ma 的个人资料乐林书香照片日志列表更多  |  工具 帮助 |
|
8月24日 次级债次级债危机大概是这些日子最热的新闻之一了, 充斥报章,电视,网络经济头条. 转一篇通俗有趣的.
"
A basic principle of high uncertainty is to be careful. This principle also applies to analyses of the situation, even if decisiveness in the face of turmoil is at a premium. Better wait than make things worse. Here a few observations to sort through the emerging debate. As financial anxiety keeps mounting worldwide, comments flourish and joyfully contradict each other. Central banks are bailing out dangerous gamblers, says one. They are skillfully preventing a 1929-style crash, says another one. Things are being gradually normalized, some assert. This is just the beginning of a vicious circle of unforeseen meltdown, just wait, warn others. One thing all agree about is that uncertainty, which market participants with short memories – many of whom were teenagers or unborn the last big time around – thought was a thing of the past, has made a striking comeback. Uncertainty did not just hit markets all over the world, it is affecting our understanding as well, hence the wide disparity of opinions. A basic principle of high uncertainty is to be careful. This principle also applies to analyses of the situation, even if decisiveness in the face of turmoil is at a premium. Better wait than make things worse. Here are a few observations to sort through the emerging debate. The origin of the problem is pretty well understood and adequately described in Stephen Cecchetti’s posting. As the US housing bubble is working its way out, mortgaged loans go sour. Since the institutions that granted these loans have promptly sold them on – this is the securitization process – to other institutions, which sold them on to others, and so on again and again, those who suffer losses are the ultimate holders. There are so many of them, all over the world, that no one knows where the losses are being borne. It could even be you, through your pension fund or some innocuous-looking investment. The second observation that all agree about, is that the total size of the now-infamous subprime loans, even augmented by normal mortgages, does not add up to a huge amount. Normally, most financial institutions should be able to absorb them with much damage. Of course, a few may have bought too much of the stuff and they will go belly-up, but that is how things normally are. Most significant financial institutions should be able to absorb those particular losses. In fact, no one can claim to be surprised by the mortgage crisis. For years now, the consensus view was that the US housing market was undergoing a bubble. The implication all along was that a correction would occur, with all the consequences. The correction has been underway for months, and in slow motion, which gave plenty of time for all to make adequate preparations. To be sure, some brave contrarians may have thought otherwise and bet accordingly. But it would be a momentous surprise if all respectable large financial institutions did not ready themselves. So far, so good. Why the interbank market crisis, then? Here comes the securitization story, and it is not controversial either. The dilution of risk is a good thing, no doubt about it. But it is generally the case that any good thing has some drawback. In this case the drawback is that no one knows who holds how much of these bad loans. Where things got bad is that, the same as many other human beings, and maybe a little moreso, financiers are prone to mood swings. When all was going well, they trusted each other as if they had gone to the same schools, which in fact they did. When the situation soured, they went at light speed to the other corner and started to suspect that everyone else was more in trouble, especially those they knew best because they went to school together. So the interbank market froze. This is where disagreements emerge. Did the central banks do the right thing? Some observers lament that they should act as lenders of last resort, which means intervening sparingly at punishing cost. The problem with that view is that central banks did not intervene as lenders of last resort. All central banks have the responsibility of assuring the orderly functioning of the financial markets. The interbank market is the mother of all financial markets, and it was drying up. So the central banks had no choice but to restart them. In addition, modern central banks operate by announcing an interest rate, the interbank rate. If they don’t enforce that rate, they destroy their own chosen strategy, which has served them well so far. This strategy allows them to change the interbank rate any time they wish. But until they do so, they have no choice but to make that rate stick. As for punishment, who were they supposed to punish? Not a particular bank, this time. The market, then? Collective punishment is generally a bad idea. In this case, it would be a terrible idea. If central banks punish the interbank market, they punish all financial markets, and therefore they punish all those who depend on these markets, which means almost all of humanity. Even Castro and Kim Jong Il. The next big disagreement is whether things will become worse. It is easy to build scenarios that lead to disaster. Many excellent stories circulate and, like any good horror stories, they ring true. They usually describe hedge funds with serious exposure to subprime loans as quickly trying to restore solvency by selling their best assets, pushing their value down. Even hedge funds that are not exposed to bad loans may be fighting for their lives if their clients withdraw funds, either because they are worried or because they must, given their own regulations or rules. Rating agencies are then forced to downgrade loads of assets and funds whose fundamentals are perfectly safe, simply because they are being downloaded on the market. At that stage, 1929 starts looking heavenly in comparison with what happens next. Well, that could be what is in store. But note that it does not have to be so. Remember first that, on its own, the mortgage crisis is small beer. Recall next that most serious financial institutions must have made adequate provisions to face this long-expected crisis, some call it normalization. Note that the large central banks have shown that they have learnt the lesson from past crisis and quickly moved to provide the interbank markets with the required liquidity. The situation is basically sound. But financial markets are always subject to self-fulfilling prophecies: if they believe that things will go wrong, things go wrong. That’s where we stand now. Isn’t it very frustrating to find ourselves, once again, on the verge of disaster and realize that our well-being depends on the whims of a few financiers not particularly known for being sedate? Why can’t we prevent this once and for all? The sad thing is that armies of regulators and supervisors have being doing just that for years and years. Remember Basel II, meant to be even better than Basel I? Nowadays banks are so tightly regulated that it is almost not fun anymore to be a banker. Well, almost. Banking is about lending, and lending is risky. In addition, as we all know, high risk means high (expected) return. Naturally, bankers have responded to regulation by carrying on with lending, risky and not risky, but they have been subcontracting the risk that they are not supposed to hold. The great securitization wave is partly a consequence of the great regulation operation. The deeper moral is simple. Financial markets exist to do risky things. The more risk they take, the higher the (expected) returns. You can use regulation to squeeze risk out of a segment of the market, say banks, but you don’t eliminate the risk, you just move it elsewhere. New segments, say hedge funds, emerge to take over the risk and the high (expected) returns that go with it. The problem is that little is known of the new segment and its players, so the armies of regulators and supervisors that protect us look in the wrong direction because they don’t know where to look. There has been much talk about regulating the hedge funds; it might happen, so the game will move elsewhere. The only way to eliminate financial crises is to fully eliminate risk. Kim Jung Il knows how; eliminate financial institutions. But that means no (expected) returns." (By Charles Wyplosz)
Do you know: Shift Happens/Information Age8月21日 Gingivitis, Dandruff and Morning Breath读一经济学人的BLOG, 此君常有智慧之语, 而且语言犀利, 行事颇为洒脱, 一直比较仰慕. 这一则不过是暗讽国内一赫赫有名另一位经济学人. 文人相轻古来有之, 没什么希奇, 只不过这几个尴尬的单词.觉得有趣.
"如果口臭,男同胞怎么对得起女友,夫人,小孩,老师,学生,同事......? 如果口臭,男同胞怎么对得起女友,夫人,老师,学生,同事......? 怎么能接吻和做爱(KISS AND MAKE LOVE)? 怎么搞卡啦OK? ***的虫牙(gingivitis)和嘴臭(morning breath)使我想起中国的一个重大公害:口臭(morning breath)!" "1983年10月,我到哈佛后第一次出丑是去洗牙齿. 记得以前去特洛伊的大学路上的LOW,理发的美国大叔竭力向我推销他的洗发水说是有效控制个什么东西, 我当时不SURE他指的是什么, 音大概记得. 就是这个DANDRUFF. 难道他也玩暗讽? 被推荐:每天刷五次牙(折腾), 每年洗两次牙(疼),坚持用LISTERIN洗刷口腔(涩的不行). 8月17日 《中国的食品质量安全状况》白皮书接着前面, 因为刚刚从新浪网看到一条消息说"中国国务院新闻办公室17日发表《中国的食品质量安全状况》白皮书。
"白皮书说，中国政府一直把加强食品质量安全摆在重要的位置。",
也不知道是出于国际压力, 还是自己要求进步. 不过呢, 读起来是又好气又好笑.说是：
“经过努力，中国食品质量总体水平稳步提高，食品安全状况不断改善，食品生产经营秩序显著好转。近年来，中国食品总体合格率稳步提升。2006年全国食品国家监督抽查合格率达到77.9%。2007年上半年，食品专项国家监督抽查合格率达到了85.1%。"
这个怎么听都像是表扬的话, 有改进当然要表扬, 不过呢, 还是高兴不起来,77.9%, 就是说我每花4-5块钱, 有一块买的都是不干净的东西. 而且还不知道这个合格率里面有多少猫腻. 后面的更可气,
"中国进出口食品质量保持高水平。多年来，中国出口食品合格率一直保持在99%以上。中国进口食品的质量总体平稳，没有发生过因进口食品质量安全引起的严重质量安全事故。"
国际舆论这些天很批的出口食品, 药品, 玩具安全问题不提倒也算了, 怎么给别人的东西到比进自己肚子里的东西更讲究卫生呢 (77.9 VS. 99%)? 经济层面上似乎可以解释, 道德层面上百思不得其解:人不应该是自私的吗? 怎么中国人这么无私? A Trade Deficit with a BabysitterQuote from Mankiw's Blog, captures all essense of the so called US-China trade relation in my op.:
Noting the babysitter is Sally: If politicians were in charge of Family Harford trade policy they would bully Sally to raise her hourly rates, so that trade would take place on a “fairer” basis. The politicians in charge of Sally’s trade policy would refuse.
Boggled already? You should be. But this matches perfectly the state of US-China trade relations: China keeps selling cheap stuff to the US, the US isn’t selling so much to China (but plenty to other parts of the world). The Americans are demanding that the Chinese charge more, and the Chinese are refusing." Ridiculous summer farce...but understandable, for one thing, there must be something to be farced about and this time it is the tained chinese goods ; for another, it is politics. 8月12日 仰望同一片星空羡慕诸位的观星之旅, 虽然结局戏剧, 仍然遗憾不能同往. 可以猜到两件事情: 聊天很开心;某同学很萎靡.
东风夜放花千树，更吹落、星如雨。/
天阶夜色凉如水， 坐看牵牛织女星。 / 星垂平野阔，月涌大江流。 / 起来携素手, 庭户无声, 时见疏星渡河汉./ 微微风簇浪， 散作满河星。 / 不敢高声语，恐惊天上人。 / 昨夜星辰昨夜风, 画楼西畔桂堂东. 身无彩凤双飞翼, 心有灵犀一阃? /
星汉无情，天河有意，东南西北相逢！ 放眼关外，哪记旧寮蓬。 儿时山河幼时语，几曾见，友朋西东。 别更久，推杯换盏，醉靥双颊红。 / 昨晚天色差,没看到. 希望今晚好运. 4月18日 于丹的论语- 网文转载(二) “中国文化已经到了最危急关头。同鸦片战争时期、新文化运动时期相比，中国文化所面临的形势更严峻，也更隐蔽。因为，这一次她所面对的是那些打着要“开掘中国传统文化这座富矿”的旗号的人们，他们巧言令色，谄视媚行，实际却偷偷为中国文化掘好了坟墓。当白先勇用青春版《牡丹亭》任意涂抹崑曲时，人们不知已在釜上；当安意如用说诗词的方式去意淫中国古代那些高雅的生命时，人们不知水已烧开；当于丹用《心灵鸡汤》般的语言来猥亵孔子时，人们早就在不知不觉中被煮熟。在这些形形色色的掘墓人那里，我们除了嗅到死尸的臭气，何尝掬得一丝传统文化的芬芳？如果这也算一种文化基因改造，那么就等于是把人的基因改造成老鼠。北京的城墙拆了也许还可以重建，但一旦人们连对传统文化的最后一丝敬畏都消失时，亡国亡天下的日子还会远吗？”
我不懂什么是对传统文化的敬畏。
孔子在2500年前就说：古之学者为人，今之学者为己。孔子口中的古人，是山顶洞人吗？但毫无疑问，孔子在他那个时代，并没有一成不变的继承商周传统文化，而是用全新的载体，以人之伦理为基础，开创博大精深的儒学。 南怀谨先生去年在一次讲座里，把孔先生的话又发展一步：古之学者为已，今之学者为钱。亚当斯密的重商主义，又有丝毫对英国重农主义的敬畏吗？ 布鲁诺被黑暗教廷烧死，因为他没有敬畏欧多克斯的地心说。 孙中山先生以医生之身起事，因为他没有敬畏孔子的君臣说。 我留着越狱麦克头，又何尝敬畏辜鸿铭的辫子说。 你们以学术讨论之名，对一位女士恶语相向，何尝敬畏孔先生的温良恭俭之说？ 你为什么不坐马车？为什么不点煤油灯？为什么不用毛笔写竖体字？为什么不学淘潜潜入山林？为什么不像陈天华以死激励国人？为什么不抱着看8个样板戏？ 京剧200多年前还只是不入流的地方小曲，昆曲600年前不过是水磨腔。你们怎么就奉为圭臬了？ 青春版牡丹亭怎么就在釜上了？心灵鸡汤版论语怎么就猥亵了？ 敬畏传统文化，就是敬畏你们诸位吗？
任何一种文化，要想传承，必然要以当世之人愿意接受的方式为载体。常委们都穿西装了，两会都反对票了，新闻联播都改版了，都强调可读性了，你们的脑子怎么比中国足球还不开化呢？你们的檄文，不也没贴到城墙门口，不也是靠BBS吗？ 孩子们，包括我等大众，是愿意背四书五经，还是听于丹的心灵鸡汤？ 熊猫当然是野生最好，可当它们在大自然中失去生存能力时，你不改造它，不人工饲养，这个物种还能存在吗？ 你们骂于丹的话，让我油然想起相声界骂郭德纲。女人要房子车子，当然难养，你们这帮小人确实也够难养的。 于丹用小故事深入浅出说孔庄，怎么就挖好坟墓了，怎么就巧言令色了。难道她脱掉漂亮的红色套装，穿上长袍，如陈寅恪般完全不管学生听不听得懂，就是捍卫传统了吗？难道她用CCTV播讣告的语气讲论语，就是不谄媚了吗？ 一般写檄文的人总要捍卫些什么，或者原则，或者利益，或者人格。我完全搞不懂你们在捍卫什么。是捍卫百家争鸣的英雄时代吗？肯定不是。捍卫程朱之说？方式像，道理不通。捍卫国学？呵呵，你别搞笑了。 嗅到死尸的臭气？我只闻到浓浓的酸气，和污言秽语的臭气。 亡国亡天下？如果让你们这些充满文化暴力的酸腐文人控制话语权，那才是离亡国亡天下不远。纳粹与日本军国主义，不过是在精英民族文化的大旗下，去灭绝异族文化。不，也亡不了，中华民族的历史早已证明，跳梁者最终莫不自取其辱。
当我们的国家在四处倡导多元文化、和谐世界的思想时，我不知道诸位所说的“世界大同”是何用意。卑鄙猜一下，是在为“中国威胁论”鼓吹吗？那对此文，我就更怀疑诸位受某些敌对势力唆使，故意为之。不要说我给你们上纲上线，你们给于丹上的纲远胜于我。 “为了中国文化的命运，我们不应再对无良媒体人表示沉默。正所谓：“八佾舞于庭，是可忍也，孰不可忍也！”我们谨此呼吁，所有有良知的媒体人，应对社会舆论予以正确引导，我们更希望，《百家讲坛》应立即让于丹下课，并向全国人民公开道歉。只有这样，中国人才能够重建我们的精神家园，中国文化才能在新世纪里重铸辉煌，我们的生活才能更加和谐。 哈哈哈哈。仰天大笑4声先。
1.中国思想史上最辉煌、最英雄辈出的两个时代，莫过于春秋战国与近代80年（鸦片战争到五四）。这两个时代的特点，都是兼容并包，百家争鸣。10博士之言论，与兼容并包相去甚远，骂街与打倒之辞，颇有郭氏学霸学阀之风。 2.陈先生倡导的“独立之思想，自由之精神”，一直为后世学子传承。论语也有和而不同之句，但在10博士身上、至少在这篇檄文中未有丝毫体现。我们只看到在继承传统文化的大帽子下，对于丹的人身攻击。 3.于丹老师做的是好事。前文我已说了，哪怕所有的功过都留待后人评说，至少她的心得是在传播向善的力量，至少在让普通公众管窥国学，至少她带动了国学热，而不是海选热，韩剧热，登革热。至于名利，那是她价值的体现。比尔盖茨卖VISTA，比她赚的名利多多了。 4.继承传统文化，没有亘古不变的方式，只有大众接不接受的方式。你可以仍然坚持早请示晚汇报，坚持像赵忠祥大叔一样只看人民日报和参考消息，但不要剥夺老百姓以自己喜欢的方式，比如上网，比如看百家讲坛，去接受知识的权利。四大名著在他们那个时代，不过是街头坊间说书人的话本。 5.我同意伏尔泰的那句话，也是各国民主宪法的定则：我不同意你的观点,但我誓死捍卫你说话的权利。欢迎在学术范围内讨论，但不要人身攻击，更不要拿民族文化的大帽子乱扣。你们不是红卫兵。我们也不是。 6.请不要扯上王小波先生。对一个有独立思想，自由精神的逝者，“狡黠”这样的词，是肤浅的不尊重。王小波先生的精神、文字和幽默，到很多年后仍然会被我们提起，他是一个人在抗争一个时代。和顾准先生一样，他保存了一代中国知识分子的良知。我承认，王先生是我最敬重的中国写字的人。 7.文化暴力是件可怕的事。不能从思想上打败对方，就从肉体上消灭对方，从人身上攻击对方，思想界、学术界的浩劫，很多由一己之贪念而起。 8.为中国教育体制悲哀。更为知识分子悲哀。鲁迅先生说：我们自古以来，就有埋头苦干的人，有拼命硬干的人，有为民请命的人，有舍身求法的人……这就是中国的脊梁！《红楼梦》里说到“文死谏武死战”。身为脊梁的知识分子，理应坚守原则和底线，关注民生，威武不能屈，富贵不能淫，将民族文化中的操守和气度薪火相传。可惜！ 9.任何人都不要低估民众的智商。这是一个每个人都有独立判断力，都有自己价值观的时代。无论官员还是学界，都不要把自己的意志强加于人。互联网绝对是人类最伟大的发明，有了它，信息不对称的时代永远结束了。同样，我这篇文章不想说服谁，也不是为于丹辩护，我只是在维护自己的判断力。 10.如果10博士真的如他们所说，是传统文化的继承者，欢迎以任何方式讨论。如果诸位信守的是上古之风，欢迎以文章辩论。如果信守的是中世纪骑士之风，欢迎决斗。傅斯年就跟顾颉刚打过架，也曾要跟孔庚决斗，算是博士动手的先例了。可惜，我不是博士，委屈了各位。 于丹的论语- 网文转载(一)檄文写得好,而且有道理. 博士们应该抵制门框 小巫的表妹夫是新加坡人。到温州拜门时，小女婿在飞机上翻看英文报纸，邻座的温州阿婆五体投地：您是博士吧？ 这个一见到美食就走不动道的家伙，为此沾沾自喜数日，以为自己长了张博士脸。 也难怪他得意。博士从来都是象征着学问和智慧，承载着荣耀和景仰的头衔。 70多年前，宋美龄给干女儿潭详挑夫君，提的条件就是“文要博士，武要上将”。后来，中将陈诚荣升驸马爷，代价是与前妻吴氏离婚。吴氏只提了一个痴情的条件：生不能同食，死后必同穴。好在为荣华富贵绝情的是将军，没有辱没博士的清誉。 胡适一生为学为政，最喜欢的还是别人喊他胡博士。冯仑是中国最大的房地产商之一，但我采访他时，冯老板一再强调自己是法学博士。赌王何鸿燊纵然两道通吃，拥有HK001车牌，但媒体报道他时都会用“何鸿燊博士”，因为何赌王有包括香港大学、香港理工大学在内的4个名誉博士头衔。基辛格贵为国务卿，称谓最常用的仍是博士。历届诺贝尔颁奖，诸位教授先生的头衔通常是博士。围城里，我们早就见识了苏博士，方博士，赵博士。 还有最近甚为活跃的十博士。 联名抵制于丹是十博士，之前联名抵制圣诞的也是十博士。 我只能很遗憾的说，你们抵制的对象错了。你们应该联名抵制门框。因为只有脑袋不幸被门框夹过，才可能发出此等怪论。按诸位博士在概率论方面的研究，十位博士同时被门框夹到脑袋，实在是小概率事件。 十博士用骆宾王《讨武曌檄》般的气势和文采，给于丹罗列了近十条罪状。我花了在辣子鸡中挑鸡丁的工夫，在华丽若骈文、却如被拔掉牙的嘴巴般空洞、被抢了老公的怨妇般恶毒的檄文里，勉强找到了博士们毫无逻辑的指责。 以下对照原文，告诉博士们被门夹到的后果：
先抽你丫两嘴把子。第一下代表于丹，第二下代表百家的观众。谁是厕所？谁是老鼠？ “对一个凭借强势媒体的巨大影响力，以阉割中国传统优秀文化为乐事的高学历文盲，予以如此不恰当的‘关注’，其结果只能导致中国传统文化的进一步走向衰亡。妄图通过对于丹的关注，来针砭面临越来越多物质挑战和精神困惑的当今世界，无异于缘木求魚。作为主流媒体的代表，该报此举殊欠妥当，某些编辑记者缺乏起码的文化良知和基本的人文素养，于此更是表露无遗。如果主流媒体都对意淫、猥亵中国文化的行为唱起赞歌，那么，不待外来文化的侵略，中国文化注定了必将覆亡。” 还要抽你丫的。文革结束那么多年了，居然还有余孽。 “现代民主社会，在文化上往往发生许多不健全的现象。那些付出了巨大的努力，学问充盈的人士会变得很穷，而那些最浅薄的作者，却可以通过廉价推销作品获得大大的财富。当然，在民主时代，这种现象是正常的。学者虽然没有钱，但是学问自身的愉悦足以补偿一切；如果在社会生活比较有标准的地方，于丹之流会很富有，但没有社会地位。因为主流的声音会告诉世人，他们有钱但并不值得尊重。然而，这一次，无良媒体人加入到为于丹之流推波助澜的行列中，社会生活的标准遭到前所未有的挑战。想想看，像于丹这样一个古汉语知识连初中文化水平都达不到的“影视学博士”，仅仅靠耍嘴皮子就可以获得社会荣誉，谁还会关心那些引导我们灵魂向上的力量？谁还愿意从事那些艰辛的然而却是真正有益于中华民族的科学文化研究呢？” 无耻之耻，无耻矣。 谁还会关心那些引导我们灵魂向上的力量？谁还愿意从事那些艰辛的然而却是真正有益于中华民族的科学文化研究呢？我可以负责任的说，绝不是你们。你们研究的就是如何骂人，如何跻身既得利益集团。在骂人方面，鲁迅和李敖都比你们强。 这段檄文中，眼红红到充血，嫉妒妒到内伤，犯酸酸到锈蚀，刻薄薄到自怜，自命清高高到沐猴而冠，文人相轻轻到鲜耻寡廉，所有穷酸腐儒之相，尽显无疑。 你们的逻辑无非是：浅薄的于丹不该有钱。如果有钱，至少不应受到尊重，至少媒体该告诉大家不应该尊重她。你们没有钱，但可以自己愉悦。 呸！ 《哈里波特》5集的发行量达2.7亿，没见英国人说罗琳浅薄的。权威的《BOOK》杂志，把罗琳评为英国最伟大在世作家，超过2005年诺贝尔文学奖得主品特。《福布斯》杂志，也压倒伊丽莎白女王，把罗琳评为最有影响力的英国女性。你总不会说，一本解读国学经典的小册子，比一本魔幻故事更浅薄吧？教人向善的于丹，也不会比罗琳更不值得尊重吧？作为一个文化多元的民族，我们尊重袁隆平先生，也尊重于丹女士。 我倒是知道，中国一帮教授博士，随便收书商点钱，就郑重推荐那些励志伪书——那些与利益集团勾结，侵吞国家财富、胡乱推荐股票的厉张等博导之流就不提了。你们也可以写书，但连发篇论文都要付版面费的你们，恐怕不知道版税是怎么回事吧？ 初中文化达不到？这跟前面的文盲说乃同源胡扯。你们的标准是什么？考卷？你们现在的素质，已经证明了中国应试教育体制的失败，考于老师就不必了吧？如果凭于丹书中的个别错误，就认定她的学养，那不是武断是什么？巴乔把点球罚丢，你就能说他比业余还低级吗？朴永训误算被古力屠龙，你就说朴天王是业余3段水平吗？张学友上海唱雪狼湖破音，你能说天王不会唱歌吗？你床上有一次不行，我就能说你老人家ED吗？ 无良媒体人？主流的声音会告诉世人，他们有钱但并不值得尊重？于丹的钱又不是偷的抢的，她出书挣的每一毛钱都纳了税，她以自己的方式传播国学，传播善的力量，传播温暖，传播从容与淡定，何至于媒体要和你们这帮宵小为伍，抵制她？你们在研究什么，研究红楼梦贾府的菜谱？ 至于自我愉悦。你们就关起门愉悦好了。自己那样不叫意淫，叫手淫。 4月2日 事人与事心<<经济日报>>一篇小文, 郑丹瑞.
"急事，慢慢的说；大事，清楚的说；小事，幽默的说；没把握的事，谨慎的说；没发生的事，不要胡说；做不到的事，别乱说；伤害人的事，不能说；讨厌的事，对事不对人的说；开心的事，看场合说；伤心的事，不要见人就说；别人的事，小心的说；自己的事，听听自己的心怎么说；现在的事，做了再说。"
看来说一件事还有很多讲究. 3月18日 The Worldly Philosopher"The study of economics does not seem to require any specialized gifts of an unusually high order. Is it not, intellectually regarded, a very easy subject with the higher branches of philosophy or pure sciences? An easy subject, at which very few excel! The paradox finds its explanation, perhaps in that the master-economist must possess a rare combination of gifts. He must be mathematician, historian, statesman, philosopher - in some degree. He must understand symbols and speak in words. He must contemplate the particular in terms of the general, and touch abstract and concrete in the same flight of thought. He must study the present in the light of the past for the purposes of the future. No part of man's nature or his institutions must lie entirely outside his regard. He must be purposeful and disinterested in a simultaneous mood; as aloof and incorruptible as an artist, yet sometimes as near the earth as a polititcian." - JMK
A book written by Robert L. Heilbroner in his graduate study. Lots of interesting stories, lives and ideas of some greatest economists - Smith, Ricardo, Mill, Malthus, Schumpeter, Keynes and others. 3月1日 Be Right BackI was trying to read something at a corner in the library. You know there are a lot of "panel tables" in the library. As i managed to find a vacant and quiet spot, i saw a piece of paper right on the table. It says "Be Rigth Back". It reminds me of the time when midterms or finals come, back in the college. All sort of stuff have been used to secure a place in the main building, cups, books, or even plain papers, and we wrote things more frankly on the paper - "占座". BUT, this is Here and there are plenty of available tables...I figured a while why this could happen:
1, A note for a friend who might come for an appointment, but in this case, the guy who wrote it would've signed the paper;
2, Simply a joke, but then, "Seat Taken" would make a better one;
3, Indeed trying to secure the seat for later, then it's so gentle and graceful of him not to throw some words like "This is my seat"
"Be right back", what is the unspoken anticipation? "please wait a second, i wil be with you shortly...". I sat down and started reading, at the same time trying to :
1, Do a favor to whoever he is. I don't want to let him down-when he is indeed right back and finds nobody there.
2, Satisfy my own curiosity. Is he Chinese:)?
Just felt funny. Actually, nothing happened. When i was about to leave, nobody showed up.
BTW, i put that paper back where it was.
2月17日 Are you homesick?I was asked the same question tonight. I said no. But I would've said yes if i thought a couple of more seconds at the moment cuz i think i was really homesick. Maybe still. There were very few times when i was in that kind of mood. It's not just for the Spring festival. As time goes by, I now have sort of same feeling over thanksgiving and christmas. It's been five five years since i was away from home. I'd never had a feeling as strong as tonight. When the time comes, you can't help it. But a hot bath helps:)
Homesickness aside, something else bothers me even more. "we have the experiences but somehow miss the meaning/And approach to the meaning restores the experiences..." from T.S Elliot. I never read Elliot and captured this from the Dilemma book. I might not fully understand the ideas it intends to convey but it makes good sense to me at this stage. I feel terrible about myself sometimes and i think little of meaning. Meaning of experiences, meaning of relationships, meaning of action and non-action, meaning of happiness, meaning of health, meaning of my own words and most of all, meaning of living. My life is filled with too many copy, paste and delete. You mgiht say "isn't it too tired to think this much?" It is indeed. But that reminds me something that Whalen told me: struggle to progress.
People either get busy living or get busy dying. Either way, you gonna find the meaning.
RY came back late. I've though he went back to NY. He did. But amazingly, he left Troy 2 pm and got back 12pm on the same day. I told him that he should stay home with his mom at this particular time. I was actually happy he is back. Besides he's not back alone, bringing some of my favorite fruits.
Good night, my friends. All happy new year! 2月15日 诺贝尔的囚徒Cantor's Dilemma - Carl Djerassi
This is not at all a new book. Can't remember how i came across it... Checked out weeks ago... More often than not, i started reading a book until it's overdue. Fortunately, it's not a big volume and on a day like this, leisure reading is not a bad choice. Before dusk, i am almost halfway through it.
For those who want to know a little academic politics, you would like to read it. Actually, the book is by no means academic;however, it's very entertaining, revealing, fun and such such. It gives an insider's description of the road from a graduate student to a nobel winner and does so in a novel style. It tells you some of the key tricks to be successful besides your research. And dont belittle them otherwise it costs you a damn thing.
Somehow, the book's title is translated in Chinese as this entry's title and i like the translation. It attracks you right away, otherwise, who cares who the * Cantor is and what his dilemma is.
The snow comes right on time on a valentine's day. The book treat me well on this lovely day. Thinking about skiing soon.
Wish all happy those in a valentine's relationship and others in search of love. 2月12日 I am willing to be wrong"The larger lesson that Bernie taught could be summed up in one of his most often-used expressions: "I'm willing to be wrong." What it meant was, "I'm open to argument. But you'd better give me a good reason to change my mind, not simply throw around rhetoric." The message was that wisdom requires listening to other points of view and holding one's own position to high standards of intellectual rigor" - A tribute by one of Bernard Saffran (1936-2004)'s students, Arnold Kling, along with sampling of his wit in the teaching of microeconomics. http://www.techcentralstation.com/120104F.html And the article ends with "Yet there was only one Bernie. I'm willing to be wrong, but I don't think there was ever a better economics teacher" 1月15日 First day school
I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation. Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves, who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity. But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition. In a sense we have come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds." But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so we have come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children. It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end but a beginning. Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges. But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must ever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone. And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecutions and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends. And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal. I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today! I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right down in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers. I have a dream today! I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together. This is our hope. This is the faith that I will go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day. And this will be the day, this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning, "My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring!" And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true. And so let freedom ring -- from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring -- from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring -- from the heightening Alleghenies of Let freedom ring -- from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado. Let freedom ring -- from the curvaceous slopes of California. But not only that. Let freedom ring -- from Stone Mountain of Georgia. Let freedom ring -- from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee. Let freedom ring -- from every hill and molehill of Mississippi, And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last, free at last. Thank God Almighty, we are free at last." 11月13日 Isn't it sweet?Be watching "Notting Hill" once again on Saturdy night and still felt like this movie so much.
And obviously emotions touched again. Realized how easily i could be captured by all that kinds of love stories.
Some are sweet, some not quite so sweet, but love still is.
"The fame thing isn't really real, you know; and don't forget,
i'm also just a girl, standing in front of a boy, asking him to love her"
"Are there any circumstances in which the two of you might be more than just friends?"
"I hope there might be, but no, i'm assured there aren't"
"I just wondered if it turned out that this person realized he'd be a daft prick and got down on his knees
and begged you to reconsider, whether you would then...re...consider?"
"....yes, i believe i would"
"Anna, how long are you intending to stay here in British?"
"Indefinitely"
This is really sweet in the movie, but when it happens in real life, it's more than just being sweet.
The movie deserves repeatedly watching.
|
|
|
