遍布82個國家。雖然像示威般的群眾活動不是筆者那杯茶，但我的立場是，這個世界並不需要投行，縱使這樣會令香港的報紙篇幅大減及窩輪廣告絕，甚至少幾個財經台，令順嫂炒股可能沒有那麼「過癮」。

OWS 事出必有因，金融海嘯以來，銀行家和資本家給人的印象是，嘴嚷悔改心底不願。面對這次全球大規模而又相對和平的民眾活動，政府和資本家再不可以坐視不理。

美國是全世界最接近成功的資本主義國家，亦是現代投行的始作佣者。一直以來，美國有相對穩定的中產階級、大部分人相信人人平等、自己有爭取上游的機會、國民傾慕英雄之餘對政府持批評態度，這種種均孕育了美國的崇商環境。這次出現OWS 行動，反映民粹主義愈來愈進佔美國政治先譜。

反華爾街的主調之一是，什麼收入才是合理？什麼收入才是公平？

前者牽涉社會道德，後者純粹是市場供求。美國企業CEO 和銀行大班的高薪，其實並不是新聞，招人詬病是近日大家覺得大部分人都在吃苦，為什麼他們可以幸免。

兩年前的金融海嘯，銀行業道德破產，到今天仍未離開受罰廂。

政府出手打救銀行，雖然避免了系統風險，但銀行在量化寬鬆的低息環境，利用孳息曲線「借短貸長」賺錢，之後再給自己發花紅，很多人覺得既不公平亦不合理。

銀行家高薪合理與否？針對的應該是制度，而不是煽情地在銀行家頭上加兩隻角。投行生意對傳統商業銀行來說，表面看是無本生利。傳統的存貸業務要建分行、請很多前線員工及招納存款，再找企業把錢貸出去。交易室一張三數個員工的交易，一年賺的錢可能比整個區的分行還要多（當然輸錢的不提）。

銀行須負社會責任此外，企業融資業務一般不用沾資產表，單是賺經紀費，何樂而不為。如果你是公司大老闆，有人跑過來建議，說你不用花分毫就可賺10 元，但那人要從10 元中分8 元，相信大部分的生意人都會答應。問題是所謂無本生利，也許本不是資金，而是銀行家的名聲、客戶資源和借貸成本等。如何去準確計算成本，從而定出公平的報酬，需要在制度上手。

銀行大班其實和高科技公司的CEO 沒什麼分別，都是超級進取型。同一類人放在投行變了貪得無厭的魔鬼。放在新興行業，便成了造福人群的科技先鋒。

賺錢本身不是錯，蘋果電腦就很賺錢，但銀行不是一家純粹的商業機構，它有它的社會責任。弄得不好，甚至會觸發危機。銀行某部分的存貸業務是包含社會責任的。政府有理由為他們提供保證以減低資本成本。國營的儲蓄銀行在發達和發展中國家比比皆是，今天觀之，歐洲不少銀行最終也許逃不開國有化的命運。

筆者相信，把銀行分拆是大勢所趨。聯儲局前主席伏爾克提出的改革方案，基本上已經獲政府接受，雖然不少銀行仍在技術層面上糾纏。

張宗永

Occupy Wall Street Movement Spreads to Asia in Global Protest

2011-10-21T10:39:00.000-07:00

Occupy Wall Street Movement Spreads to Asia in Global Protest
By: ERICA HO

Protesters rally and gather together in downtown Hong Kong, at Exchange Square Podium, on Saturday, October 15, 2011.
Erica Ho

What happens in New York, doesn't stay in New York. As Occupy Wall Street enters its fourth week, its power is resonating throughout Asia and Europe. Other key financial capitals, from Hong Kong to London, are joining the fray.

Asia may be booming, but that's not to say there are still grievances to be addressed. In downtown Hong Kong, at the Exchange Square Podium in the heart of the Central financial district, there have been calls to rally and “Occupy Central.” Lee Chung Wing, one of Occupy Central's key organizers, is part of the Left21 protest group, one of the groups calling for change. Though the organization, which calls for democratic and social reforms, was set up early last year, the group has decided that Occupy Wall Street echoes their cries. Organized primarily through Facebook, Occupy Central is just not limited to one group's interests. Lee says “there are actually many leftist people who hate capitalism [that are against] this idea… even though we're in Hong Kong. We are working with different organizations, and even trade unions, to put this event together and work together.”

The primary message at Occupy Central is unclear, just like its fellow brethren in New York. Vague manifestos and speeches are passed around with the common theme of limiting “financial opportunism.” There are several other local issues at hand: the right of workers to collectively bargain, more democratic governance, and skyrocketing real estate prices. Complaints center on anything from poorly-handled bank bonds to the political handover of Hong Kong to China in the late ‘90s. Though the estimated crowd was pegged around 300 attendees, it was evident that many more showed up to join in solidarity despite the hodgepodge of conflicting issues. Many protestors, with gear in tow, were prepared to camp out until Monday morning if necessary.

As one of the financial capitals of the world, Hong Kong is not only where moneyed bankers from Europe and America come to play amongst glittering skyscrapers: disparities between the rich and poor here remain distinctively sharp, from the family of four that survives on $1,000 a month to the hedge fund manager that pays over $10,000 a month in rent. According to figures from 2010, nearly 20% of Hong Kong's population currently lives under the poverty line. It was only earlier this year that Asia's premier financial center instituted a minimum wage for the first time in its history, coming in at a whopping $3.60 per hour. But despite the calls for anti-capitalism and “Occupy Central,” this is not simply a local, Hong Kong-focused movement.

In lieu of attending events in their respective hometowns, protestors, coming from as far as the United States, Europe and other parts of Asia, gathered in downtown Hong Kong. In a universal day of protest, Occupy Central is just one of several demonstrations being planned throughout a few other continents. Over 1,000 people have pledged to attend a demonstration in Sydney alone – Melbourne, Seoul and Taipei are expected to see their fair share of protestors. Campers in Britain are preparing their tents as the sun rises over the London Stock Exchange, the hub of Europe's business, on a crisp Saturday morning. The movement is uniting the world's key financial centers – the ones that drive the global economy – on one single day. As one organizer in Melbourne explains, "I think people want real democracy. They don't want corporate influence over their politicians. They want their politicians to be accountable."

Erica Ho is a reporter at TIME. Find her on Twitter at @ericamho and Google+. You can also continue the discussion on TIME's Facebook page and on Twitter at @TIME.

Occupy protests in Hong Kong

2011-10-20T17:56:00.000-07:00

Occupy World Today 15 Oct. protests reach Asia - China, Japan, Filipine...

2011-10-20T17:47:00.000-07:00

A MESSAGE FROM OCCUPY CLEVELAND TO OCCUPY HONG KONG

2011-10-20T17:01:00.000-07:00

Hong Kong's 'Occupy Central' Protest - Link News

2011-10-19T23:34:00.000-07:00

Hong Kong's 'Occupy Central' Protest - Link News

Occupy HSBC, Central, Hong Kong

2011-10-19T20:48:00.000-07:00

The American Dream Film Part 2 HD

2011-10-19T18:09:00.000-07:00

The American Dream Film Part 1 HD

2011-10-19T18:08:00.000-07:00

Obama Acknowledges Wall Street Protests as a Sign - ABC News

2011-10-18T07:07:00.000-07:00

Obama Acknowledges Wall Street Protests as a Sign - ABC News

By VERENA DOBNIK Associated Press
NEW YORK October 6, 2011 (AP)
Concerns over Wall Street practices and economic inequality that have led to sit-ins and rallies in New York and elsewhere reverberated up to the White House on Thursday, with President Barack Obama saying the protesters are expressing the frustrations of the American public.

Thousands of protesters, including many in union T-shirts, marched the day before in lower Manhattan, joined by labor leaders who say they will continue to support the protests with manpower and donations of goods and services.

The protests have slowly grown in size and attention over more than two weeks, with the president's acknowledgment at a news conference a sign they might be jelling into a political movement.

Obama said he understood the public's concerns about how the nation's financial system works and said Americans see Wall Street as an example of the financial industry not always following the rules.

"It expresses the frustrations that the American people feel that we had the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, huge collateral damage all throughout the country, all across Main Street," the president said. "And yet you're still seeing some of the same folks who acted irresponsibly trying to fight efforts to crack down on abusive practices that got us into this problem in the first place."

He said, though, that the U.S. must have a strong and effective financial sector for the economy to grow, and that the financial regulation bill he championed ensures tougher oversight of the financial industry.

Among some protesters, reaction to Obama's acknowledgment was less than enthusiastic.

"His message is that he's sticking to the party line, which is, 'We are taking care of the situation.' But he's not proposing any solutions," said Thorin Caristo, a 37-year-old antique store owner from Plainfield, Conn.

New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said Thursday police will continue to accommodate the protests "as long as they do it peacefully and in accordance with the laws and regulations."

The vast majority of the protests have been peaceful, "but there's clearly a core group of self-styled anarchists ... who want to have a confrontation with police," said Kelly, who added that the city has spent about $2 million in overtime to police the protests.

The protesters have varied causes and no apparent demands, but have spoken largely about unemployment and economic inequality, reserving most of their criticism for Wall Street. "We are the 99 percent," they chanted Wednesday, contrasting themselves with the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans.

"The great thing about Occupy Wall Street is that they have brought the focus of the entire country on the middle class majority," said George Aldro, 62, a member of Local 2325 of the United Auto Workers, as he carried the union's blue flag over his shoulder through lower Manhattan.

"We're in it together, and we're in it for the long haul."

Ed Figueroa, a janitor in a public school in the Bronx and a shop steward with Local 32BJ of the Service Employees International Union, said the march was "the first time in these weeks that unions have shown their face."

"But it won't be the last time," he said.

The unions were donating food, blankets and office space to the protesters, said Dan Cantor, head of the Working Families Party. But he said the young protesters would continue to head their own efforts. The movement lacks an identified leader and decisions are made during group meetings.

"They're giving more to us than we're giving to them. They're a shot in the arm to everybody," Cantor said.

Victor Rivera, a vice president for the powerful 1199 Service Employees International Union, which represents health care workers, said the union had donated "all the food they need for this entire week" to the protesters. Union leaders had also assigned liaisons from their political action committee to work with demonstrators.

"We are here to support this movement against Wall Street's greed," he said. "We support the idea that the rich should pay their fair share."

The Occupy Wall Street protests started Sept. 17 with a few dozen demonstrators who tried to pitch tents in front of the New York Stock Exchange. Since then, hundreds have set up camp nearby in Zuccotti Park and have become increasingly organized, lining up medical aid and legal help and printing their own newspaper.

On Saturday, about 700 people were arrested and given disorderly conduct summonses for spilling into the roadway of the Brooklyn Bridge despite warnings from police. A group of those arrested filed a lawsuit Tuesday, saying officers lured them into a trap before arresting them. Video shows officers using bullhorns to try and tell the group to get off the road.

Activists have been showing solidarity with the movement in many cities, including Los Angeles, Boston, Seattle and Providence, R.I.

Several Democratic lawmakers have expressed support for the protesters, but some Republican presidential candidates have rebuked them. Herman Cain called the activists "un-American" Wednesday at a book signing in St. Petersburg, Fla.

"They're basically saying that somehow the government is supposed to take from those that have succeeded and give to those who want to protest," the former pizza-company executive said. "That's not the way America was built."

On Tuesday, CBS reported that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney called the protest "class warfare" at an appearance at a Florida retirement community.

———

Contributing to this report were Associated Press writers Colleen Long and Deepti Hajela in New York, and Ben Feller in Washington.

Bank of China demonstration on Occupy Central

2011-10-17T17:57:00.000-07:00

香港占领中环

2011-10-17T16:33:00.000-07:00

Occupy Hong Kong 15-10-2011

2011-10-17T15:57:00.000-07:00

美國華爾街與香港雷曼事件切膚之痛

2011-10-17T06:07:00.001-07:00

Eddy Chan
Occupy Central 佔領中環
美國華爾街與香港雷曼事件切膚之痛

昨今兩天都接受傳謀追訪：美國華爾街與香港雷曼事件有何關系？道理非常簡單，如新聞穚所描述。美國華爾街是因為貪婪，製造有毒金融產品，假如這個是毒品製造工場或者是毒品發原地，那香港銀行就是這些毒品的分銷中心。

債主門，每天都有各大傳謀採訪，爭取雷曼事件爆光。總好在家中坐以待斃，“佔領中環” 行動失敗，雷曼事件難以再掛在傳謀嘴邊！堅持“佔領中環” 行動能得以延續，對兩雷曼事件披露於世界的支持者中，讓世界看看這個毒品分銷中心成功的地方。

"佔領中環"大行動「雷曼苦主大聯盟」前主席「陳光譽」在大會發言(上)

2011-10-17T02:10:00.000-07:00

HK Activists stage 'occupy Central' demo in Asia 2011-10-15「佔領中環」

2011-10-16T18:20:00.000-07:00

響應"世界佔領日"「雷曼苦主大聯盟」舉辦"佔領中環大遊行"途經遮打大廈

2011-10-16T05:55:00.000-07:00

(遮打大廈) HK Land and HK judge all disregards UN Human right laws concerning right to demonstrate, 杜溎峰法官should be condemned.

This case can be reported to UN human right commissions mbogner@ohchr.org the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (Cap. 383), which incorporates into HKSAR's law the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

"佔領中環"大行動「雷曼苦主大聯盟」前主席「陳光譽」在大會發言(下)

2011-10-16T05:48:00.000-07:00

響應"世界佔領日"─香港"佔領中環"大行動現場

2011-10-16T05:47:00.000-07:00

響應"世界佔領日"「雷曼苦主大聯盟」參加"佔領中環"大行動

2011-10-16T05:41:00.000-07:00

Wall Street fury for HK

2011-10-16T05:04:00.001-07:00

Wall Street fury for HK

Alice So and Mary Ann Benitez

Friday, October 14, 2011

The anti-establishment Occupy Wall Street movement has spilled over into Hong Kong with internet calls for protesters to occupy Central tomorrow.
Called "Occupy Hong Kong" - with at least three Facebook accounts set up by individuals - the rally will be held from 2pm at the fountain near Exchange Square.

Hong Kong is among 719 locations in 71 countries where protesters, angered by an economic crisis they blame on politicians and bankers, will take to the streets tomorrow in response to an internet call by United for Global Change.

Many of the 1,000 local Facebook fans think the call was inspired by Occupy Wall Street, which has seen some 2,000 people camp out at a Manhattan park since last month.

But United was born on May 15 at a rally in Madrid's central square, sparking a movement that spread across Spain before inspiring other countries and leading to the New York City action.

Facebook user Wong Ka- man wrote: "We are the 99 percent! Each money-making strategy is launched by another, but only 1 percent will benefit! Ain't you fed up?"

And Abyss Yau wrote: "Everyone in Lion Rock sells their labor, with their youth, blood and sweat to earn a meager reward. Sometimes even [forfeiting] the dignity of life."

On the microblogging site Weibo, the issue attracted 479 users. Wrote one: "The local movement may not be on the same scale as the US one, but it is an important platform to explore the possibilities of further anti-capitalist campaigns."

United will organize discussions at the event to collect public opinion on "financial hegemony."

怨生活艱難恨貧富懸殊怒民佔中環

2011-10-16T04:54:00.000-07:00

美國紐約持續近一個月的「佔領華爾街」運動越演越烈，並迅速蔓延全球，超過80個國家共九百多個城市民眾，為響應10月15日「佔領全球」號召，相繼發起示威，抗議金融機構貪婪。本港三百多名示威者昨亦加入「佔領中環」行動聲援，當中更有不少參與者聲言，是因不滿行政長官剛公布的《施政報告》未有措施解貧富差距問題而來！採訪：靜態組

示威者先在中環交易廣場外聚集，更在廣場銅牛雕塑上揮動旗幟，及將面具掛在銅牛雕塑的牛角上，象徵成功佔領中環，示威者隨後轉到中環豐總行地下紮營，百多人繼續通宵集會，大批警員奉召到場戒備。

十多個團體300人參加

參與「佔領中環」活動的三百多名本港市民，是響應「佔領華爾街」及網上號召，他們昨午2時許在中環交易廣場外平台集會，高舉橫額及高叫口號，反對資本主義及打倒金融霸權。參與的十多個團體包括社民連、人民力量、職工盟、街工等，亦有「80後」代表到場，抗議大企業剝削員工，以及過份發鈔引發全球通脹。

為數約50人的雷曼苦主，於參加集會前，也先在中環各銀行外遊行示威，要求政府公開雷曼事件調查報告，及協助他們提出集體訴訟。

面具掛銅牛示成功佔領

示威者的抗議對象不但止是大銀行，還有跨國企業，亦有人關心香港面對的問題，參加者在論壇上輪流發言，表達意見。在論壇進行期間，一班戴面具示威者，在大廈管理公司同意下，將面具掛在廣場平台的銅牛雕塑的牛角上，並在銅牛上揮動旗幟和高叫口號，象徵行動成功「佔領中環」。事實上很多在場聲援市民均是因不滿曾特首剛發表的《施政報告》而來。到場靜坐的楊先生認為，報告政策內容純粹派糖，安撫市民，無助長遠解決市民根本需要，「好似話復建居屋，佢竟然話如果地產市道唔好就停，呢個好垃圾。」

反金融霸權的示威人士傍晚由交易廣場轉往豐銀行總行地下集會，示威者又輪流發言，並在銀行門外的獅子像貼上標語，反對強積金計劃，多名保安人員見狀立即圍獅子像及在示威人士周邊架設圍欄，示威者將寫有抗議標語的橫額鋪在地上，繼續集會，有集會人士更把帶備的營幕架起，打算進行長期抗爭。

期間警方曾經向示威者發出警告，指示威未得不反對通知書，但示威者並無理會。

200人響應「佔領中環」

2011-10-15T06:58:00.000-07:00

百人響應「佔領中環」

2011-10-15T06:39:00.000-07:00

Minibonds Octave Constellation

Obama's budget headed to Congress - Yahoo! News

Morgan Stanley will be sued in US for selling false RMB bonds in Hong Kong with mainly Bank of China

Demonstration in front of Bank of China

港一季近千金融精英失業 三星證券撤港 130人裁剩20人

Protestor gets beaten by Oakland Police

Bill Gates I don't pay enough tax.mp4

To non-Lehman Octaves Notes victims

HK SFC is covering up BOCHK in breaking SFC ord. 107

Legco investigation of non-Lehman Octaves Notes

Mis-selling of Octaves Notes

About Bank of China bank frauds as conducted by Chan H F, Jeffrey / Bank of China

摩根士丹利

www.morganstanley.com/octavenotes/pdf/series19-20/Octave20_Notice_to_Distributors_180112.pdf

www.morganstanley.com/octavenotes/pdf/series17-18/Octave18_Notice_to_Distributors_180112.pdf

２０１２年１日１３日唐英年評論雷曼事件

２０１２年１月１３日梁振英評論雷曼事件

２０１２年１月１３日何俊仁評論雷曼事件

Structured Products

Key Risks Associated with Derivatives

Tilt Shift Ep001 Part2 移軸人生 第一集 佔領中環 第2節

Tilt Shift Ep001 Part1 移軸人生 第一集 佔領中環 第一節

Occupy Wall Street's Livestream Operators Arrested - National - The Atlantic Wire

政情：傻強死撐非金融獨大 - 東方日報

不速之嚇 嚇窒龍豬

2011年12月19日聲討唐英年造勢大會

追擊示威 登門抗議 將墮法網

Savantas Policy Institute

How Corporations Destroyed American Democracy - Chris Hedges.

Why TIME Chose 'The Protester' as 2011 Person of the Year

"I'll Occupy" Recruitment Song: The 99 is Pissed and We Will Not Be Dism...

唐氏綜合政語錄 - 唐英年政壇精采演說 Tang's speech

Occupy Wall Street comes to Capitol Hill | Capitol Hill Blue

AFP: Judge paves way for Lehman Brothers liquidation

Los Angeles City Hall

Movers And Sheriff’s Deputies Refuse Bank’s Order To Evict 103-Year-Old Atlanta Woman

立法會否決修訂專業投資者定義的議案

Occupy’s next frontier: Foreclosed homes

匯賢智庫

匯賢智庫

訂立《競爭法》刻不容緩

PEACEFUL FEMALE PROTESTORS PENNED IN THE STREET AND MACED!- #OccupyWallS...

失職唐英年

93宗雷曼兄投訴個案仍待處理

New Regime for Ascertaining Evidential Requirements for Professional Investor Status

Reforms to Public Offers of Unlisted Structured Products Regime

慎防虛擬資本過度膨脹

Tang and Yam both allow derivative products to be sold in HK without supervisions in HK banks

Letter to HK LEGCO about cover up of banks misselling frauds

THE BEST VIDEO ON "OCCUPY THE WORLD"

Analysis: Wall St. banks wonder if they are shrinking for good

Obama deploying 20,000 troops inside U.S. to prepare for "event"

雷曼苦主「佔領銀行街」第36日舉辦"中環大遊行"(5)途經「中國銀行(香港)

雷曼苦主「佔領銀行街」第36日舉辦"中環大遊行"(5)途經「上海商業銀行」

U.S. money funds seen at risk from Europe's debt storm

#OccupyAirSpace: - Protesters Launch 'Robokopter' Drone

U.S. banks should "undermine" Occupy protesters: memo

UC Davis Protestors Pepper Sprayed

Rise Up - Parachute Club against US

Woman Shows Court Order to NYPD, Gets Punched in Face. #occuppywallstreet

為200 億雷曼案做「裁判官」看盡人生百態 經驗難得

We Are The Many - Makana

Occupy Portland: Tensions rise between Portland Police and crowd

Curbing risks of big banks

雷曼苦主「佔領銀行街」第19日，發言人接受「無線電視」訪問

Two Oakland Police Provocateurs Caught on Video!

Lawrence O'Donnell on Police Brutality at Occupy Wall Street

高院第３５宗：雷曼苦主告中銀索償

How keen is my rally

Rebel without a pause：how the activists did it

立法會調查雷曼迷債小組委員

雷曼苦主大聯盟 舉辦 「佔領銀行街」活動

加強監管拋空有利股市穩定發展

HOW THE BANKS AND GOVERNMENT ARE STEALING FROM YOU

Hong Kong: Why Occupy Central?

李國英指公民黨對黨員法官的解釋不合理。

Wealth and income in the top 1 per cent | rabble.ca

OWS香港第一

Occupy Wall Street Movement Spreads to Asia in Global Protest

Occupy protests in Hong Kong

港一季近千金融精英失業三星證券撤港 130人裁剩20人

Tilt Shift Ep001 Part2 移軸人生第一集佔領中環第2節

Tilt Shift Ep001 Part1 移軸人生第一集佔領中環第一節

不速之嚇　嚇窒龍豬

追擊示威　登門抗議　將墮法網

為200 億雷曼案做「裁判官」看盡人生百態經驗難得

雷曼苦主大聯盟舉辦「佔領銀行街」活動

怨生活艱難恨貧富懸殊怒民佔中環