(BN) Goldman Viewed Unfavorably by 54% as Poll Shows No Damage

They don't know that they don't know

Bloomberg News, sent from my iPad.

Goldman Viewed Unfavorably by 54% as Poll Shows No Damage

May 12 (Bloomberg) -- Wall Street conventional wisdom holds that a sterling reputation is crucial to winning business and keeping clients. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. may be the exception, according to a new Bloomberg survey.

Fifty-four percent of respondents to the global poll of traders, investors and analysts conducted May 9-10 have an unfavorable opinion of the New York-based bank, more than double the negative rating for JPMorgan Chase & Co. Yet a month after a U.S. Senate report said Goldman Sachs misled clients, 78 percent of those surveyed said the accusations will either have no effect on the firm or will harm its reputation without driving away customers.

"Investors will continue to put their money with capable institutions, regardless of their history or morality," said an e-mail from poll participant Christian Contino, 27, who works as a consultant for the investment-management section of the United Nations' International Fund for Agricultural Development. The bank has "very capable spin doctors who will be able to downplay any negativity."

Stephen Cohen, a spokesman for the company, declined to comment on the poll results and reactions.

Goldman Sachs, led by Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Lloyd C. Blankfein, survived the financial crisis, unlike some smaller rivals, and has been a target of criticism ever since. The bank, the fifth-biggest in the U.S. by assets, agreed to pay $550 million last year to settle a suit filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission that alleged Goldman Sachs misled buyers of a mortgage-linked investment the firm created in 2007.

Housing Bets

The Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, led by Michigan Democrat Carl M. Levin, used Goldman Sachs as a case study in its two-year examination of the financial crisis. When the subcommittee released its 640-page report last month, Levin said that Goldman Sachs misled clients and Congress about the firm's bets on the housing market.

"The testimony we gave was truthful and accurate and this is confirmed by the subcommittee's own report," Lucas van Praag, a Goldman Sachs spokesman, said at the time.

"It seems unlikely that Goldman Sachs has to expect further consequences," said an e-mail from Daniel Horak, 26, a trader at Erste Sparinvest KAG in Vienna, Austria, who replied in the poll that he had a "mostly unfavorable" view of the firm and that he didn't expect Goldman Sachs to lose customers.

Levin and Oklahoma Senator Thomas A. Coburn, the subcommittee's ranking Republican, formally referred their report to the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are reviewing the findings.

Impact on Reputation

The company was viewed less favorably than other banks by the 1,263 poll respondents. While 54 percent said they had an unfavorable view of Goldman Sachs, 25 percent felt the same about JPMorgan, 49 percent for Citigroup Inc. and 48 percent for Bank of America Corp. Thirty-five percent had an unfavorable view of Frankfurt-based Deutsche Bank AG, which was also singled out in the U.S. Senate subcommittee report.

Blankfein, 56, has tried to burnish Goldman Sachs's image. After the SEC filed its lawsuit last year, he established a committee to study the firm's business standards. The committee's report in January made 39 recommendations, including changing financial disclosures and providing simpler explanations to clients about conflicts of interest.

Goldman Sachs also began an advertising campaign in September that emphasizes the firm's role in job creation and alternative energy.

'Confidence Business'

"We have to regain the trust of the public, we have no choice," Blankfein said in an interview with Fareed Zakaria that aired on CNN on May 2, 2010, according to a transcript. "We can't survive without people thinking well of us," he said, because "our business is a confidence business."

The firm's shares dropped $5.13, or 3.5 percent, to $142.75 in New York Stock Exchange composite trading, their lowest closing price since Sept. 2. The price remains below the $184.27 close on April 15, 2010, the day before the SEC filed its lawsuit. Richard Bove, an analyst at Rochdale Securities LLC, recommended today that investors sell Goldman Sachs shares, citing increased pressure on the U.S. Justice Department to bring criminal charges against the firm.

Thirty-six percent of respondents said they were "generally bullish" on Goldman Sachs stock six months from now, while 32 percent were "generally bearish." The rest had no opinion. That divided sentiment is about where it was in June 2010.

'Very Supportive'

The company's profit slid 38 percent last year as revenue tumbled. Goldman Sachs ranks third this year among advisers on global takeovers after coming in second during 2010, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

"Our shareholders, our clients, have been very, very supportive," Blankfein said in the CNN interview. "They know the essence of who we are, and frankly I think we still enjoy a reputation with those -- a good reputation with those key constituent groups."

Goldman Sachs was 25th, two notches below JPMorgan Chase, in an annual ranking of the world's most admired companies by Fortune magazine. The results are based on a survey of top executives and directors from Fortune 1000 companies, Global 50 companies and other major non-U.S. companies, as well as financial analysts, between October and December, according to the Hay Group, which conducts the survey.

Goldman Sachs's connections with government officials were cited by some respondents to the Bloomberg survey as a reason the firm is unlikely to be affected by the Senate report.

Goldman's Alumni

"The regulatory capture by the likes of Goldman Sachs is a done deal -- it is an open secret that GS alum spread through the tentacles of public office," said Arijit Banik, 42, a senior manager in economics, pensions and hedging for RBC Dexia in Toronto, in an e-mail. The firm "remains an inexorable cog in the machinery of campaign financing in the U.S. electoral system, where money talks."

Goldman Sachs and its employees donated $31.4 million to U.S. political parties between 1989 and 2010, more than any other financial institution and the fourth-highest amount of any organization, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington research group.

The UN fund's Contino, who like 32 percent of poll respondents said he had a favorable view of Goldman Sachs, was also among the 42 percent who think that Blankfein will remain chairman a year from now. Twenty-seven percent didn't think Blankfein would still have the job in a year and 31 percent had no opinion.

"Lloyd Blankfein has done a great job over the past five years," Contino said. "If there has to be a fall guy, it won't be him."

Main Street Ire

Noah Shapiro, director of risk management at Optim Energy LLC in Irving, Texas, was one of the poll respondents who said Blankfein won't be chairman in a year.

"Goldman has significantly drawn the ire of Main Street as being the poster child of the inexorable greed that fomented the credit crisis," Shapiro, 34, said. "Blankfein will need to fall on his sword as not only the head of Goldman Sachs, but also as a chief luminary on the Street, to blot away the stain of manipulative financial engineering."

The quarterly Bloomberg Global Poll of investors, traders and analysts who are Bloomberg subscribers was conducted by Selzer & Co., a Des Moines, Iowa-based firm. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points.

"Opinions on Goldman Sachs are the same the world around, with very little difference across the U.S., Europe or Asia," said J. Ann Selzer, president of Selzer & Co.

To contact the reporter on this story: Christine Harper in New York at charper@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: David Scheer at dscheer@bloomberg.net

Find out more about Bloomberg for iPad: http://m.bloomberg.com/ipad/

Sent from my iPad

Aljunied residents, enjoy your next 5 years....in regret.

I can't believe the stupidity of the opposition supporters in Aljunied. Clearly they love the mistress and gave up the wife.



Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s People’s Action Party retained power with the smallest margin of popular votes since independence amid a record turnout that tripled the number of opposition members in parliament.

The party that has ruled Singapore for more than five decades won 81 out of 87 parliamentary seats and 60.1 percent of the popular vote in yesterday’s polls, according to the Elections Department. A record 2 million ballots were counted.

The run-up to the election brought out tens of thousands of Singaporeans to rallies in support of the PAP and the opposition parties, which resonated with citizens complaining about the rising cost of living and competition with foreigners for jobs and housing. The result adds pressure on Lee, 59, to reach out to the growing number of Singaporeans who have questioned government policies.

“The political landscape has changed forever,” Suzaina Kadir, a senior lecturer at Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. “There’s serious questioning of the PAP’s continued dominance. Now the work begins for the opposition.”

Politicians competed in single-seat wards or multiple-seat districts called Group Representation Constituencies, or GRCs. The party that gets the most number of votes in a district sends all its members to parliament. The PAP lost a GRC for the first time in this election. A record 82 parliament seats were contested by six opposition parties.

Opposition Advances

The Workers’ Party won the five-seat district of Aljunied and the single-seat Hougang constituency, the only wins by opposition parties. Secretary-General Low Thia Khiang and Chairman Sylvia Lim, who called for a stronger voice in parliament and more affordable public housing, led the Aljunied effort, while Yaw Shin Leong won in Hougang.

“Your votes tell the world that you want Singapore to mature as a democracy, and you want to tell the government that you want a more responsible, inclusive, transparent, accountable government,” said Low, who has been in parliament since 1991.

The Workers’ Party also fielded lawyer Chen Show-Mao, who advised on deals like Agricultural Bank of China Ltd.’s $22.1 billion initial share sale, in Aljunied.

The only uncontested constituency was that of Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, 87, the Cambridge University-trained lawyer who led the island from British rule and was its first premier. He’s also the father of the current prime minister.

Popular Vote

The parliament dissolved last month had 82 PAP lawmakers, two elected opposition politicians and 10 non-elected members. The PAP won about 66.6 percent of the votes cast in 2006, down from 75.3 percent in the 2001 elections. The worst showing for the PAP before yesterday was 1991, when it won 61 percent of the popular vote.

The PAP has ruled Singapore for more than five decades and delivered a 41-fold jump in gross domestic product, combining a focus on education, homeownership, business friendliness and strict laws to boost the wealth of citizens. Lee’s more recent efforts to spur the economy include the opening of two casino resorts, bringing Formula One races to the island and attracting foreign workers. GDP grew a record 14.5 percent last year.

The party encountered a more vocal electorate than before, prompting a rare apology from Lee for failing to build enough public housing and expand transport links as the population grew. “If we didn’t quite get it right, I am sorry but we will try and do better the next time,” he said at a rally on May 3.

“While voters have given the PAP a strong mandate, many voters including some of those who have voted for us have also clearly expressed their significant concerns, both on issues and on our approach to government,” Prime Minister Lee said in a speech after the victory. “We hear all your voices.”

Ministerial Casualties

Foreign Minister George Yeo, who lost his seat in Aljunied, had promised to lead a push for reform within the party. He was one of two cabinet ministers who lost power in the election, the other one being Lim Hwee Hua.

“There is considerable resentment against the government and its policies and some of them run deep,” Yeo said in an interview with the Straits Times on May 5. “We have to listen harder to what people say.”

Singapore’s economic success has widened the income gap, with the world’s highest share of dollar-millionaire households contributing to higher property and consumer prices, leaving some citizens behind.

Singapore’s Gini coefficient, a gauge of income inequality, rose to 0.48 last year from 0.444 in 2000, according to the statistics department. A reading of zero means income equality, while a reading of one means complete inequality. Inflation accelerated to a two-year high of 5.5 percent in January.

Foreign Workers

The growth and widening income gap has also been fueled by an influx of foreign workers to expand industries such as construction, shipbuilding, hospitality and banking. Foreigners make up more than a third of the population, with only 3.2 million citizens out of 5.1 million inhabitants.

Singapore’s gross domestic product was about S$285 billion ($231 billion) last year, compared with S$6.9 billion in 1960, based on 2005 market prices. The government plans to spend S$6.6 billion on benefits for citizens in this year’s budget to ease the burden of inflation.

“Policies will still be on track, except the big difference is the government will have to articulate them better and communicate them to the citizens better,” said Song Seng- Wun, an economist at CIMB Research Pte. in Singapore.

To contact the reporter on this story: Shamim Adam in Singapore at sadam2@bloomberg.net Weiyi Lim in Singapore at wlim26@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Stephanie Phang at sphang@bloomberg.net

(BN) Qaddafi’s $33 Billion to Be Made Available to Libyan Rebels, Clinton Says

But what about the voices of people who actually support Gaddafi? Are they not voices too? Is the devil painted blacker than he should? Are the rebels whiter than angels? 

I thought Gaddafi would have fallen long time ago. But that he is still around tells me clearly he has support. And we should let the libyans chart their own course either as one people or as separate tribes. 

Bloomberg News, sent from my iPad.

U.S. to Let Libya Rebels Access Qaddafi's Frozen $33 Billion

May 5 (Bloomberg) -- Allied nations opposing Muammar Qaddafi granted Libyan rebels the right to request the dictator's frozen assets as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said part of the $33 billion in the U.S. will be made available.

Clinton made the announcement at a meeting in Rome today of foreign ministers from NATO and allied nations, most of which are taking part in Libyan operations. In a statement, the Libyan Contact Group said it agreed a separate finance mechanism for donors to aid the Transitional National Council, the Libyan rebel authority in the eastern city of Benghazi. The statement said Kuwait gave $180 million to the fund. It didn't mention any other donations.

The Obama administration wants to use "some portion of those assets owned by Qaddafi and the Libyan government in the United States, so we can make those funds available to help the Libyan people," Clinton said. The Treasury Department said about $33 billion of Libyan state assets were held in the U.S. at the end of March.

Qaddafi's forces continued to bombard rebel-held cities as the foreign ministers met. Allies including Qatar took part in the Rome meeting as did TNC members.

'Strike His Forces'

"As long as Qaddafi continues to attack his citizens, we will continue to strike his forces and the assets, facilities and command centers across Libya that are supporting his operations," Clinton said in remarks to other ministers.

Clinton also announced that the U.S. will remove legal barriers to make it easier for oil sales to benefit the TNC.

The Treasury Department recently took steps to remove barriers under U.S. law for oil-related transactions that benefit the Transitional Council. Kuwait announced that it would assist and Clinton called on other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council to help.

The insurgency in Libya, which has Africa's largest proven oil reserves, has helped push oil prices up by almost a third. Oil declined for a fourth day in New York, the longest losing streak in almost eight weeks. Crude oil for June delivery dropped $3.37, or 3.1 percent, to $105.87 a barrel at 9:18 a.m. on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The contract touched $105.11, the lowest level since March 31. Prices are up 32 percent from a year ago.

More Aid Needed

Clinton said the U.S. will provide $53 million toward the United Nations target of raising $310 million for Libyan relief. "They are still a long way from that goal," Clinton said. She noted that the U.S. is providing another $13 million in other relief support for Libya and urged more countries to contribute.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen urged the allies yesterday to channel money to Libya's opposition.

"Funding is a political move to foster regime change and less about protecting Libyan civilians," Jan Techau, director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Brussels and a former German Defense Ministry analyst, said in a phone interview. "Rasmussen wants to find which countries subscribe to regime change and how to pay for it."

Air Strikes

The insurgency against Qaddafi's four-decade rule of Libya began in February and allied forces have been making air strikes since March.

Qaddafi loyalists pounded the rebel-held western port of Misrata yesterday, endangering an aid ship which delivered supplies and picked up stranded migrant workers and wounded Libyans.

A British mine-clearing vessel, HMS Brocklesby, destroyed a mine containing 100 kilograms (220 pounds) of high explosives laid by pro-Qaddafi forces at the entrance to Misrata's harbor, the Ministry of Defense in London said in an e-mailed statement.

British jets attacked two multiple rocket launchers near Sirte on May 3 and a pair of surface-to-air missile launchers near Tripoli yesterday, the ministry said in a separate e-mailed statement.

NATO said in an e-mailed statement its jets flew 62 strike missions on May 3 and that alliance warplanes had targeted six tanks and seven ammunition storage sites.

At the UN in New York, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Argentine lawyer Luis Moreno- Ocampo, said he will seek arrest warrants for three members of Qaddafi's regime who "appear to bear the greatest criminal responsibility" for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Held Accountable

Without specifying Qaddafi by name, Moreno-Ocampo told the UN Security Council that he wants to hold accountable "those who ordered, incited, financed or otherwise planned the commission of the alleged crimes."

He cited evidence of murder, rape, torture, unlawful imprisonment and deportation, as well as a government effort to cover up the alleged crimes. The Qaddafi regime began planning its repression of anti-government demonstrations before they started, after observing the unrest in Egypt and Tunisia, he said.

Foreign Secretary William Hague expelled two Libyan diplomats from the U.K., giving them until May 11 to leave the country, the Foreign Office said.

"I ordered the expulsion of the two diplomats on the basis that their activities were contrary to the interests of the U.K.," Hague said today in an e-mailed statement in London.

To contact the reporters on this story: Nicole Gaouette in Rome at ngaouette@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Silva at msilva34@bloomberg.net

Find out more about Bloomberg for iPad: http://m.bloomberg.com/ipad/

Sent from my iPad

(BN) Trump’s Diggers Should Look for Real Ideas: Margaret Carlson

Could trust the Americans to make him president! White house would be on playboy next!

Bloomberg News, sent from my iPad.

Trump's Diggers Should Look for Real Idea: Margaret Carlson

April 27 (Bloomberg) -- If anyone can grow up to be president, does that mean anyone who runs should be covered as if he could be president, even when he couldn't possibly be?

I'm speaking of Donald Trump. The press is caught in a spiral, covering his possible candidacy and rise in the polls, which necessitate covering him even more.

Trump enjoys the eternal appeal of the barker at the circus, the motivational speaker, the in-your-face huckster. Not for him the buttoned-down demeanor of a CEO with a board of stuffed shirts. The huckster never has to prove he's really successful -- Trump could be in kneecap-breaking hock, for all we know -- so long as he lives as if he is.

What's made this brush with candidacy different than his previous ones is that he's ridden the discredited birther movement for all its worth.

Big-name Republicans, not wanting to lose the roughly 45 percent of their voters who still don't believe Barack Obama is a natural-born citizen, talk about the issue in careful code: "I take the president at his word" (House Speaker John Boehner) or "It's distracting" (Sarah Palin).

Not so the real-estate developer with an ego as tall as a skyscraper. Every time the supposed facts his crack team of investigators discovers in Hawaii are exposed as hokum, he doubles down.

Obama's grandmother never said she was present at his birth in Kenya; a translator did, and it was immediately corrected. Obama's certificate of live birth is genuine. His birth notice in Honolulu newspapers wasn't part of a grand conspiracy to clear the way for him to be president someday.

Case Closed

After the White House today released copies of Obama's long-form birth certificate, Trump was triumphant where others might be apologetic. "From day one, I said I hope he gives the certificate, because I don't want this issue clouding a campaign," Trump told reporters.

Obama, clearly amazed he was having to address such an issue at a press conference aired live by the networks, said it's time to stop being "distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers."

That Trump rode such an ugly horse this far is a stain on some Republicans that exposes how unappealing the roster of presidential aspirants is. One of the best potential candidates, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, said Monday he won't run. That could mean his close friend, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, gets in. Or it could mean that Trump and other out-of- the-mainstream candidates, such as Representative Michele Bachmann, continue to drown out more-plausible, less carnival- ready alternatives. Heard much from Tim Pawlenty lately?

Seeking Attention

Trump's ascension shows our politics are now so roiled that any outsider is appealing. When I spent time with him, in 1999, he was a harmless gadfly, pre-"Apprentice," frustrated that he didn't get more attention for himself and his books. He built his presidential exploratory committee on spec, as if it were a gaudy new building he would flip at any moment.

He had his constituency -- "The guy who picks up the bus at the Port Authority, gets $50 in chips and a ticket for the all-you-can-eat buffet and takes the missus to the Trump Taj Mahal, he loves me," Trump told me then -- and his mansions (his murals rivaled the Sistine Chapel; Mar-a-Lago was superior to the White House), and his name plastered everywhere. It just wasn't enough.

Family Values

Even after an ugly divorce from Ivana and a tabloid-hot romance with Marla "Best Sex I Ever Had" Maples, he could quickly correct for running low on family values. "I could be married in 24 hours," he said, shining the lamp in the back of his limousine on his then-companion, now-wife, model Melania Knauss. "Is this the next first lady of the United States, or what?"

His marital status isn't all that's changed. This time around he's pro-life, pro-religion, pro-bombing for Mideast oil, and anti-health care reform. (He used to support a single-payer system.) He once proposed a 20 percent surtax on Japanese imports, back when he hated Japan for the Toyotas they made the way he now loathes the Chinese for the cheap building materials they provide.

Trump is a more clownish and vulgar version of the amateurs who jump into presidential politics without engaging much but their mouths previously: the Pats (Buchanan and Robertson), moralists (Alan Keyes and Gary Bauer), and businessmen (tire magnate Morry Taylor, data-processing magnate Ross Perot and magnate-chronicler Steve Forbes).

No Ideas

At least some of the amateurs had a cause. Perot, whose flameout included imagined black helicopters buzzing his daughter's wedding, ran on the idea that deficits were bad, Buchanan on "America First," Forbes on a flat tax. Trump is running on almost no ideas at all.

That doesn't seem to bother one high-profile conservative, Franklin Graham. The Christian evangelist and son of Billy Graham told ABC's Christiane Amanpour that the more you listen to Trump, "the more you say to yourself, you know, maybe the guy is right."

Donald Trump, prospective candidate of the godly set. Try selling that as a reality show.

(Margaret Carlson, author of "Anyone Can Grow Up: How George Bush and I Made It to the White House" and former White House correspondent for Time magazine, is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are her own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Margaret Carlson in Washington at mcarlson3@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this column: James Greiff at jgreiff@bloomberg.net

Find out more about Bloomberg for iPad: http://m.bloomberg.com/ipad/

Sent from my iPad

(BN) China Declares Victory Over Rapid Population Rise as Focus Shifts to Aging

Deceleration. Like death and taxes. 

Bloomberg News, sent from my iPad.

China Says Population Growth Controlled, Focuses on Aging

April 29 (Bloomberg) -- China declared victory over rapid population growth as the release of its decennial census signaled the focus will turn to managing the impact of a faster- than-expected rise in the number of older people.

China had 1.34 billion people as of Nov. 1, the Beijing- based National Bureau of Statistics said yesterday. While still the most populous country, the higher birth rate of India's 1.2 billion people puts it on course to take the title when the South Asian nation holds its next census in 2021.

Success in capping the population growth through the three- decade-old one-child policy presents China's leaders with another problem as the swelling ranks of retirees create pressure to boost social welfare programs and pose a risk to the economic growth needed to fund them. The over-60s make up 13.3 percent of the population, 1 percentage point more than forecast and half as much again as in India, United Nations data show.

"The working age population is due to start falling within the next three or four years," said Jim Walker, managing director at Hong Kong-based Asianomics Ltd. and former chief economist at CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets. "These 9, 10 percent growth rates people have become accustomed to are not sustainable for very much longer."

Investors should put their money in countries where the prospects for return on equity are highest, such as India, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and the Philippines, he said.

Trends Continue

Economic growth will slow "as demographic trends continue, highlighting the need to rebalance the economy over the next decade to prepare for such a transition," RBC Capital Markets analysts, including Hong Kong-based Brian Jackson, wrote in a report published today. Growth would likely slow to 8 percent-10 percent in the coming 5-10 years, from the average 11.2 percent over the past five years, they said, citing government officials.

India will overtake China as the world's fastest-growing economy by 2013 as it adds six times more workers to its labor pool, Morgan Stanley said in a report last year. People 14 years old and under make up 16.6 percent of China's population, a decline of 6.3 percentage points from the 2000 census. Almost one in three Indians are in that group, Bloomberg data show.

China risks having to support retirees at per capita wealth levels that are only a fraction of aging developed countries and needs a better pension system to avoid what Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said is the danger of growing old "before getting rich."

Fiscal Pressure

"The aging population is set to add fiscal pressure on the government in the medium and long term, which makes it imperative to put in place a well-functioning pension and health care system as soon as possible," said Chang Jian, a Hong Kong- based economist with Barclays Capital who previously worked at the World Bank and Hong Kong Monetary Authority.

With more than $3 trillion in foreign exchange reserves, the government "has deep pockets now" and should be able to manage the aging of the country as long as economic growth rates remain high, Chang said.

China's slowing population growth is a product of its family planning system and the policy of limiting urban residents to one child per woman, Ma Jiantang, head of the National Statistics Bureau, told reporters in Beijing yesterday. Annual population growth was 0.57 percent between 2000 and 2010, half a percentage point lower than the 1.07 percent annual growth between 1990 and 2000, according to the census figures.

"Our national basic policy of family planning has been well implemented and the overly rapid population growth momentum is effectively under control," Ma said. Still, the proportion of people over 60 years old was 2.9 percentage points higher than in 2000, and that trend is "gradually accelerating," according to the statistics bureau.

UBS, Blackrock

The trillions of dollars China's hundreds of millions of workers will need in retirement savings may be a boon for global lenders and asset managers.

UBS AG, Blackrock Inc. and State Street Corp. help China's National Social Security Fund invest assets overseas, according to the International Monetary Fund. China's 856.8 billion yuan ($131.8 billion) national pension fund may increase its global investments and has 18 billion yuan invested with private-equity funds, Wang Zhongmin, vice chairman of the National Council for Social Security, said March 30.

As China's population growth slows, it is also becoming more urban. City dwellers swelled to 665.6 million last year, more than twice the population of the U.S. China is close to having more residents in cities and towns than in villages for the first time in its history. The urban population makes up 49.7 percent of the total, 13.5 percentage points higher than a decade ago, the NBS said.

Contradictions, Challenges

The one-child policy, which has resulted in millions of aborted female fetuses, has led to men making up 51.3 percent of the population, with 34 million more men than women. Most countries have more women than men, including the U.S., where 50.3 percent of the population was female in 2010, according to U.S. census data.

The census figures show that "we still face some contradictions and challenges in population, economic and social development," including an aging population and an "unbalanced gender ratio," Ma said.

China will eventually move to a two-child policy, the China Business News reported yesterday, citing an unidentified person close to policy makers. Farmers and national minorities can often have more than one child, and rich people can pay fines for having a second or third child.

Investors have overlooked the implications of changes in China's population profile "because of the extreme focus on growth," said Kirby Daley, a Hong Kong-based senior strategist with Newedge Group's prime brokerage business. "The demographic issues cannot be avoided at this point. They are not reversible."

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Paul Panckhurst at ppanckhurst@bloomberg.net

Find out more about Bloomberg for iPad: http://m.bloomberg.com/ipad/

Sent from my iPad

Business Illusionist Donald Trump Perfect For President

usiness Illusionist Donald Trump Perfect For President
May. 1 2011 - 11:42 pm | 2,529 views | 0 recommendations | 2 comments

Trump for president?
The country is tired of Barack Obama and his unfulfilled campaign promises. Voters are equally unhappy with the Congress which is bickering over pennies when it’s Ben Franklin’s face on hundred dollar bills we need to be watching. Cutting off funding for free jazz and opera broadcasts on National Public Radio hardly seems the ticket out of our deficit problems yet that is what John Boehner is focusing on in the House these days.

National disquiet makes it seems as if the G.O.P. ought to be able to present a viable candidate who might actually have some fresh ideas to address our nation’s woes. The list is long: unemployment, an out of control deficit, a broken educational system and immigration (foreigners are still trying to sneak into the “land of opportunity”). Then there is the issue of how we are going to care for our senior citizens going forward in a way that we can afford and that fulfills our implicit obligations to our elders who often cannot fend well for themselves.

Up looms the ‘B’ word: bankruptcy. The national deficit is on the front pages on a daily basis. Standard & Poor’s recently placed the U.S. of A. on credit watch for a possible downgrade. We are told that while states cannot go bankrupt but local municipalities can. Unlike cities, towns and states, the United States has one unique capability. It can print money. They must be working overtime down there in Washington at the Mint.

As our country hurtles toward the possibility of bankruptcy, we need a man who understands the bankruptcy laws inside and out. We need a leader who has been to the brink or gone over the falls in his corporate barrel more times than you can think of. Enter Donald Trump. If practice makes perfect, who do you know who has filed for bankruptcy more times than Donald Trump’s businesses?

One could say that Donald Trump started with a large silver spoon in his mouth. His father, Fred Trump, was a well known real estate developer in Brooklyn and Queens and left a fortune to his four children variously estimated at between $150 and $250 million. Donald’s older sister, Maryanne Trump Barry is a N.J. Superior Court Judge who is one of the wealthiest jurists in the nation.

In the early 1990s Trump almost went over the cliff of personal bankruptcy. He advises in his books to never personally guarantee business loans and admitted he didn’t follow his own good advice. The country was in a downturn and was vastly overleveraged. He had also made the extreme error of personally guaranteeing his commercial real estate loans. He was quoted in 1997 in the New York Daily News that his personal wealth was about minus $900 million.

Over the decades, “the Donald,” as his former wife Ivana dubbed him some years back, has avoided personal bankruptcy by borrowing heavily from his very rich father and his siblings when there was no other option, and by playing brinkmanship very well. Even so, his companies have very publicly failed on many occasions.

In 1989, Trump bought the Eastern Airlines shuttle service from Eastern as it was trying to stave off its own collapse by selling off its better assets. He renamed it The Trump Shuttle and tried to class up the service and its image. The Eastern shuttle was an efficient service for business people to get back and forth from NY to Boston or D.C. Nobody cared if it was fancy inside the plane or not. It didn’t take much for the Trump Shuttle to fail in an economic downturn. It was loaded with way too much debt, a Trump hallmark. Rather rapidly, in September 1990, never having made a dime, the Citibank led group of 22 banks foreclosed on the Trump Shuttle’s $380 million loan. That was Trump’s first introduction to the bankruptcy courts but he’s been there several times since.

As the New York real estate market cratered, Trump was able to work his way out of his difficulties by 1. turning to his family for desperately needed cash, 2. convincing those who held his loans that they were more likely to recoup their money if they allowed him to stay involved in the workouts. He lost vast parts of his real estate empire along the way. Think the Plaza Hotel, the NYC Rail Yards (now the Riverside Complex) and other properties as well. He nonetheless carried on in a way that obscured this fact from the public, especially those outside New York City. New Yorkers could read about Donald’s travails in the NY Daily News if not elsewhere and knew then that he is really mostly bluster and bluff and lives a life as full of puff as his ridiculous hair do.

Bankruptcy laws were intended to allow companies to reorganize their businesses and keep going when debts overwhelm them. Sometimes there is a path to the future if given time and a better economy to bail you out. Bankruptcy usually results in the wiping away of considerable debt that can otherwise hobble a company. Debtholders often wind up with control of the company and stockholders are wiped out completely. Excessive debt makes it impossible to ever survive the rising interest costs you must pay once your debt becomes junk . It is hard to have any money left to remain competitive. On a smaller scale, think about your credit cards that started with low interest rates that zoomed to 30% during the recent banking crisis if you were late with a payment.

To Trump, bankruptcy is simply a useful “tool.” For sure, it works if you have no regard for your fellow shareholders who are pretty much wiped out in the bankruptcy process. In the case of his casinos, Trump has screwed his shareholders three consecutive times by wiping out their invest. If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. In 1992, Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Castle and Trump Plaza had $1 billion in debt when the 1990-91 recession hit. This was simultaneous with the failure of the Trump Shuttle. The first go at Chapter 11 was in 1992 and Trump’s stake was reduced to 50% by the bondholders.

The second time around was in 2004 when Trump Marina, Trump Taj Mahal and Trump Plaza in Atlantic City filed for bankruptcy. In an interview with Neil Cavuto on Fox News, Trump said: “I don’t think it is a failure. It’s a success.” That time the debts totaled $1.8 billion. The third time, it was Trump Entertainment Resorts that filed for chapter 11. In an interview with Neil Cavuto that day,Trump bragged that “we have a lot of cash.” He also said that “bankruptcy is a tool. And you can use bankruptcy to your advantage.” The modus operandi was to reorganize, retain a huge salary and other payouts to himself, even if you still have a ton of debt so the company is likely doomed to go down yet again. The last time, he and his daughter simply quit the week the company went bust so he could say he no longer had a role in the company and even though it had his name on it.

If, like the Donald, you are used to being involved in defaults in the billions, one surmises it would be easy an easy transition to the concept of owing trillions as the United States has now done. George W. Bush pushed us off that ledge of a balanced budget when he came into office in 2001. Now, it seems, there is no turning back. It’s quite amazing to think how low we have sunk in only a decade. In the midst of this, the current ill regarded Congress with an approval rating lower than President Obama’s is fittingly focusing on National Public Radio and the small dollars we spend on making classical music, jazz and opera available to the masses who can’t afford $100 tickets to walk into live performances.

For Trump, the U.S. presidential race, must be amazingly enticing as a self promotional tool and a way to further aggrandize his limitless ego. It’s a free national platform with zero cost advertising. Forget the recently reported facts that only once in the last number of decades has Trump bothered to vote in a primary since 1989, according to the New York Board of Elections records. LINK: He hasn’t always voted in regular elections either.

When you are a publicity hound to promote your other business activities, just having your name in the papers is reward enough. It embellishes your brand. It garners viewers for your The Apprentice shows. It drives even more tourists to New York to have their photographs taken in front of Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue and emailing them home via their cell phones. Maybe one of them will decide to buy an apartment from someone to whom Mr. Trump has licensed his name.

At some point Trump will have to get off the Obama birther flap now that the President Obama has published the long form of his certificate of live birth. He must move onto important issues that voters want addressed. That has to be really challenging for a man with little apparent substance or interest in policy matters. Not only has Trump embellished his net worth over time but also his veracity has been called into question regarding even the height of his buildings and the number of floors they contain. This was highlighted in New York magazine in 2001.

Remember that to run for public office, you must reveal your personal finances. Since Trump is quite vested in embellishing his net worth at every possible opportunity, his jig would be up rather quickly. In 2009, Trump sued a reporter at the New York Times who wrote that in reality he was at best a millionaire, but surely not a billionaire no matter where he showed up in the Forbes 400 list. The N.J. Judge, Michelle J. Fox, threw the case out of her court.

While Trump isn’t quite as bad as Newt Gingrich in his marital infidelity record, he did have an open affair with Marla Maples, 17 years his junior, that resulted in his nasty divorce from Ivana Trump. (Ivana was famously quoted as saying: “Don’t get mad. Get Everything.” She left their marriage with an estate in Westchester, $10 million in cash which the Donald had to borrow from friends and family to pay her off, and reportedly 49% of the Mar-A-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla, but Donald denies that he had to go hat in hand. Ivana also got a nice set of alimony and child support payments to keep her going in the future. Maples had already given birth to their daughter, Tiffany, two months before she and Donald finally got married in 1993. The marriage went through five postponements as he insisted on a “pre-nup” as described in the People magazine article linked above. She left with only $2 million. He’s now married to Melania Knauss, who is 24 years his junior and he has one son with her named Barron born March 20, 2006.

P.T. Barnum had nothing on Donald Trump. In fact, we could argue that beyond being a promoter of the first order, Trump missed his true calling. It isn’t rendering business advice on TV. It isn’t building tall, gaudy buildings that will far outlast him. It isn’t being a circus barker as Barack Obama called him recently in the flap about Obama’s live birth certificate. Trump really is an illusionist when it comes to his net worth, just like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz.

Also implicit in seeking public office is to engage the voters, kiss babies, and shake hands with your adoring public. However, Trump is an admitted “germophobe.” He cannot shake hands with others. How do you run for office that way? If he does, Purell, the maker of hand sanitizers, is going to love this man!

Joan E. Lappin, CFA
Gramercy Capital Mgt. Corp.

Warren Buffett, do yourself a favour, buy out the whole damn company. Shareholders are a pain in the ass.

• 
  
• 
  
tion 
• APRIL 27, 2011, 6:27 PM ET

What Did Buffett Know and When Did He Know It? (Updated)

• Berkshire Internal Investigation: Sokol Violated Policies, but Was It Insider Trading? (Update)
• Futures Dip Slightly After GDP Growth Falters; Exxon, Pepsi, P&G Drop After Earnings (Updated)

• EMAIL
• PRINT
• PERMALINK
• • TWITTER
  • FACEBOOK
  • YAHOO! BUZZ
  • STUMBLEUPON
  • DIGG
  • FARK
  • REDDIT
  • MYSPACE
  • LINKEDIN
  • DEL.ICIO.US
• Text Size

By Avi Salzman

The Berkshire Hathaway (BRKB) report on top Berkshire executive David Sokol’sresignation makes Sokol’s deception seem much more extensive than it appeared inChairman and Chief Executive Warren Buffett’s initial letter announcing the resignation. The investigation also sheds new light on Buffett’s role, and makes parts of the letter he released announcing Sokol’s resignation seem enigmatic, if not outright evasive. We’ve outlined the committee’s basic findings in a previous post.

Sokol apparently met with Citigroup bankers to suss out potential acquisition targets in December. Of 18 chemical companies Citi analyzed for him, Sokol zeroed in on Lubrizol (LZ) and asked Citi to see whether its CEO James Hambrick would meet with him.

Meanwhile, Sokol started buying Lubrizol shares the day after he met with the Citi bankers. And he kept buying even after his friends at Citi told him that Hambrick would meet with him and intended to pass along his interest to Lubrizol’s board. When Sokol eventually went to Buffett with his recommendation that Berkshire buy Lubrizol, he didn’t mention the Citi bankers, or the timing of his share purchases. The report described the meeting at which Sokol first talked to Bufffett about Lubrizol:

“Mr. Sokol mentioned that he owned the stock. He did not disclose: the amounts and timing of his purchases; the fact that he bought the shares after discussing Lubrizol with Citi and after Mr. Sokol had narrowed the bankers’ initial list of 18 chemicals companies to one, namely Lubrizol; the fact that Mr. Sokol had bought shares after Mr. Sokol (acting as a senior representative of Berkshire Hathaway scouting acquisition candidates) had asked for Citi’s help arranging a meeting with Lubrizol’s CEO to discuss Lubrizol and Berkshire; and the fact that Mr. Sokol bought shares after learning that Citi had discussed his request for a meeting with Lubrizol’s CEO, who told Citi that he would discuss Berkshire Hathaway’s possible interest in a transaction with the Lubrizol board.”

But Buffett, who said in his letter that Sokol’s resignation “came as a surprise to me,” was apparently suspicious of Sokol as early as March 15, the day after the Lubrizol deal was announced:

“A Citi representative with whom Berkshire Hathaway did business congratulated Mr. Buffett on the merger agreement, and told Mr. Buffett that Citi’s investment bankers had brought Lubrizol to Mr. Sokol’s attention…At Mr. Buffett’s request, Berkshire Hathaway CFO Marc Hamburg phoned Mr. Sokol on March 15. Mr. Hamburg asked Mr. Sokol for the details of his Lubrizol stockholdings. Mr. Sokol provided the dates and amounts of his Lubrizol purchases. Mr. Hamburg also asked about Citi’s role in introducing Mr. Sokol to Lubrizol. Mr. Sokol answered that he thought he had called a banker he knew at Citi to get Mr. Hambrick’s phone number. When Mr. Hamburg commented that it sounded as if the banker must have exaggerated his role when he spoke with his colleagues, Mr. Sokol did not contradict him.

Berkshire learned between March 17 and March 25 that Sokol had bought shares even after asking Citi to set up the meeting with Hambrick, which the audit committee says was a violation of Berkshire’s insider trading policies. Buffett got back from a trip to Asia on March 26, and received Sokol’s resignation letter on March 28. But Buffett said in his letter that he had talked to Sokol on March 27 “about various operating matters and received no hint of his intention to resign.” So even after Berkshire had learned that Sokol had bought the shares, a violation of Berkshire policies, Buffett spoke to Sokol and didn’t even bring the purchases up, and then was surprised by his resignation?

The audit committee doesn’t push the Buffett angle, and it’s unclear whether it will dent the Oracle’s reputation. Obviously, the details about Sokol are much more damning.

One more interesting revelation: Although Sokol had been mentioned numerous times as a Buffett successor, a position that comes with the unspoken title as “greatest investor in the world,” Sokol told Buffett he wasn’t interested in the job. Of course, it’s easy to say that on your way out.

“On March 29, Mr. Buffett provided Mr. Sokol an opportunity to review for accuracy a draft Mr. Buffett had prepared of a press release announcing Mr. Sokol’s resignation and disclosing Mr. Sokol’s Lubrizol trades. At Mr. Sokol’s request, Mr. Buffett deleted from the release the one passage Mr. Sokol said was inaccurate: a passage that implied that Mr. Sokol had resigned because he must have known the Lubrizol trades would likely hurt his chances of being Mr. Buffett’s successor. Mr. Sokol told Mr. Buffett that he had not hoped to be Mr. Buffett’s successor, and was resigning for reasons unrelated to those trades. Except for that deletion, Mr. Sokol concurred in the accuracy of the press release. For example, Mr. Sokol left unchanged the statement that when Mr. Sokol made his purchases, he “did not know what Lubrizol’s reaction would be” if Mr. Buffett developed an interest in a transaction. Mr. Sokol also left unchanged Mr. Buffett’s statement that he had “held back nothing in this press release”

(Update: Sokol’s lawyer Barry Levine has responded to the board, saying that Sokol’s trades were above board and that he had been considering a Lubrizol investment before meeting with the Citi bankers. He said Sokol told Buffett twice about his Lubrizol investment, not once. Levine also claimed that the Berkshire committee didn’t seek to interview Sokol — the board has since responded that Sokol was interviewed 3 times and that Sokol’s lawyer had not responded to another attempted interview.)

The fall of Singapore - goodbye if PAP loses power.

Singapore is the last true city state in the world. Its existence is premised upon a strong, single party control of the top minds. Top minds that are nurtured over the course of decades.

Singaporeans who support the opposition do not know the fire they are playing with. They lap up the puny arguments of the opposition. They do not see the big picture. In particular are the young, who are oblivious to their superficial understanding of the real world. They think of democracy as the goal, and have seen too much peace, stability and progress. 

It is time for Singapore perhaps to see decline and destruction.

In the event of a loss of control of PAP of the government, I expect to see the country slide down to mediocrity. Singaporeans are largely Chinese, and they are Chinese in general are self serving. Unless Singapore chooses sensibly, it will self destruct without much external influence.

On Chen Show Mao, Mr Low's motives and the WP's missing plans

Letter from Yeo Hong Meng

06:25 PM May 01, 2011

At every General Election, the Workers' Party has never failed to drum up high expectations or to play big time on the emotion of the electorate with their introduction of one 'celebrity', such as Mr Francis Seow, Mr Tang Liang Hong and Dr James Gomez. But each time, controversies would arise and they would either disappear or jump ship like Dr Gomez. So it's only fair for me to question the sincerity and commitment of the WP' latest star candidate, Dr Chen Show Mao.

I still do not buy this notion that after 30 years abroad he remains committed and connected with Singapore. Where was he when Singapore was striving to move up from Third World to First World? Where was he when the 1998 Asian financial crisis hit us or for that matter, when deadly SARS hit? Coming back to Singapore four or five times a year does not make one any closer to his motherland. What were his contributions to Singapore at the peak of his life? Can he tell us categorically he does not hold a US passport? No doubt Dr Chen is a man of calibre but that does not mean he has the right fit as a politician who is needed to not only act as a check on the Government but also work the ground and be close to constituents.

I am puzzled by what Mr Low said with regard to why he and his team in Aljunied GRC cannot come up with a plan for the GRC. As Mr Low has been an MP for over 20 years, the financial statements of Aljunied GRC are available for his scrutiny; and the voters will not blame him if he puts a caveat to his proposed plans that they can only materialise if the team is able to get the necessary funds. Yet he has dodged the issue, and asked to be elected before coming up with a municipal budget. Is this fair?

Whe he was first elected as MP for Hougang, did it the ambition of forming an alternative government not occur to Mr Low then? Twenty years on and with the entry of a 'star catch', he has now decided to go for broke. He told voters it was the most difficult decision yet. Is it not fair for me to question his motives, when even the WP's chairman acknowledges the WP is not a position to form an alternative government?

As to its notion of a First World Parliament - had the WP put up its current slate of candidates back in the 80s or 90s, it would have given the PAP a run for its money. But times have changed, we need to raise the bar and we no longer just need a voice in the Parliament, we need people who can work and come up with concrete solutions to help solve domestic and international problems. We do not need eloquent orators to evoke emotions and at the end of the day, are just talk but no action. Singapore cannot afford to spend time debating endlessly on every matter in the name of democracy.

Finally, has Mr Low been fair to his rival Mr George Yeo? He told Aljunied in the 2006 election that Mr Yeo was hardly around due to his responsibilities as a Foreign Minister, but five years on, Mr Yeo has fulfilled his promises to his constituents and juggled his tight schedule to make time for them. Yet when he asked Mr Low what his plans for Aljunied were, Mr Low was not able to say.