Tharman says not govt's role to comment on GIC, Temasek investments


Status
Not open for further replies.

razor

Senior Member
May 3, 2003
1,743
0
0
11
Woody Land
www.razin-photography.com
#1
The MP for Ang Mo Kio GRC, Inderjit Singh, asked, "In July last year, Temasek invested a few billion dollars into Barclays Bank... From what I understand, these values have now gone down to half of the investment
oh well...
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#3
sshh.. the barclay thing wasn't really made publicly known, it was only reported in some overseas financial times.


it's not Gov't role to comment, cos as we all know all investments carries risks and you know how the story goes.. come on, it's an honest mistake, let's move on.
 

waileong

Deregistered
Feb 5, 2003
2,519
0
0
Visit site
#4
How would you know it's an honest mistake when no info has been provided?
 

Yappy

Senior Member
May 30, 2004
1,321
1
38
#5
sshh.. the barclay thing wasn't really made publicly known, it was only reported in some overseas financial times.


it's not Gov't role to comment, cos as we all know all investments carries risks and you know how the story goes.. come on, it's an honest mistake, let's move on.
You take calculated risk. Sometimes you loose and sometimes you win. However if you win more you.. ?

Should the government intervence when they make money or only question when they loose an investment!
 

creampuff

Senior Member
Jul 11, 2006
5,116
1
0
Dover
#6
sshh.. the barclay thing wasn't really made publicly known, it was only reported in some overseas financial times.


it's not Gov't role to comment, cos as we all know all investments carries risks and you know how the story goes.. come on, it's an honest mistake, let's move on.
Honestly, I'm afraid you sound like a govt apologist... whatever happened to the word accountability? Or shouldn't they be held to account at all? Keeping thing under wraps so that people will forget and the problem will go away eventually? Not the Govt's role to comment? Pray tell then which body does the GIC report to? Pleease give us all a break...
 

burger

New Member
Aug 6, 2005
189
0
0
CCK
#7
There are always very good, good, average, bad and very bad investments. Why pick on one investment instead of looking at the whole portfolio? :dunno:
 

waileong

Deregistered
Feb 5, 2003
2,519
0
0
Visit site
#8
The bosses of Citi, Merill Lynch, UBS, etc. all lost their jobs because of one bad decision, didn't they? One bad oversight, one thing that happened during their watch... That's accountability.

Did they go around saying, "it's not my role to comment on why my subordinates invested in the sub-prime market"?

When you deal with billions of dollars, there are no "honest" mistakes. There are only mistakes and wrongdoings. For mistakes, people lose their jobs. For wrongdoings, people go to jail.

That's the price to be in the game.

That is why American CEO's earn obscene amounts in bonuses and stock options. Because of the risk involved.

They know that one mistake means their corporate career is finished, that they can never ever come back to business again. And Sox means that negligence or deception is punishable by jail.

Which is why they have such handsome golden parachutes. Because of the risk involved.

That's accountability.
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#9
nice sounding, but do you think merrill lynch only had 8 top bankers involved in their fiasco? :)

link

it's all very nice to sound dramatic and make it sound as if it's a warzone. unfortunately, such stuff only happens on tv. sackings happen. jobs are lost. but heyyy you know how it works.

p.s. i'm more interested in temasek's overall performance than just one portfolio. name me one person who can invest and get it right all the time regardless, and i will quit school and just lick his boots until i get his skills. unfortunately, such a person does not seem to exist.
 

waileong

Deregistered
Feb 5, 2003
2,519
0
0
Visit site
#10
You miss the point. I'll repeat it. ACCOUNTABILITY.

It means the guy with the authority is responsible for the actions of his subordinates and for the firm as a whole.

If he approved their actions, he's totally responsible. If he knew about it and didn't stop it, he's still responsible. If he didn't even know about it, he's responsible for the failure to keep a proper watch.

The buck stops with him.

Nobody gets it right all the time and investors do forgive small mistakes. That's why the bosses of HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, etc. are still around, although they lost money too (about US$1.5B in JPMC's case). But large mistakes cannot be forgiven.

You may disagree with the system. But those are the rules of the game. The guys who take up these jobs, they know it from Day 1.

That's why CEO's like them get the big bucks. Because they'll have to be the fall guy if anything happens during their watch.

nice sounding, but do you think merrill lynch only had 8 top bankers involved in their fiasco? :)

p.s. i'm more interested in temasek's overall performance than just one portfolio. name me one person who can invest and get it right all the time regardless, and i will quit school and just lick his boots until i get his skills. unfortunately, such a person does not seem to exist.
 

Yappy

Senior Member
May 30, 2004
1,321
1
38
#12
Honestly, I'm afraid you sound like a govt apologist... whatever happened to the word accountability? Or shouldn't they be held to account at all? Keeping thing under wraps so that people will forget and the problem will go away eventually? Not the Govt's role to comment? Pray tell then which body does the GIC report to? Pleease give us all a break...
We are lucky to have a govt like ours. They have their ups and downs... strength and weakness..Can you find a better one? Please let me know. i would like to join them.

To know more about GIC, just key GIC in Google and you see all.... nothing is wrapped!

and also what type of break are you talking about?
 

Yappy

Senior Member
May 30, 2004
1,321
1
38
#13
You miss the point. I'll repeat it. ACCOUNTABILITY.

It means the guy with the authority is responsible for the actions of his subordinates and for the firm as a whole.

If he approved their actions, he's totally responsible. If he knew about it and didn't stop it, he's still responsible. If he didn't even know about it, he's responsible for the failure to keep a proper watch.

The buck stops with him.

Nobody gets it right all the time and investors do forgive small mistakes. That's why the bosses of HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, etc. are still around, although they lost money too (about US$1.5B in JPMC's case). But large mistakes cannot be forgiven.

You may disagree with the system. But those are the rules of the game. The guys who take up these jobs, they know it from Day 1.

That's why CEO's like them get the big bucks. Because they'll have to be the fall guy if anything happens during their watch.
This is actually what we are looking at. The final outcome of the investment. If at the end of the day, you make and recover, do you still go after the so call 'accountability'?

You must remember, sometimes the return is not immediate, it could be one or two years down the road.
 

Yappy

Senior Member
May 30, 2004
1,321
1
38
#14
There are always very good, good, average, bad and very bad investments. Why pick on one investment instead of looking at the whole portfolio? :dunno:
I agreed with you. One should look at the overall performance instead of only one. You cant win all the times!

It may sound bad now, but who's know, you may get back your investment later.
 

Mar 5, 2006
262
0
0
#15
Let's sweep this under the carpet. Whoopse, the 3m carpet is almost full beneath.

ok, to be honest, there is no right or wrong in investment. The calculation has to be correct at the point just before pressing the green button. His as is on the job, like it or not.

If market plunged on the whole, their as is covered. If a particular investment devalues drastically during a boom time, then corruption is suspected.

Accountability applies to both private and non private sector. It's a matter of how one prepares for unexpected twists. If one has the guts to take the hot seat, he would have the wit to fend off any rumor. Beside, he belongs to the same pack of wolfs.

For the rest of us, LPPL. Life goes on.
 

reachme2003

Senior Member
Oct 6, 2003
3,735
0
0
#16
what tharman meant is govt do not comment on such investments publicly.
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#17
Honestly, I'm afraid you sound like a govt apologist... whatever happened to the word accountability? Or shouldn't they be held to account at all? Keeping thing under wraps so that people will forget and the problem will go away eventually? Not the Govt's role to comment? Pray tell then which body does the GIC report to? Pleease give us all a break...
hehe.. why don't you find out and tell us all? I'm just a common peasant.
 

waileong

Deregistered
Feb 5, 2003
2,519
0
0
Visit site
#18
1. Heard of Micropolis?

2. Has anyone ever been held accountable for a bad Temasek/GIC investment?

This is actually what we are looking at. The final outcome of the investment. If at the end of the day, you make and recover, do you still go after the so call 'accountability'?

You must remember, sometimes the return is not immediate, it could be one or two years down the road.
 

waileong

Deregistered
Feb 5, 2003
2,519
0
0
Visit site
#19
1. Volumes have been written about investment by thousands of authors, whoc would beg to differ with you. There is a right and wrong for every investment.

2. Investment losses are typically due to inadequate risk management or emotions, corruption has nothing to do with it. The investment books teach you to look at investments rationally, to cut losses rather where necessary. You hire investment managers not because they can predict the market, but because they know how to deal with what the market throws at them. No one can predict where the market will go, but the smart managers are the ones who know when to cut losses and know how to ride the winners.


ok, to be honest, there is no right or wrong in investment. The calculation has to be correct at the point just before pressing the green button. His as is on the job, like it or not.

If market plunged on the whole, their as is covered. If a particular investment devalues drastically during a boom time, then corruption is suspected.

Accountability applies to both private and non private sector. It's a matter of how one prepares for unexpected twists. If one has the guts to take the hot seat, he would have the wit to fend off any rumor. Beside, he belongs to the same pack of wolfs.

For the rest of us, LPPL. Life goes on.
 

Yappy

Senior Member
May 30, 2004
1,321
1
38
#20
1. Heard of Micropolis?

2. Has anyone ever been held accountable for a bad Temasek/GIC investment?
Ha... and you remembered the Micropolis. I think it was a good lesson learnt and burnt badly. A loss is sometimes a gain. Are we not thriving after the loss? Can we always win? Accountability, yes accountablity.. how do you know that no head roll?

Yes over the years... the GIC made some wrong decisions and I believe much was loss.. but at the end if he or she regain and recover... so what so bad about it?
No venture no gain.. do you want our monies to stay at maybe 2% interest yearly or do you want to throw the line and get a big fish?
We are not the richest but we are neither the poorest. We have enough to allow the current, the next and the future generation to enjoy the fruit... so where do you think the money from?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom