Double Entry Bookkeeping

Q&A: Mortgage lending rules

2012-01-02T14:32:00.003Z

FSA (英國的「金管會」)在一份關於改革房貸制度的研究文件中提到：「我們注意到，輕鬆可得的貸款對某些族群，例如首次購屋者，不盡然是好事。寬鬆供給的貸款是，藉由導致房價大幅上升，致使首次購屋者因無力承擔而退出市場的因素之一。」

我們台灣的金管會，什麼時候才能摸摸良心，告訴馬英九和吳敦義這個顯而易見、不容抹滅的事實？請他們停止用納稅人的錢，供應各種低利貸款？

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q&A: Mortgage lending rules
By Ian Pollock
Personal finance reporter, BBC News

The chief City regulator, the Financial Services Authority (FSA), has moved a step closer towards tighter regulation of mortgage lending.

By the summer of 2013 it wants new rules to be in place to prevent a return of the reckless lending seen in the middle of the last decade.

This will involve much closer scrutiny of a borrower's ability to repay.

The riskiest loans, worth more than the current value of the property being bought, will be banned outright.

Lenders will have to assume in their calculations that interest rates are higher than they are now when decide how much to lend.

The FSA says: "We are concerned that, as money returns to the market, firms will come under increasing pressure to consider riskier lending and will focus more on market share than maintaining lending standards.

"We need to learn the lessons of the past and act to stop poor lending practices re-emerging in the future," the FSA adds.

Who will all this affect?

At the moment, very few people. Strict mortgage rationing, due to a lack of funds, has been in force since 2008 anyway. So home sales have been roughly halved since then. The slightest blemish on a credit score can see an application for a mortgage being turned down. So, the FSA estimates that just 2.5% of current new borrowers would be affected by the more stringent lending rules it is proposing. And, assuming they are not watered down in some way as a result of the continuing consultation, they will not come into effect until 2013 at the earliest.
So what is this all about then?

This is all about stopping a new boom in mortgage lending, and house prices, in the future if lenders start lending too much money to home buyers who cannot really afford to repay their loans. That is what happened in the middle years of the last decade. Were it not for the extraordinarily low level of interest rates we have been experiencing, the FSA fears that tens, or even hundreds, of thousands more borrowers would now be in arrears and facing repossession.

Even if the boom conditions seen a few years ago returned, the new approach laid down by the FSA would, on its estimate, restrict lending to about 11% of prospective borrowers.
Sounds like not much will change for most people?

Not quite. Firstly, the widespread use of so-called self-certified mortgages (known to some as liars' mortgages) are now ruled out. They accounted for a very high proportion of new lending a few years ago. People will no longer be able to claim - with no evidence - that their income is big enough to justify a mortgage loan when in reality it is not.

For other applicants, even if lenders find they have more money to lend, they will have to scrutinise the finances of their borrowers much more thoroughly, to show they really can afford to re-pay. And lenders will have to assume that interest rates are noticeably higher than they are today.

Will my mortgage deal be renewed?

If you took out a mortgage a few years ago on rather optimistic assumptions, your lenders will not be forced to dump you if, as a brand new borrower, you might not pass the new lending criteria.

Whether you get the same deal is another matter though. If the value of your home has fallen in the meantime, any new mortgage may be much more expensive than it was before.

Will my interest-only mortgage be affected?

Yes, if you want to renew it in its current form. A new part of the FSA's continuing consultation proposes telling lenders to assess the affordability of interest-only loans as if the borrower were taking out a more expensive repayment mortgage. So in the future, if you have an interest-only loan, and want to re-new it, you may have to show that your finances are sufficiently robust, or that you have other "credible" sources of cash to pay off the mortgage in due course.
I would like to buy my first home, but cannot obtain a mortgage.

Will this help me?

In the long run yes, because it may help suppress artificial house price booms that lock out first-time buyers. The FSA puts the matter very clearly in its consultation document:

"Easy mortgage credit availability is not necessarily a force for good for groups such as first-time buyers. The easy supply of credit was a factor which, by generating significant house price appreciation, contributed to the declining role of first-time buyers within the market, squeezed by affordability problems."

'Occupy' is a response to economic permafrost

2011-10-21T14:19:00.001+01:00

BBC 的記者觀察到，參與「佔領」("Occupy") 活動的人，並沒有特定的族群特徵：有中產階級、有學生、有帶著小孩的媽嗎、當然也有失業者。他們沒有共同的訴求：問 50 個人他們要什麼，會得到 50 個答案。

這些人唯一的共通點，和以往參與街頭抗議活動的人不同，是他們不認為政治能夠解決問題。他們反而認為政治正是造成這一切問題的源頭。不管是哪一黨，基本上都是同一群人。因為他們不相信政治，他們不透過政治管道(如：民主選舉)尋求解決方案，他們也不冀求政黨(如英國的工黨或美國的民主黨)執行他們的訴求，他們直接走上街頭！

台灣參與「佔領」活動的人會比歐美國家少那麼多，也許是因為大多數的人都還以為統獨的訴求和藍綠的差異，比自己的生活重要；沒發現到其實不論是藍綠，都是同樣一批人：同一批有錢人。

馬英九提出的房價「實價」課稅方案雖然沒什麼內容，執政三年以後跟著蔡英文起舞更反映出其不願影響既得利益者的心態，蔡英文所提出的漸進式方案卻也和馬英九的「633」一樣無法在一個任期內完成，可預期一定會無疾而終。在維護既得利益者這方面，馬英九、蔡英文、藍、綠是沒有任何差別的。

什麼時候我們認清楚藍綠和統獨其實是同一群既得利益者人的不同面向，什麼時候我們得到自由。

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

'Occupy' is a response to economic permafrost

16 October 2011 Last updated at 10:27 GMT
Paul Mason
Economics editor, Newsnight

In February I wrote a blog called "Twenty Reasons Why It's Kicking Off Everywhere". With the global Occupy protests yesterday it is still looking quite accurate. But it's now clear there is a 21st reason. And a 22nd. We've had nine months of political paralysis. And people have begun to feel the economic permafrost setting in.

I went down to Paternoster Square to observe the first few hours of the London protest. The police sealed off the square, which is private property, so the protesters squatted the steps of St Paul's Cathedral. They had a big, sit-down general assembly and then broke into small circles, cross-legged, then got back together and decided to stay the night. At that point there were around 2,000 people.

Who were they? This is not yet as demographically wide as the indignado camps in Madrid or Syntagma were when they first started. Nor is it as "mainstream" as Occupy Wall street - yet. Not a single mainstream British politician attempted to appear at the protest; not a single MP, not a single famous author or film-maker. Helen John, the Greenham Common veteran, spoke, as did Peter Tatchell, but the biggest response - indeed it was a rock-star like response - was for Julian Assange. He was acclaimed by 9/10ths of the crowd and barracked in ribald language by the others.

Of the people I met: lots of student occupation activists from last winter; veteran leftists and veteran anarchists going back to the days of Saltley Gate; people involved in NGOs; an Oxbridge professor of computer science; a large smattering of "Anonymous" people - with their Guy Fawkes masks - who've become the new pole of attraction for the deep "autonomist" movement. Some women with their babies. And - the biggest group - just ordinary people.

Though the place was swarming with media, including a hilarious spoof of a Fox News reporter wearing a flak jacket, the main complaint is that the media is ignoring them and does not understand them. This latter point I think is largely true.

Even in America, where the protests are bigger and have a bigger penumbra of liberal celebrities and writers to give them salience, the initial response to Occupy Wall Street was to ask: what does this mean for the Democrats? Will Obama's ratings improve?

It's a pointless question. Most people involved in such protests have switched off from mainstream politics: they believe it's a rich-person's club and totally impenetrable to reason or pressure. In Britain they have no intention of "raising demands" on Labour in opposition.
In fact they revel in their diversity; it was true in Syntagma and it is true at St Paul's - if you ask 50 people why they're here and what they want you will get 50 answers.

Powerful signal worldwide

But these protests are a powerful signal worldwide. Their mere existence shows that people are determined to "think globally" about routes out of this crisis - at a time when economics is driving politicians down the route of national solutions. However marginalised they are politically - and in some countries, above all America and Greece, they have broken out of marginalisation - it is still a fact: in 1931, as the remnants of Globalisation 1.0 collapsed, there were no mass international protests against austerity. There were plenty of national, and indeed nationalist ones.

The protesters yesterday stuck a spoof street sign saying "Tahrir Square, London, EC4M". This was not Tahrir - but it obeyed the same impulse to occupy physical space.

The impulse, I believe, is being driven by two things: first it is - as I wrote in the 20 reasons - a meme. It is an effective action that is transmitting itself independent of any democratic structures and party political hierarchies: if you camp somewhere, the press turn up and you can get an instant hit of wellbeing by, however briefly and tenuously, living the dream of a communal, negotiated existence.

Second, because this communal, negotiated, networked life already exists in people's heads as a result of the rapid adoption of social networks and networked lifestyles. As Manuel Castells, one of the first sociologists of the internet, said: the more autonomous and rebellious a person's attitudes are, the more they use the internet; the more they use the internet, the more autonomous their lifestyle becomes.

Something has been going on between the left earphone and the right earphone of this generation that represents a profound change in attitude. I am still struggling to get my own head around it (I'm trying to write a book about it but the events keep happening too fast).
What is absolutely clear however, is what they are determined to do: it's much bigger than any single-issue campaign or cause. They mean to limit the power of finance capital and build a more equal society, while rejecting the hierarchical methods of the parties that once claimed to do so.

In this sense the movement is a kind of replacement social democracy; a mirror image of the besuited young people who populate the think tanks of Labour, the SPD, the US Democrats etc.
Occupy Everywhere, then, is the kind of movement you get when people start to believe mainstream politicians have lost their principles, or are trapped by vested interests, or are all crooked.

That's the answer to the question "what". The answer to why now? Basically we are in danger of a global stagnation - it was HSBC's economics team that described it as a permafrost. It poses the question "who pays for the banking crisis" very acutely. And large numbers of people are now realising it is going to be them, and more painfully, their children. As in Greece, in that circumstance, for every protester camped in the freezing dawn there may be many more quietly fuming in their living rooms who feel the same way.

England riots: The return of the underclass

2011-08-22T16:48:00.004+01:00

英國右派保守黨說倫敦暴動是因為「社會生病了」、「道德淪喪」和「家庭教育失敗」；左派工黨說暴動是因為「貧富差距擴大」和「政策往富人傾斜，窮人感覺被遺棄」。政治上的爭論大概永遠都不會結束。但是上週看 BBC Young Voters' Question time，有個年輕人說了一個會讓保守黨汗顏的事實：

「當窮人每天工作十幾個小時，賺得錢卻連餬口都不夠的時候，政府怎麼能期待他們『有時間』照顧小孩！？有成功的家庭教育！？」

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

11 August 2011 Last updated at 10:59 GMT
Article written by Mark Easton Home editor

England riots: The return of the underclass

The Tory party's social policy guru Iain Duncan Smith believes Britain has witnessed the growth of a "more menacing underclass".

Listening to the voices on some of England's toughest estates trying to justify the rioting, looting and arson, it would be easy to concur with his theory of a "new generation of disturbed and aggressive young people doomed to repeat and amplify the social breakdown disfiguring their lives and others round them".

It had been thought the word "underclass" with its connotations of fecklessness and criminality had been expunged from the New Labour government's lexicon.

But it is back, a headline-writer's shorthand for the undeserving and dangerous poor who are burning and robbing their own communities.

Within weeks of coming to power in 1997, Tony Blair set up a Social Exclusion Unit inside the Cabinet Office specifically to deal with what his party painted as Margaret Thatcher's underclass - hundreds of thousands of people, workless, skill-less, often homeless and hopeless, a group cut off from mainstream society - dubbed the entrenched 5%.

Huge sums were pumped into schemes in the most deprived neighbourhoods, but tussles over budgets and the sheer challenge of engaging with people who are often hostile to officialdom meant ambition couldn't translate into outcome.

Instead Tony Blair went down the Respect Agenda route, pre-empting the rhetoric of responsibility and good manners that is now the language of the coalition.

Reporting as I have done from countless urban sink estates over the years, I have met many teenage lads baffled and resentful at their lack of opportunity to participate in the consumer society they care so much about.

It comes as little surprise that the looters have targeted trainer stores and sports shops.

Right and wrong

The commentator David Goodhart suggested this week that "laissez-faire liberalism (of the right economically, and the left culturally) has left too many people adrift, especially in the inner city, without sufficient structure or sense of obligation or meaning in their lives."

Yesterday, the prime minister suggested he agrees with this analysis when he said the problem was "a complete lack of responsibility, a lack of proper parenting, a lack of proper upbringing, a lack of proper ethics, a lack of proper morals."

That is what we need to change, he said.

But how? The Social Exclusion Task Force (as the Social Exclusion Unit became known after it was merged with the PM's Strategy Unit in 2006) has been wound up, its Whitehall interventionism at odds with Big Society entrepreneurism.

Mr Cameron stresses the importance of "discipline in schools" and a "welfare system that does not reward idleness".

His party's Work Programme is another great hope in getting the long-term jobless into employment. There's no money, he's relying on carrots and sticks supplied by others. Is that going to be enough to reach the entrenched 5%?

The politics

As MPs prepare for today's parliamentary statement on the disturbances, all parties are anxious that they cannot be portrayed as apologists for the rioting, blaming some perceived political failure that plays to a partisan case.

"Let's have the sociological argument in the weeks and months ahead", Nick Clegg said on the Today programme this morning.

But the question will have to be asked and answered at some point.
There have to be reasons why thousands of people have attacked their own neighbourhoods when, as the prime minister says, their behaviour is so obviously spectacularly counter-productive.

Destroying the businesses which bring wealth and jobs, attacking the officers trying to keep people safe, creating a climate of fear and resentment, all are certain to make lives worse not better.

When American inner-city streets were burning in 1967, President Lyndon Johnson set up a commission on civil disorders to answer three basic questions about the riots: "What happened? Why did it happen? What can be done to prevent it from happening again and again?"

The subsequent Kerner Report was dismissed as deeply flawed by conservatives who argued that it exonerated rioters for their criminal behaviour and placed the blame on wider society.

So when Lord Scarman was asked to "inquire urgently into the serious disorder" in Brixton in 1981, he was careful to insert a paragraph which said "the social conditions do not provide an excuse for disorder - all of those who in the course of the disorders in Brixton and elsewhere engaged in violence against the police were guilty of grave criminal offences".

But he did accept that social circumstances had created a "predisposition towards violent protest".

Is there such a predisposition now?

Can the root causes of the violence be pinned on bad politics as opposed to simply bad kids, bad parents and bad morals - "criminality - pure and simple"?

When the Home Affairs Select Committee completes its inquiry it will find itself treading that narrow line between condemning and contextualizing the unrest, but it would be hard to imagine any such investigation not wanting to consider what policies will be most effective in ensuring England's social landscape does not have parts left tinder-dry and combustible.

The bewildering events of the past few days are a reminder of why, however difficult, no country can afford to ignore any strata of its society.

人才宣言：十年內台灣恐無人才可用

2011-08-15T06:15:00.000+01:00

把人才流失的責任推給政府有點可笑，解決方案居然是引進外籍白領更是不可思議，特別是其中一個連署人是要新鮮人不要計較薪水的台大校長李嗣涔。如果政府有統計一下新鮮人的起薪：只要統計商管學生最容易找到工作的的台大和政大就好，十年前和現在的台政大新鮮人起薪幾乎相同。考慮到這十年來的通貨膨脹，這種新鮮人起薪變化實在非常荒謬；這也難怪人才流失那麼快了：語言能力夠好的，直接去上海、香港和新加坡找工作就好了，何必留在台灣？這則新聞和前幾天蕭萬長說「有感」的新聞一比，就知道台灣這些既得利益者的態度是多麼荒唐！

-----------------------------------------------------------

人才宣言：十年內台灣恐無人才可用

【經濟日報╱記者黃文奇／台北報導】 2011.08.15 02:00 am

中央研究院院長翁啟惠昨（14 ）日聯合18位產、學、媒體、藝文界代表發表「人才宣言」，他向政府呼籲，台灣已成為嚴重的「人才輸出國」，政府再不正視人才失衡問題，十年內台灣將無人才可用。

翁啟惠表示，他於數年前已經開始呼籲台灣人才失衡問題，今年4月起邀集產業界、學界甚至媒體、藝文界領袖共同研擬這份「人才宣言」，包括宏碁集團創辦人施振榮、台大校長李嗣涔、聯合報社長胡立台及雲門舞集創辦人林懷民等人於昨日共同發表宣言，強調台灣正「面臨一個空前的人才失衡危機」，呼籲各界正視。

翁啟惠表示，發展知識經濟是台灣該走的路，但過去十年來，台灣有49萬名合法居留外僑，其中有40萬人屬於勞工階級，白領階級僅2萬人，相較之下，台灣每年外移的人口卻達2萬至3萬人，以白領階級占大多數，已成了名副其實的人才輸出國。

針對外籍人士來台就業問題，宣言也指出，外國人需取得國內外相關系所碩士以上學位、或者學士學位但有二年以上工作經驗，才能受聘從事專門性及技術性工作；僑生與外籍生學校畢業後，在台工作起薪為4.79萬元。這些規定都讓人才晉用失去彈性。

針對外籍人士居留問題，宣言中也批評，外籍人士必須先放棄自己國籍才能取得台灣公民權，無公民權則無法支領月退俸，因此不願來台工作。

翁啟惠強調，人才外移的根本問題在於國外人才不敢進，而國內人才不想留，其中公教未分軌，薪資結構太制式化是癥結。此外，國內教育體系趨向單一化，技職體系培養出太多沒有技術的人才，也讓人才培養出現危機與斷層。值得注意的是，國外高階人才來台多所限制，也讓外籍菁英卻步。

此外，宣言也強調，應適時檢討我國移民、產業政策，吸引人才並改善產業結構，建構完整的知識經濟體系，加速建立如生技醫療、綠能、文創等知識密集的產業，作支撐教育與人才長期根留台灣的基礎。

翁啟惠指出，金融海嘯後，亞太地區成為人才競逐紅海，而鄰國已經做好因應措施，包括大陸未來5到10年，要吸引2,000 位高端科研與領導人才，而新加坡、香港、韓國、日本等都把網羅人才視同作戰，台灣不能再等。

【2011/08/15 經濟日報】@ http://udn.com

US AAA credit rating downgraded

2011-08-06T02:06:00.002+01:00

S&P 將美國長期債信評等從 AAA 降級為 AA+，不知道這次金管會又會有何反應？要求銀行和保險公司提出因應方案？減持美債？如果評等為 AA+ 的美債要減持，那評等比美債還低，只有 AA- 的中華民國政府公債該不該減持？

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6 August 2011 Last updated at 01:47

US AAA credit rating downgraded

One of the top credit rating agencies, Standard & Poor's, has downgraded the United States' top-notch AAA rating.

S&P cut the long-term US credit rating by one notch to AA+ with a negative outllook, citing concerns about growing budget deficits.

S&P said it was because the deficit reduction plan passed by Congress on Tuesday did not go far enough.

Washington was locked in months of acrimonious partisan bickering over a bill to raise the US debt ceiling.

As rumours swirled earlier about the downgrade, unnamed US officials had told US media that S&P's analysis of the US economic situation was deeply flawed.

Correspondents say a downgrade could further erode global investors' confidence in the US economy, which is already struggling with huge debts and unemployment of 9.1%.

S&P said in its report issued late on Friday: "The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilise the government's medium-term debt dynamics.

"More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges."

How much private sector in NHS?

2011-07-03T16:08:00.001+01:00

英國的 NHS 現在是完全的公醫體系，但是現在保守黨執政的英國政府，打算將部分的醫院和組織私有化，並讓各地區的醫師團體有更多的權力分配醫療資源。半個世紀以來從來沒有私有化參與經驗的 NHS，面對各界對於私有化以後對於一般民眾醫療品質是否有影響的疑慮。想來台灣公私參半的全民健保可以經驗分享？還是給一點建議？

---------------------------------------------

1 June 2011 Last updated at 09:35
Article written by Robert Peston
Business editor

How much private sector in NHS?

I tried to set out the arguments for and against increasing the involvement of the private sector in the provision of NHS healthcare, in a short film for the Ten O'Clock News last night.

The central questions for me are these ones:

1) If you accept the argument that a bit of competition from the private and voluntary sector will help to spur productivity gains throughout the NHS (and not everyone does), what is the optimum share of NHS provision that the private sector should provide to deliver this benign outcome (right now, the private and voluntary sectors provide about 5% of NHS healthcare)?

1) 如果你接受私人部門和義工團體所帶來的一點競爭可以協助 NHS 增加生產力的論點，則 NHS 體系中應該有多少比例開放給私人部門，以達成此良好的結果 (目前私人部門和義工組織提供約 5% 的 NHS 醫療服務)？

2) Since there is evidence that competition is most effective at raising standards when weaker institutions, unable to raise their game, know that they will go bust, are we happy to see NHS hospitals put out of business? And if we are, can arrangements be put in place to minimise the disruption for patients and communities?

2) 既然證據顯示，因為虛弱的組織無法跟上而明白自己最終將會破產，競爭對於提升標準最為有效，我們是否樂於見到 NHS 醫院結束營業？且如果我們樂於見到此結果，是否已有安排以減少對病人和社區帶來的不便？

3) At what point (if ever) would the private sector's clout within the NHS be so great that private providers would be able to hold to ransom taxpayers who finance them (pay us more, or else), eroding the productivity gains? As we've seen with the financial crisis at the care home provider Southern Cross, the threat of an interruption of a vital service is quite a bargaining chip for a health provider.

3) 是否會在某個情況下，因為私人部門在 NHS 中巨大的影響力，私人醫療服務提供者因而得以勒索納稅人提供財務支持 (付更多錢或是其他方式)，而減少了所增加的生產力？正如我們在金融危機時見到安養院經營公司 Southern Cross，其終止提供重要服務之威脅是相當重要的議價工具。

4) And will the greater transparency of costs of different treatments and therapies likely to be brought by increased private sector involvement in the NHS start to undermine political and public support for the principle of universal provision that is free at the point of use? If it does, would that be a good thing or a bad thing?

4) 如增加私人部門參與 NHS，是否會因為不同治療的成本透明化，促使政治和公眾對於全面性免費提供醫療服務的支持減少？這是好還是壞？

投7千億總統：建設活絡南台 vs Lyon learns how to play second fiddle

2011-05-25T14:59:00.000+01:00

里昂，法國的第二大都市，為了在首都巴黎獨大的法國爭取生存，採取的策略和國內其他縣市長卻大不相同：

1. 里昂認知巴黎獨大的情況無法避免，所以不和巴黎競爭相同的資源和建設，相反的；
2. 里昂瞭解大型公司與政治、中央政府有關的高階主管和部門無法離開在巴黎，所以遊說大型企業把與此無關的財務和人力資源部門搬到里昂來降低成本
3. 運用本地原有的產業優勢，吸引相關產業來設置高階研究機構；但文中也提到，所謂生物科技高階研究機構，無法改善當地就業狀況，因為這些研究機構只聘用少量高階人才

台灣的地方政府首長和中央政府的認知是什麼？台北有國際機場、有兩岸直航，所以台中、台南和高雄也要有；台北要蓋流行音樂中心，高雄也來蓋一個...

就算也是首都倫敦獨大的英國，也不是所有中央政府機關和大企業都設在倫敦市中心；許多中央政府事務機關都設置在倫敦周圍的衛星城市；大型企業很多只有高階主管在倫敦，主要的後勤部門，如財務、會計、人力資源、資料處理、客服等，都外包至或設置在英格蘭偏遠小城，甚至是威爾斯或蘇格蘭，也不見得就會影響公司運作

中央政府應該嘗試將部分不涉及政治運作的事務機關，並鼓勵大型企業將後勤部門，搬遷到中南部，這樣才能真的增加中南部的就業機會

-----------------------------------------------------

投7千億總統：建設活絡南台

【中央社╱台南19日電】 2011.05.19 12:56 pm

總統馬英九今天祭出多項南台灣利多，除將投入南部建設達新台幣7447億元，活絡南部經濟，並宣布台南機場列為兩岸直航機場，增加中國大陸旅客到台南觀光。

馬總統就職將滿3週年，上午首度移師台南，在台南大學舉行中外記者會，宣布多項南台灣利多政策。

馬總統說，以南部為例，中央政府與地方政府應是伙伴關係。台灣不論南北都應齊頭並進，均衡發展。政府除將台南縣市、高雄縣市合併升格成直轄市，更重要的是「讓2個直轄市變成南部區域發展的火車頭，帶動地方經濟、文化的發展，這是幾十年做不到的事，我們做到了」。

馬總統表示，政府已投入和預備投入南部建設費用7447億元，如高雄海空經貿城，計畫投資2632億元，將高雄打造成為國際海空雙港門戶，及製造業、物流業與工業重鎮，預估可增加17萬個就業機會。

馬總統說，持續推動在嘉義興建故宮南院、嘉義市區鐵路高架化；高速鐵路在雲林設站；在屏東推動大鵬灣風景區建設、客家文化中心六堆文化園區等一系列交通與文化建設；也投入500多億元經費，治理曾文、南化烏山頭水庫及穩定南部地區供水計畫。

馬總統說，台南市是文化古城，風景優美，有孔廟、赤崁樓、安平古堡、億載金城與延平郡王祠等著名景點。聽說近來觀光客愈來愈多，「我們要把握機會，好好發展台南的文化觀光產業」。

由於兩岸正在協商增加航班，馬總統宣布，「從今年暑假開始，台南機場將列為兩岸直航的機場，先從包機做起，未來的航點仍需要與對岸進一步洽商」。馬總統希望台南地區旅遊業者與政府一起合作，做好準備，讓更多中國大陸觀光客直接到台南觀光。

馬總統說，政府預計投入經費2326億元，包括台南市鐵路地下化、台南創意文化園區等，這些建設須加快腳步。此外，台南市是重要農業區，3年前調高老年農民福利津貼到6000元，最近也提高稻穀收購價格，都是為維護農民權益，「我希望活絡南部經濟，帶動整個區域的蓬勃發展」。

【2011/05/19 中央社】

--------------------------------------------------

Lyon learns how to play second fiddle

By Laurence Knight
Business reporter, BBC News

Being a provincial town in a country dominated by one massive urban metropolis is not much fun.

The capital gets an unfair share of the attention - and of the investment money - while you are at constant risk of withering in its shadow.

France is a case in point.

Paris and its satellite towns have over 11 million people, while the next biggest city of Lyon can muster only 1.7 million.

And while Lyon's Rhone-Alpes region boasts an income per person of about 30,000 euros ($44,000, £27,000) - the highest outside Paris - the capital's region of Ile-de-France is still streets ahead at 47,000 euros.

What is a second city to do?

Out in the cold

The answer, it seems, is not to compete at all - at least not head-on - says Jacques de Chilly, director of the Lyon regional development agency, Aderly.

Set up in 1974, Mr de Chilly says the agency's original strategy was to convince firms to relocate their headquarters from Paris.

The city offered an obvious cost advantage - both in terms of square metrage and payroll - as well as a great quality of life, with less commuting and some of the best restaurants in France.

But it wasn't enough.

"Companies wanted to stay close to the ministries, the media and the big financial institutions," explains Mr de Chilly.

This was something Lyon had no hope of offering, leaving it out in the cold.

The plan was not a total flop.

Aderly coaxed firms into transferring some head office functions to Lyon - but only the more administrative, less politically sensitive ones, like finance and human resources.

A change of strategy was clearly needed.

"In the last five to seven years, we decided to focus on sectors in which we have critical mass," says Mr de Chilly.

These, he says, are "life science" - also known as bio-technology - and "clean tech" such as recycling and renewable energies.

Together these industries account for about 50% of investment into the region.

'Under one roof'

The reasons these sectors do well is down to the quirks of Lyon's long industrial history.

The city is one of only four places in the world where the most dangerous diseases can be studied According to a potted narrative often trotted out by its current mayor, Gerard Collomb, the story began in the 16th Century, when Lyon became pre-eminent in the Europe's nascent silk industry.

Having manufactured the cloth, the textile merchants also needed to dye it.

From this simple beginning, over the next three centuries, the Rhone valley became the heartland for the French chemicals industry - of which "clean tech" is a more recent offshoot.

With the advent of modern medicine in the nineteenth century, the industry expanded into pharmaceuticals - best exemplified by the enormous conglomerate, Rhone Poulenc, which was set up in 1928.

Next, the work of Louis Pasteur in developing the vaccine opened the way into virology.

One of Pasteur's students founded an institute in Lyon that germinated the city's modern-day life sciences industry.

The institute itself has since been subsumed within Sanofi Pasteur, the world's biggest vaccine manufacturer.

And the firm has thrived thanks to Lyon's specialisation in its industry, according to Sanofi Pasteur spokesman Alain Bernal.

For example, he says Lyon is one of only four cities in the world that hosts a P4 laboratory - the highest bio-hazard category - enabling research into the most dangerous diseases, such as ebola.

The town is also home to one of the world's top biotechnology schools, helping to bring together academics with researchers and industry people.

"You need a lot of complementary expertise under one roof," says Mr Bernal.

Lyon is dependent on the goodwill of the national government for the future ownership of its airport His firm funds a foundation at the university, offering students industry experience, while Sanofi Pasteur gets to cream off the best talent.

Lobbying Paris

Having found its niche, Lyon does not compete with Paris these days.

Rather, it competes with other biotech clusters worldwide such as Boston or Stockholm, and nearby European cities like Geneva and Milan, says Mr de Chilly.

Indeed, the city has learned to milk its relationship with Paris, by positioning itself as a French national champion.

Under the "Lyon Biopole" banner, the city's biotech cluster has attracted millions of euros in research funding from the French government.

The National Research Agency is due to announce a big strategic investment in the health industry in June, which Lyon's lobbyists hope will be their planned new research institute.

But the apparent success of the city's strategy belies some unsolved problems.

The town is still dependent on the goodwill of the national government in other ways, such as infrastructure - for example, the city's airport, which is set to be sold off by Paris.

High end jobs

Moreover, the town's chosen industrial sectors are not ones that lend themselves to mass job creation.

Greenfield investments typically created a small number of high skill jobs "The average new investment creates 20-40 jobs," says M. de Chilly. "But they are very intensive with respect to the strengths brought to the city."

All the same, the positions they create - research and development posts or high-end service jobs - are typically too specific and high-skilled for the bulk of local workers.

Unemployment is the region is 8.6% - admittedly below the national average - but high enough to be a policy concern.

Yet big semi-skilled job-creating investments - such as in manufacturing - are hard to come by, and not just in Lyon.

The last big job-creating investment by a foreign firm in France was by Toyota in 1998, says Mr de Chilly.

Since then, the car industry and other manufacturers seem more interested in lower-cost EU countries, such as Slovakia.

Mr de Chilly is hopeful this will change, and points to a logistics centre recently set up by the US pharmaceuticals group Baxter.

Labour costs are rising in Eastern Europe, he says, making France more attractive.

And with companies increasingly concerned about the environment - not to mention fuel costs - he claims they are keener to invest in production facilities close to the end consumer market.

夸夸其談的英國政客

2011-05-23T11:13:00.001+01:00

台灣的政客幾乎都是專業出身的，絕大多數都是律師。經濟財政方面的官員，也都有相關的背景。但是專業知識足夠，卻似乎越不能夠堅持專業。每每到了選舉，就不管專業，亂開選舉支票。自己的專業反而要來替政治服務了。

反觀英國的政治人物，多半是劍橋牛津出身、以政治為家傳事業的上流社會人物；雖然對專業不懂，但是受到出身背景和教育的影響，反而更能堅持理想。右派提出的政見就像右派，選上執政的時候執行的政策，也會是右派的政策；左派提出的政見聽起來就是左派，執政時也會盡量堅持自己的理想。

台灣的這些政客老是只會說自己專業，但是沒有理想、沒有堅持、眼中只有選票的人，就算再專業有什麼用？

---------------------------------------------------------

夸夸其談的英國政客

英國《金融時報》專欄作家　西蒙‧庫柏

我最近與三位英國統治階層人士一同出差，深夜酒桌上的玩笑和預想的一樣精彩。不過，有時候我們也必須工作。而工作時，我的同伴們卻可事先不做準備，也不需要筆記——而且效果還不賴。這不用奇怪，因為他們受到的全部教育都是在教他們怎樣即興發揮。他們知道，要想成功，你只需要會說漂亮話，而這也是英國統治階層擅長做的：說漂亮話。

我這裏所說的是英國上過私立學校以及（或者）牛津劍橋、隨後進入體制內的那類人：資深政客、公務員、律師、高談闊論者，還有穿著考究的那種銀行家。那是托尼‧布雷爾(Tony Blair)、大衛‧卡梅倫(David Cameron)、克里斯多夫‧希欽斯(Christopher Hitchens)、安娜‧羅賓遜(Anne Robinson)和西蒙‧考威爾(Simon Cowell)所屬的階層，他們的英語說得比世界其他任何階層都漂亮。

就連進入英國體制內大門的「入門」考試，也主要考的是沒有知識就侃侃而談的能力。成績好是不夠的，你還需要在牛津劍橋面試這個很英國式的儀式上表現良好。這個儀式就像下面這樣。17歲時，你穿著新西裝，前往牛津或劍橋的某個學院參加面試，找到導師的房間。導師可能會請你喝杯你以前從沒見過的雪利酒，然後就開始談。導師們四仰八叉靠在沙發上，拖著長音問出各種讓他們無法入眠的問題。我認識一個申請人被問到的問題是：“你不覺得威尼斯的聖馬可廣場(Piazzetta San Marco)像巴克萊銀行(Barclays)的一家分行嗎？”如果答得漂亮，進入體制內的門票就會遞到你手中。

剛進入牛津劍橋的時候，你知道的東西還很少。畢竟，你可能只參加了三個科目的考試。在大學裏，你只學一個科目，經常是英國文學、歷史或拉丁語和希臘語——如果你家長是別的國家的人，他們肯定會焦慮地問：「學這種科目以後有什麼用啊？」

大學也不鼓勵學生用功學習。我的一位南非親戚在劍橋第一次接受「督導」時，承認閱讀書目上的書一本也沒有讀。「上帝啊！」導師對他抱怨道，「我也沒讀。我還以為你能看幾本、然後告訴我那些書都講了什麼呢。」

牛津劍橋的教學方法獎勵侃侃而談。18歲的你（可能還帶著一點宿醉）朗讀自己那可憐但雅致的作文。導師指出你欠缺的知識，在接下來一個小時的談話裏，你要迂回地避開那些欠缺的知識。

傳統上，英國精英在21歲時就會結束教育。直到最近，他們都還懶得去讀研究生。因此，他們懂得很少，但話說得很漂亮，雖然只會用英語說。

查理斯‧珀西‧斯諾(C. P. Snow)在他1959年題為《兩種文化》(Two Cultures)的講座中，驚詫於統治階層對基本科學知識的無知。例如，溫斯頓‧邱吉爾(Winston Churchill)依據首席科學顧問徹韋爾勳爵(Lord Cherwell)有缺陷的統計研究，批准了受到誤導的對德「區域轟炸」。當然，邱吉爾沒辦法核對那些數字，他的強項是辭令。他拿到的諾貝爾獎是文學獎，這決非偶然。英國二戰時的國王喬治六世(George VI)現在之所以為人熟知，主要是因為他為了能把話說好曾付出很大努力，電影《國王的演講》(The King's Speech)講的就是這個故事。

數字仍然是英國統治階層面臨的一個挑戰。他們把倫敦金融城當做神奇的賺錢機器，金融城的需求會得到最大程度的滿足，因為只有老天才知道那東西是怎麼運轉的。即使是英國財政大臣喬治‧奧斯本(George Osborne)，除了在牛津學歷史時學到的那點皮毛外，也沒有受過什麼經濟學教育。英國公共辯論中的主角，很少是像沃倫‧巴菲特(Warren Buffett)、比爾‧蓋茨(Bill Gates)、馬克‧扎克伯格(Mark Zuckerberg)或是中國工程師出身的領導人那樣懂數字的人。英國國內優秀的工程師和定量分析師都被關在發動機室裏，開火車的是那幫誇誇其談的傢伙。

歷史學家麗莎‧賈丁(Lisa Jardine)寫道，英國統治階層還在努力試著對核能或氣候變化的科學論據作出判斷。布雷爾曾暗示伊拉克的「大規模殺傷性武器」可以在45分鐘內打擊倫敦，當時英國體制內的人大都相信了他的話。受過教育的美國人經常讚賞布雷爾比美國總統小布希更善於闡述觀點。沒錯，布雷爾的確善於說話，那就是他的工作。如果知識上有欠缺，他在侃侃而談時會繞開。

布雷爾在運用語言方面只有一個缺點，他和柴契爾夫人(Margaret Thatcher)一樣，沒有幽默感。不過總體上，英國統治階層人士都是有趣的演講者。套用這個階層最喜愛的劇作家諾埃爾‧考沃德(Nol Coward)的話說：「我有生以來/最為擅長的就是/讓人愉悅。」

卡梅倫最近在愉悅別人的衝動驅使下，即興模仿一個老電視廣告，對一位元工黨女議員大喊「親愛的，冷靜。」除了西爾維奧‧貝盧斯科尼(Silvio Berlusconi)，沒有哪位西方領導人會冒這種被批性別歧視的風險，因為他們不需要顯得有趣。

誠然，無知有時候也能讓英國統治階層避免犯錯誤。對於哲學，他們既無知又懷疑，所以會排斥那些有時讓法國和德國的精英們落入陷阱的瘋狂想法。畢竟，單純靠夸夸其談治理國家並沒有產生什麼災難性後果——或者說至少目前還沒有。

譯者/王柯倫

http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001038616?page=1

府重申：媒體披露馬蕭才知邵燕玲爭議

2011-04-11T02:07:00.000+01:00

看到最近大法官提名的爭議，實在很想建議副總統和總統府的幕僚把 West Wing 裡面關於提名大法官那幾集看一下，瞭解一下提名大法官之前，對於所擬提名人選的篩選應該做到什麼程度。現在說什麼媒體披露以後才知道，只是顯得自己有多麼不專業！West Wing 的編劇來作總統府幕僚，都可以做得比現在這些人好！

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

府重申：媒體披露馬蕭才知邵燕玲爭議【聯合報╱記者徐尉庭、廖雅欣、鄭宏斌／宜蘭縣報導】 2011.04.08 02:59 am 最高法院庭長邵燕玲日前在法官論壇聲明，提名之初就已表達爭議背景，但雙方取得主觀互信基礎，才接受提名。

民進黨立委批評，馬總統「明知而為」，公然向全民說謊，應對說謊行為道歉。

總統府發言人羅智強昨天回應時，仍重申總統與副總統是在媒體披露後，才知道邵燕玲爭議案。他表示，從推薦到提名的整個過程，有一些應注意、卻未注意的地方，因此總統、副總統表示歉意，「實際的情形就是如此！」

立委陳亭妃表示，馬總統說看報才知邵爭議背景，但邵說與馬總統見面時就告知，總統府卻一直給民眾「羅生門」般的說法。陳亭妃並說，從邵燕玲聲明稿可知，馬總統早知疑慮和爭議，卻仍然執意圈選提名，之前說不知情，是向所有台灣人民說謊。

立委林淑芬說，邵燕玲含冤莫辯，只好發出聲明自清。她呼籲總統府公布接見邵燕玲時的錄影帶，還原事件真相。

【2011/04/08 聯合報】@ http://udn.com/

The Problem With Value: Professor Bob Graff

2011-03-08T07:13:00.003Z

這篇文章很早已前就想要轉過來，但是一時想不到要下什麼 comment：該講的都被作者講完了。

台灣的上市櫃公司的董監事和管理階層，絕大多數都還是用創業者或大股東的心態來經營公司(當然不能說他們不對，因為他們還真的是大股東或創業者)；對他們來說，audit 是股票公開發行籌資的必要之惡：「我花了錢，會計師就應該幫我搞定！」、「不要再告訴我你還要我作什麼！」。相較於國外成熟的大企業，是把會計師查核當作廣義的股東關係和公共關係的一部份，因此，對於審計品質的要求要高了一個層級。

value 的問題在台灣還有另外一個 issue：在台灣的商業環境和文化下，簽訂合約，只代表雙
方「開始」溝通合約條件而已，簽約雙方都不真的把合約內容當一回事；往往在簽約後，客戶發現合約內容有什麼不利之處，還可以要求事務所額外提供不在合約內容內的服務，而不另外簽訂合約或付款；更有趣的是，事務所也把這種事情當作理所當然的「客戶服務」！

------------------------------------------------------------------

The Problem With Value: Professor Bob Graff

By Francine • Dec 24th, 2009 • Category: Audit Firm Management, Pure Content

Bob Graff is a retired PricewaterhouseCoopers partner living in South Korea. He worked in the Systems and Process Assurance practice (SPA). It was called CAAG in 1986 when he first started doing technology consulting for clients. He has been associated with the Korean practice since 1995 until his retirement last year. He is currently lecturing to the next generation of Asian business leaders at Solbridge Intl School of Business, Daejeon, Korea. This guest post was written exclusively for re: The Auditors.

The Problem with Value

One of the factors which lead economies to repeated brinks of disaster is the pursuit of value. Not that the pursuit of value is wrong, but rather when the definition of value is not shared by the concerned parties inappropriate professional behavior results.

Much has been written and fingers pointed at examples such as banker’s bonuses, underwriter’s creation of dubious investment instruments, auditor’s failure to fulfill their responsibilities and, outright fraud. Generally, one is lead to believe individual self interest motivated the actions, or lack of, of those individuals involved.

While it is understandable we view such actions in terms of greed, this reasoning leaves us with only regulatory and punitive actions by which, through fear of detection and punishment, we attempt to ensure an environment where we can trust the actions of others. Quite frankly, regulation and penalties have proven to be ineffective (or we would have solved this by now).

What is needed is a new approach. Not to replace post-event regulation and punishment but to augment them with inducements to encourage the behavior we desire.

As human beings we look for single solutions to complex issues. I do not believe there is a single solution but, there may be a common issue.

I believe the root of the problem lies in our unquestioning acceptance of the term “value”. A quick internet search on the term value will lead to at least a dozen different branches where value is defined and yet we use the term as if it were mutually and universally understood. I believe this common acceptance is unwarranted and in fact creates the undesirable situations mentioned above. Let me propose a definition of value. “That which moves us toward our goal(s) has value. The degree of value is determined by the priority of the goal and the extent to which we move toward it.”

Let me use the auditor /client relationship as an example of how the lack of a shared understanding of value can lead to inappropriate behavior.

The auditor/client relationship is initiated through the RFP – proposal process. In this process the client states requirements and the auditor responds with an understanding, solution, and pricing offer. From this point forward the relationship is tainted and the seeds for inappropriate behavior are sown. Why, because in almost all cases the framework of the relationship is now based on the stated requirements and price – not the desired goals and anticipated value of the service.

This is inadequate because the client has defined the requirements in terms of what they see to be the solution to a problem not in terms of what their goal(s) are. The auditor further compounds this by replying in terms of solution (not outcome) and attaches their goal in terms of price.

A number of issues follow.

Changes in the client’s goals change the adequacy of the stated solution (or realization the initial solution was inadequate) and the auditor is forced to expend additional resources to achieve a changed solution. (They may choose to accept this increase or add additional charges to compensate.) In this case, the client does not really understand the auditor’s position as they believe they contracted for a goal achievement (value) which has yet to be delivered.

In another case, clients fail to see the value in the delivered service and look to maximize their investment in the relationship by asking for “value-added” service. The auditor responds by delivering beyond what was stated in the contract, typically by performing services which they believe the client will value. But again, without a clear understanding of what the client values this effort will be haphazard at best.

At the end of the day both parties feel unsatisfied. For the client (the more basic the service, such as audit) the lower the switching cost and higher benefit from cost shopping other firms. However, the auditor has now made an investment in the client and will take steps to retain the relationship and money stream. From this point forward the risk of a downward behavior spiral expands. As once the auditor demonstrates flexibility in service or cost the client will push to find the limits.

Most of us in the profession have witnessed this dynamic with frustration. I have heard many professionals question the value of their service, driving them to cling to regulation, methodology and, technique rather than search for the value they deliver.

What can be done?

If misunderstanding value is contributing to the problem, an improved understand of goals should lead to improvement. But how to achieve this improved understanding?
The client is not likely to initiate additional effort without demonstrated benefit. But the auditor does stand to gain from an improved understanding of goals and so, it will be the auditor who must make initiate this process.

Here are some common sense steps auditors can take:

Enter a dialog with the client prior to responding to the RFP. Go beyond understanding the stated solution to seek out their goal(s). What is the outcome they want? Few, if any, clients want a new system, audit, or survey just to have it done.

Align your proposal to the client’s priorities and goals and find where you have common goals (yes, your goals are important too.). Some of the most enjoyable and successful engagements I have participated on were those where we had common shared goals (i.e. SOX implementation or SAS 70 attestations).

Start proposals with a clear value statement. What goal will the client be closer to at the end of the engagement. This will lead to better scope creep control, expectation management and project success. As a test, take a current proposal and count how many pages are devoted to the project value and how many are spent describing technique and methodology. (What priority does the client place on your process vs. his goal achievement?)

Have periodic status update meetings, not focused on % solution complete or solution problems, but rather on goal achievement.

With a clear common understanding and communication of the goals and values desired a significant step would be taken to ensuring the mutual behavior desired by all shareholders.

How warm is your home?

2011-03-03T13:00:00.003Z

Now I know that average the room temperature of a British home is at 17.5C. This reminds me two things: the first is that I had to sleep with my sweater and jacket on when I was in a home stay in London because it was so cold. The room temperature was at about 12C. That really surprised me, and froze me as well;the second is that health visitors came to my flat to see how my son is taken care of soon after he was born. They were surprised that we kept the room temperature at above 20C. Their official suggestion is to keep room temperature at 17-18C to prevent SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrom). Well, I don't think any family in Taiwan is able to keep room temperature well below 20C and SIDS is that common in Taiwan. Maybe that's just another myth.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

3 March 2011 Last updated at 02:34 GMT

How warm is your home?

By Megan Lane

Our homes are getting warmer just as the powers-that-be are asking us to turn our thermostats down. How cool is too cool for a house?

Spring is in the air in the UK, but it will be weeks - if not months - before the nation's radiators switch off.

The average indoor temperatures of British houses are creeping up now central heating is the norm, and double glazing and insulation are added to older, draughtier homes.

In the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change's new online modelling tool My 2050, users can decide what they want the UK to be like in 39 years' time. The only caveat? Carbon emissions must drop 80% while keeping the lights on.

It shows that hitting this target requires more than extra wind turbines or nuclear power stations. How many cars should be electric? Should international shipping grow or shrink?

Continue reading the main story Government drive My 2050 is web application for Department of Energy and Climate ChangeThey want to cut emissions by 80%Design your own virual future with My 2050
And, most immediate to personal comfort, should the average indoor temperature of British houses continue to rise, stay roughly the same at 17.5C (63.5F), or fall?

Dropping it to 16C - the lowest setting in this virtual world - only shaves 7% off carbon emissions. Even if we all get in the habit of wearing woollies inside, this will still feel chillier than usual to most people.

David MacKay, the DECC's chief scientific adviser, practises what he preaches in his once draughty semi-detached 1940s house. As well as double glazing and insulation, he has turned the heating right down.

"When I'm at home, my normal thermostat settings are roughly 13C, but lower when I am out, and 15C, briefly, at getting-up time in the morning. One important additional rule is that whenever I feel cold, I turn the thermostat up as high as I like. The automatic thermostat control then turns it back to the normal settings a few hours later."

He hopes that insulating more homes, smarter thermostats and "the promotion of sweater-wearing by sexy personalities" will encourage more people to follow suit.

Wrap up warm to get cosy
But to many, a thermostat set in the low teens may sound unconscionably frugal - especially when the range of numbers commonly goes from 10 to 30C.

Comfort cannot be defined absolutely, but the World Health Organization's standard for warmth is 21C (70F) in a living room and 18C (64F) elsewhere.

Our expectations of thermal comfort have been raised by central heating at home and at work, and because we are more sedentary at home and at work. Those sitting still - in front of the TV or at a computer - feel the cold quicker than someone moving about.

"A human's perception of whether they feel warm depends on what they are doing, and what they've been doing for the past hour or so," says Dr MacKay in his book Sustainable Energy - Without The Hot Air.

According to one widely quoted model, devised in 2008 by the Building Research Establishment and used in My 2050, average indoor temperatures have risen from 12C in 1970 to about 17.5C (63.5F) today.

But, says Michelle Shipworth of the UCL Energy Institute, this model assumes we are turning our thermostats up, to explain why energy use hasn't gone down as homes have become more energy efficient.

What has happened, she says, is that we now heat more rooms, and for longer.

Continue reading the main story Living room temperatures18-21C - comfortable temperature9-12 or 24+C: Risk of stroke and heart attack21-24C or 16-18C - some discomfort12-16C - risk of respiratory diseaseLess than 9C - risk of hypothermiaSource: Study by housing expert Richard Moore
Forty years ago, few houses had central heating, and chilly hallways and spare rooms dragged the average temperature down. Radiators now warm rooms that previous generations wouldn't have heated - corridors, bedrooms, and bathrooms.

The last comprehensive set of measured home indoor temperatures is from 1996, when the English House Condition Survey found that although living room temperatures in winter remained relatively stable, the nation's hallways were getting warmer - up from 16.3C in 1986 to 17.9C.

"And for bedrooms, you'll be far more comfortable while you're asleep if it is about 14 or 15C," says Shipworth.

Dr Lucy Worsley, chief curator of the Royal Historic Palaces, agrees. "My grandmother wouldn't sleep in a heated bedroom, and would always have a window open. You can't imagine many people today feel the same."

In our enthusiasm for cosy homes, she says many of us are like the profligate Georgians.

Continue reading the main story “Start QuoteFair houses so full of glass that one cannot tell where to become to be out of the sun or cold”
End Quote Sir Francis Bacon on 16th Century fashion for huge windows
"A warm living room showed you were a good host and a generous person. They thought an element of wastefulness showed you had enough cash to be generous," says Worsley, presenter of BBC Four's If Only Walls Could Talk, a history of our homes to be broadcast in April.

"In medieval times, heating your home was akin to burning money. There was a 16th Century saying, 'the game's not worth the candle' - a task was only worth doing if it justified the expense of illumination.

"But when people began to have more spare time and spare money, considerations of waste became less important."

With energy bills soaring in recent years, and more people aware of energy consumption, she expects frugality to be thrust upon us once more.

"I do think the future will be medieval, when the big bang comes and we run out of oil. Small windows, shutters on the outside, a chimney for natural ventilation."

Learning to operate a smart thermostat takes time
And expectations can be adjusted down as well as up. In Japan, there is a move away from super-cooling and over-heating office buildings. Government officials are encouraged to abandon jackets and ties in summer, and some local authorities have workers wrapped in blankets at their desks in winter.

"In 2005, Prime Minister Koizumi decreed that no government building should be heated above 20C or cooled below 28C," says Professor Michael Kelly of Cambridge University.

"That had quite an energy saving, but no drop-off in worker productivity. Compare that to London, where the expectation is that buildings will be within a few degrees of 22C year-round."

So will smart thermostats and radiator valves help, allowing homeowners to target heat where it's needed at different times in the day?

Experts say technology can do only half the job. A smart thermostat is only as smart as the person operating it.

證交稅挹注健保財源財部反對

2010-12-15T04:47:00.003Z

金管會和財政部官員的發言都在自打嘴巴！

金管會官員指出，不能因證交稅比較好課（投資人交易時就會立刻被課），財政有缺口就向證交稅拿錢，況且股票投資人不是每個人在證券市場交易都有賺到錢。

上班族指出，不能因薪資所得比較好課(上班族領薪水時就會立即被課)，財政有缺口就向上班族拿錢，況且上班族不是每個人的收入都足以支應生活開銷

對因二代健保要對證券交易稅及菸酒稅開徵「健保捐」，財政部至今都抱持保留態度。據瞭解，財政部主要是堅持，健保是保險，必須具備自償性，應與稅制分開處理，因此不管在任何稅目上附加健保捐，都違反租稅中性原則。

資本利得，如房屋交易所得、土地交易所得及證券交易所得，不是免稅就是稅率稅基超低，領薪水的反而要繳重稅，這樣不違反租稅中性原則？這位財政部官員這麼有租稅專業知識，願意挺身而出捍衛專業領域，怎麼不要求自己修法資本利得也要納入所得稅一併課稅？這位財政部官員怎麼不會對現行資本利得免稅或或輕稅的情況「持保留態度」？

-------------------------------------------------------

經濟日報╱記者陳美珍、李淑慧／台北報導】 2010.12.14 03:00 am

衛生署新健保方案規劃以加徵證交稅挹注健保財源，財政部及金管會昨（13）日同聲反對；財政部認為健保是保險，應與稅制分開處理；金管會官員直指，提高證交稅率是提高投資人交易成本，「後續影響怎樣，大家都知道」。

據悉，財政部認為，若僅在現有證交稅收內，提撥一定比率收入為健保財源，可能比直接提高稅率更可行。目前證交稅稅率千分之3，去年稅收約1059億元。

一般認為，財金部會反對提高證交稅，是擔心影響投資人交易意願，衝擊股市，這也讓衛生署有意以提高證交稅挹注財源的想法，恐不易實現。金融高層官員就指出，兩大財金部會同步反對，二代健保是否納入證交稅當作財源，恐怕還有很大的問題。

行政院和國民黨立委昨天就衛生署二代健保法草案新版本達成初步共識，但是否加徵證交稅千分之0.5來挹注健保財源，衛生署和財政部還在最後試算，尚未拍板定案。

金管會官員指出，不能因證交稅比較好課（投資人交易時就會立刻被課），財政有缺口就向證交稅拿錢，況且股票投資人不是每個人在證券市場交易都有賺到錢。

對因二代健保要對證券交易稅及菸酒稅開徵「健保捐」，財政部至今都抱持保留態度。據瞭解，財政部主要是堅持，健保是保險，必須具備自償性，應與稅制分開處理，因此不管在任何稅目上附加健保捐，都違反租稅中性原則。

財政部高層官員說，國民年金法已將未來營業稅加徵1%的空間，留做國民年金財源，已無可能再以營業稅做為健保財源挹注的對象。

由於現行證券交易稅率，實質已內含部分證券交易所得稅，財政部認為，股市要活絡，交易稅就不宜過重。若一定要從資本利得或證券交易稅收下手，「自證交稅收中提撥一定比率做為健保財源或許可行」。

【2010/12/14 經濟日報】@ http://udn.com/

台灣的個人所得稅率低嗎？

2010-11-04T01:16:00.004Z

台灣的個人所得稅率低嗎？

英國的個人所得稅率一直都很高，不過只分兩級：20% 和 40%。一般畢業生的薪水，如果是從事像店員之類的工作，起薪會在年薪 2 萬英鎊左右。2 萬英鎊適用的所得稅率就是 20%，但是如果薪水在約 3 萬 5 千磅以上，就會適用 40% 的稅率了。

台灣的個人所得稅級距由 6% 起跳，然後是 13%、21%、30% 和 40%。乍看之下似乎大部分的人適用的稅率都比英國低很多。不過有一點要注意的是，英國沒有所謂健保費。英國人看醫生去醫院看病開刀治療完全免費，也不用付所謂掛號費；而這個醫療體系(NHS)所有的經費，都是政府出錢，也就是說英國的「健保費」是從個人所得稅裏出的。

台灣的健保費目前在 5% 左右，如果把健保費考慮進去，放在和英國相同的比較基礎上，台灣實際上的所得稅率應該是 11%、18%、26%、35% 和 45%。台灣實際上的個人所得稅率其實不會比英國低！(也許會有人爭論健保費部分是由政府和雇主負擔，但是羊毛出在羊身上，不管是政府負擔或雇主負擔，其實還不是都是由薪資裏扣下來的！)

更不公平的是，台灣的健保費只採用「薪資所得」計算，只有領薪水的人要繳健保費。靠資本利得(買賣股票和房地產賺錢)的人，是不用繳健保費的！

-------------------------------------

「健保費」應更像「健保稅」

【經濟日報╱社論】 2010.10.29 01:39 am

沉寂若干時日的二代健保，最近又受到注意，卻是六大工商團體聯合表達反對意見。由於工商界領袖齊聚一堂代表台灣的經營者興師問罪，積極推動二代健保的馬政府不能當做馬耳東風，置若罔聞。

工商界大老關切的重點，多放在一些久受抨擊但遲未見改善的技術問題上，諸如醫療資源浪費、藥價黑洞、國外居民低繳保費揩健保的油等；這些問題不論一代健保、二代健保都應全力以赴、剋日解決，因而為此反對二代健保，不具特殊意義。

比較具有針對性的，是工總常務理事痛批二代健保像在繳「健保稅」，而非「健保費」。由於擴大費基，將薪資以外的其他收入，也依所得稅的課稅方式，納入收取健保費的基準之中，的確令健保費更趨近實施多年的所得稅制度。不過，這與過去比較像健保費的一代健保而言，的確是一大進步。真正令人遺憾的是，二代健保的收取方式更接近所得稅，但仍遠遠劣於所得稅；因而問題不在於它是不是健保稅，而是為什麼在更優越的所得稅行之多年下，硬要以遠比所得稅更不公平的「健保稅」做為健保的主要財源。

一代健保最大的缺陷，就是只向薪資所得者收健保費，而且不論貧富，一律收取相同的費率。單一費率的改善所得分配效果，當然比不上累進稅率，就此而言，已遜於所得稅一籌。更嚴重的是，健保只向薪資所得者開刀，而放過其他任何所得來源，但造成當前貧富差距快速擴大的元凶，正是薪資所得成長停滯，而非薪資所得日漸膨脹。現有的所得稅制，儘管對於投資土地、股票等資產而產生的資本利得幾乎一概免稅，因而使納稅重擔多半落在薪資所得者身上，但到底還有一小部分是由非薪資所得者負擔。一代健保卻是連這一部分也全予豁免，使健保費成為最不公平、最不合理的收費方式。

基於此一極大偏差，也為了擴大費基廣開財源，二代健保最重要的改革，就是要消弭健保費的費基與所得稅的稅基之間的缺口；儘管資本利得的漏洞仍難完全杜絕，但到底已比過去高明太多。若據此抨擊二代健保的健保稅，實在是對二代健保的極大誤解，我們反而應該要求二代健保更像所得稅，加上適當的累進精神，會讓弱勢族群得到更大的福利。

所得稅與健保費除了費率是否累進的差異外，所得稅設有十分寬厚的免稅額與扣除額，由於其金額人人相同，對弱勢者的保障遠大於高所得者，使其負擔的公平性相對增加；至於健保費，不論一代、二代都無此設計，對經濟能力相對弱勢者的保障乃大為降低，比所得稅更為不如。

因此，全民健保實施以來，每有虧損發生，各界即大罵失色，認為虧損必須由全體納稅人填補，乃是天大的禍事。其實，正好相反！不僅虧損的缺口，如果全部健保經費都由所得稅支付，反而是全民的福音。

由於二代健保向所得稅趨近，將收費的所得範圍擴大，我們相信今天因給付薪資而承擔高額健保費的企業經營者，反而會減輕其負擔，工商團體應在實施之前，與健保單位好好將這筆帳算清楚；並強力監督衛生署，消除醫療浪費、藥價黑洞、低收海外居民健保費等問題，更應以其經營方面的真知灼見，借箸代籌，提出更有效的改善方案。

除此之外，在健保費仍無法企及所得稅的公平精神前，我們期盼二代健保的設計者與立法者，必須採取所得稅的做法，進一步改善對弱勢民眾的收費辦法，如六大工商團體所建議的，由政府編列社會預算予以補助，就是一個非常值得重視的方向。

【2010/10/29 經濟日報】@ http://udn.com/

G20: Why we all want to be Canadian now

2010-06-25T11:27:00.007+01:00

加拿大的銀行，房貸貸款額度如果超過七成五，貸款人要自己出錢買保險。萬一還不出錢來，保險公司要賠銀行。

-----------------------------------------------------------

G20: Why we all want to be Canadian now
Page last updated at 07:40 GMT, Friday, 25 June 2010 08:40 UK
By Caroline Hepker BBC World Business Report, Ottawa

Even on a rainy weekday at Ottawa's By Ward market, Canadian shoppers are cheery.

As Americans and Europeans face deficits and drastic government cuts, Canada's economy is recovering from only a mild recession.

Sheltering near the maple syrup stall, local restaurant promoter Melissa Grecco says Canada escaped the fate of the US.

"We felt the effects on corporate bookings, companies not spending money on staff or booking on a limited budget. But we didn't feel it as much as the US. And within the last couple of months our business has exploded."

Painful reforms

So Canada is now one of the top performing industrialised economies. How did they manage it?

For a start, painful reforms in the 1980s and early 1990s.

Canada's government, based in the stone neo-gothic Parliament building in Ottawa, along with individual provinces, were able to afford an economic stimulus package.

Whilst other nations borrowed, Canada had a budget surplus for over a decade.

According to James Flaherty, Canada's jaunty finance minister, it was also down to a more cautious approach.

"The Canadian character is relatively fiscally conservative. Canadians themselves are relatively prudent, I think, in terms of how much they are prepared to borrow and the risks they are prepared to take."

Safe as houses

Certainly, fewer risks are allowed in the housing market.

Canadian home values have held fairly steady according to Pierre de Varennes, a real estate broker in Ottawa, with 350 employees.

He says stricter standards for homebuyers meant no housing boom and bust in Canada:

"In Canada, you cannot over-mortgage your property. In fact if you are financing more than 75% of the value, you have to get insurance. Not for you but for the bank."

With that protection, Canadian banks have done well from mortgages. And with less exposure to toxic sub-prime mortgages in the US, Canada's six biggest financial institutions, headquartered on Bay Street in Toronto, survived the financial crisis disaster free.

'Big stick'

The Toronto skyline that Gordon Nixon, the President of Royal Bank of Canada, can see from his office on Bay Street not only looks very different to Manhattan. It is run differently, too.

"The structure of our marketplace in Canada is very different," he says.

"Most mortgages are held on the balance sheet of banks. The terms are more conservative and there is not as aggressive a marketplace.

"Sub-prime lending is very limited in the Canadian marketplace. What was the weakest asset class in the US and spread to the balance sheets of many banks was one of the strongest in Canada."

But Canada has also been happy to wield a bigger stick when it comes to financial regulation.

Banking superintendent Julie Dickson credits Canadian firms with better risk management.

But banks must also adhere to more stringent standards. What's more, her office is within walking distance.

"We spent a lot of time looking at what they are doing on a day-to-day basis. We also had good rules when it comes to capital and leverage. And the industry is of a size that it is easier for the regulator to get their arms around it."

Canada's financial sector is smaller and perhaps more insulated than in the US.

Critics add that Canadian banks are less innovative, with higher costs for consumers. Talking to Canadians, they seem to shrug off those arguments, happy with the results of a more prudent and, some argue, less greedy economic philosophy.

Puzzle solved

The G8 and G20 is a crucial opportunity for Canadian policy makers, eager to vaunt their successes to leaders gathered in Toronto.

And Canada need only point to growing businesses like Magmic. The Canadian IT firm makes games for the Blackberry, Apple's iPhone and iPad.

John Criswick, who founded in the firm in 2002, says the recession was painful but the odds have been tipped in his favour because he is in Canada.

"The recession definitely had an impact on us. We are half the size we used to be. But we are growing out of that and being in Canada has aided us in that recovery. It is pushing us beyond what our competition are doing in the US."

John's most profitable game? The iconic US brand the New York Times Crossword - currently the top selling gaming app on the iPhone.

The Canadians, it seems, have answers for even the toughest puzzles and they are keen to share their strategies with the rest of the world. Why in this economy, we all want to be Canadian.

倫敦的房子有多貴: Commutefrom.com告訴你

2010-06-14T16:42:00.020+01:00

台灣某些建商喜歡拿台北的房價與國際大都市，特別是倫敦比較。他們認為與國際大都市相較，台北的房價偏低，所以台北房價還有上漲空間。

現在我們來看看倫敦市郊一般的房子大概要多少錢。

英國有很多網站協助初次搬到倫敦工作需要找房子的人。只要你在網站上輸入你上班地點最近的地鐵站，還有你希望每天通勤的時間，就可以幫你找出符合你通勤條件的地鐵站或電車站。

網站上還會列入由英國地政機關 (Registry of Land) 所統計當地房屋平均交易價格，和各類房地產價格。有的網站還有有房地產仲介的廣告，可以直接點進去看目前出售中的房屋。

在此介紹兩個功能類似的網站：

Commutefrom.com

Where can I live

首先先介紹 Commutfrom.com：

1. 首先輸入你預計上班地點：先假設以倫敦金融區 (City)最主要的地鐵站 Bank 為上班地點，在這裡上班的多半是荷包滿滿年薪台幣千萬起跳的投資銀行家，相信他們不會住不起豪宅。

預設通勤時間為搭通勤電車或捷運 40 到 50 分鐘，如果加上從家裡走路到車站 10 分鐘，再從 Bank 地鐵站走到公司 10 分鐘，通勤時間總共一小時。

2. 然後「go」，網站上就會列出符合你的條件的地鐵站或火車站。在剛剛設定的條件下，總共有 155 個地鐵站或火車站符合條件！

3. 隨便點一個車站，看看當地的相關資料：

4. 自己隨便點一點其他車站，看看通勤時間 40 到 50 分鐘內的房屋價格到底是多少？記得英國人的收入是台灣人的三倍。

5. 如果不相信這個網站上的價格，就往該車站的價格資訊點下去，會引導到 BBC 的房屋價格統計網站，這裏的資料是英國的地政機關 (Registry of Land) 提供的成交價格資料。

What Mr Jobs doesn't know, or intentionally ignores...

2010-06-04T14:31:00.006+01:00

What Steve Jobs doesn't understand (or probably ignores intentionally, I assume) is that it is the culture, the pressure and the unspoken disciplines which require workers to work day and night and which have been deeply built in the military management style of Foxconn that make the workers leapt, rather than the lack... of theatres or swimming pools. A former consultant to Foxconn commented (which was on a Taiwanese newspaper last week): "If you have no time to use those facilities, what's the good to have them?"

--------------------------------------

Apple boss defends conditions at iPhone factory

Page last updated at 9:11 GMT, Wednesday, 2 June 2010 10:11 UK

Apple boss Steve Jobs has defended conditions at a Taiwanese electronics firm that produces the firm's popular iPhone, following a spate of suicides.

"Foxconn is not a sweatshop," he told a conference in the US.

Mr Jobs said that Apple representatives were working with Foxconn to find out why 10 workers had killed themselves at a factory in Shenzhen, China.

An eleventh worker recently died at another factory in northern China.

In total, there have been 13 suicides and suicide attempts at Foxconn factories this year.

"We're all over this," said Mr Jobs at the All Things Digital conference in California.

Continue reading the main story You go in this place and it's a factory but, my gosh, they've got restaurants and movie theatres and hospitals and swimming pools

Foxconn has said that it will give its assembly line workers a 30% pay rise.

The firm had previously said that it would offer a 20% pay increase to its Chinese workers, who earn 900 yuan (£90) per month at entry-level.

"We hope the hike in wages will help improve the living standards of the workers and allow them to have more leisure time, which is good for their health," an official of Foxconn's parent company Hon Hai precision told AFP.

Hon Hai Precision is the world's largest maker of consumer electronics, and employs 800,000 workers worldwide, mostly in China.

Foxconn makes a range of products for manufacturers including Apple, Dell and Nokia.

The deaths have shone a spotlight on working conditions at the factory, where workers - often from rural China - work up to 12 hours a day, six days a week.

But Mr Jobs defended the conditions.

"You go in this place and it's a factory but, my gosh, they've got restaurants and movie theatres and hospitals and swimming pools. For a factory, it's pretty nice," he said.

Surreal moment

Mr Jobs addressed a number of other issues at the All Things Digital conference.

Last week, Apple overtook Microsoft to become the world's largest technology company by market value.

"For those of us that have been in the industry a long time, it's surreal. But it doesn't matter very much, it's not what's important," Mr Jobs said.

"It's not what makes you come to work every morning."

He also claimed that Apple's controversial move to block Adobe Flash animation and video technology from its popular iPhones and iPads was "a technical decision".

"We didn't start off to have a war with Flash or anything else," he said.

The comments are the latest step in a long-running dispute between Apple and Adobe over the Flash platform.

房市透明化學者籲政府擔責任

2010-05-30T15:02:00.005+01:00

不動產交易應該是依據「土地登記規則」辦理。「土地登記規則」裡，也只說要填寫登記申請書，並沒有規定「登記申請書」裡面應該要有什麼欄位。要買賣雙方申報交易價格，只要在「登記申請書」裡，增加一個「交易價格」欄位就可以了。

就算說要修改「土地登記規則」，「土地登記規則」是內政部的行政規則。這應該只要內政部一個行政命令，經總統公佈施行就好，也不需要經過立法院同意...

價格公開的部分，之前有看到新聞說有法務部解釋，只要不涉及揭露買賣雙方姓名、身分證字號等訊息，單獨揭露交易價格與房屋屬性，並非個人資料保護法所限制之範圍。

如此看來，只要內政部修改「登記申請書」的內容，增加登記「交易價格」，就可以公開不動產交易價格，何以需要修法？

提供交易價格算是登載公文書，作假會觸犯刑法第 214 條「使公務員登載不實罪」:

「明知為不實之事項，而使公務員登載於職務上所掌之公文書，足以生損害於公眾或他人者，處三年以下有期徒刑、拘役或五百元以下罰金」

作假申報是要坐牢的！何以地政司官員認為「如果只是修改行政命令，恐怕無法達到得知真實價格的效果」？

只要規定要求買賣雙方於移轉登記時，申報交易價格並提供契約影本。這樣買賣雙方都有法律責任誠實申報。這樣就可以加諸買賣雙方揭露交易價格的法律義務，當然可以得知真實交易價格。

---------------------------------

房市透明化學者籲政府擔責任
20100528 17:57:48

（中央社記者何孟奎台北28日電）為推動房屋交易資訊透明化，多名學者與無殼蝸牛聯盟今天在立院呼籲，推動不動產交易價格資訊透明是政府責任，內政部地政司應修改土地登記規則相關規定，讓民眾知道真實價格。

民進黨立委陳節如下午舉辦「落實不動產交易價格資訊透明」公聽會，包括政治大學地政系教授張金鶚、玄奘大學財金系副教授花敬群、無殼蝸牛聯盟發言人彭揚凱、內政部地政司官員、經建會官員以及房仲業者都與會。

陳節如表示，美國民眾買房之前，可輕易查到歷次交易價格，美國政府對資料查詢與蒐集也訂定規範，讓業者、民眾可付費取得完整資料庫。可見透過修改土地登記規則，由政府直接掌握交易資訊，才能真正解決資訊公開的問題。

張金鶚說，中央銀行總裁彭淮南日前曾指出，許多地段高房價都是假象，可見台灣不動產交易價格資訊有多麼不透明；要讓房屋交易資訊透明化有許多管道，最簡單的就是修改土地登記規則土地登記買賣價格，而非公告價格。

張金鶚認為，房屋交易資訊透明化沒有侵犯隱私權的問題，「現在土地謄本都調得到，都是可揭露的資訊。」他強調，不動產交易價格資訊要透明化，「政府部門要去做，只要求民間是不足的。」

彭揚凱指出，房屋交易資訊透明化是政府的責任，如果要求房仲業者自律，是推托責任的做法；政府應訂定明確的規範，讓民眾有所依據，地政司應修改土地登記規則，用行政命令就可解決此一問題，不要再推給其他機關。

內政部地政司官員回應表示，要推動不動產交易價格資訊透明化，土地登記也是一個方向，地政司不會推托責任；但如果只是修改行政命令，恐怕無法達到得知真實價格的效果，最好回到法律層面，研究如何修法。990528

財政部長的良知呢？

2010-05-27T11:14:00.011+01:00

在這次英國國會大選獲勝的保守黨新政府，計畫提高個人資本利得稅稅率，使與個人所得稅稅率稅率一致。目前營利事業所得稅稅率是 28%，個人所得稅稅率是 20%、40% 及最高級距的 50%。但是個人資本利得稅稅率只有 18%。

在目前的稅法下，出售供自己居住使用、且自己主要居住所在的住宅(main home)免資本利得稅，但個人出售投資目的房地產或其他較少居住使用的住宅(second home)則適用 18% 的資本利得稅稅率。

因為資本利得稅稅率差異，許多高所得者投入大筆資金投資房地產，享受出售房地產所得只需要繳 18% 的資本利得稅，規避自己原本應該適用的 40% 或 50% 個人所得稅稅率級距。

現在保守黨政府打算提高資本利得稅稅率，使與個人所得稅稅率一致。

但此項計畫受到年輕議員的反對。

對於年輕議員的異議，新上任的商務部長 Cable 反駁如下：

"At present it is quite wrong and it is an open invitation to tax avoidance to have people taxed at 40% or potentially 50% on their income, but only taxed at 18% on capital gains; it leads to large scale tax avoidance so for reasons of fairness and practicality, we have agreed that the capital gains tax system needs to be fundamentally reformed."

「現在的作法不但有錯，而且等於公開邀請民眾規避 40% 或 50% 的所得稅，然後只繳 18% 的所得稅；這會導致大規模的逃稅，因此為了公平起見並就實務上考量，我們同意資本利得稅系統需要大規模改革。」

其他議員又說這樣會懲罰辛苦工作存錢，投資房地產做退休金用的藍領階級 (working class)。

商務部長又反駁：

"I don't accept the way he puts it. I don't think there are terribly many people who he describes as working class who get very large capital gains."

「我不同意他的說法。我認為只有少數他指稱的「藍領階級」有很高的資本利得。」

關於資本利得稅，我們的財政部長說了什麼？

------------------------------------

No split on capital gains - Cable

Business Secretary Vincent Cable has insisted the coalition government is not split over planned increases to non-business capital gains tax.

The move could see second home sales taxed at a rate of 40% or 50%.

Senior Tory MPs have attacked it as a tax on the middle classes and a betrayal of Conservative values.

But Mr Cable told BBC News it was a "key" part of the coalition deal and there was no disagreement over it between the Lib Dem and Tory partners.

Mr Cable, who has stood down as Lib Dem deputy leader, said the changes to capital gains tax would help to fulfil the Lib Dem aim of bringing more "fairness" to the tax system.

He told the BBC: "It's very important that we have wealth taxed in the same way as income.
"At present it is quite wrong and it is an open invitation to tax avoidance to have people taxed at 40% or potentially 50% on their income, but only taxed at 18% on capital gains; it leads to large scale tax avoidance so for reasons of fairness and practicality, we have agreed that the capital gains tax system needs to be fundamentally reformed."

'Punishing the virtuous'

Businesses must pay capital gains tax when they sell assets, such as buildings or shares. Non-business capital gains tax is levied on individuals who come into a windfall through the sale of property or shares.

“ Far from taxing the rich, it will simply tax the elderly at their point of maximum vulnerability - when they enter retirement ” David Davis, Conservative MP

It is set at a lower rate than income tax to encourage entrepreneurs - but many individuals have used it to invest in buy-to-let properties and other assets to plan for their retirement.

And it is these people that senior Conservative backbenchers, such as David Davis and John Redwood, say would be hit by the proposed changes.

In an article for the Daily Mail, Mr Davis said increasing the tax risked "punishing the virtuous" and "destroying aspiration".

"It will penalise hard work and saving. Far from taxing the rich, it will simply tax the elderly at their point of maximum vulnerability - when they enter retirement," wrote the former shadow home secretary.

Critics also claim that increasing non-business capital gains tax (CGT) too much will actually lead to a reduction in tax receipts as people put their money into other kinds of investment or find ways of avoiding it.

"Unless it is very carefully designed, the plan to increase CGT will not only fail to raise the money needed, it will cost money," added Mr Davis - citing evidence from the US.

But Mr Cable dismissed Mr Davis's argument, saying: "I don't accept the way he puts it. I don't think there are terribly many people who he describes as working class who get very large capital gains."

Cameron's message

And he insisted there was no real disagreement at the top of government over the changes, which will be announced by Chancellor George Osborne in next month's budget.

"It's not actually an argument between the coalition partners, as I understand it, it's an argument between a few Conservative backbenchers and others," he added.

He also dismissed John Redwood's proposal to make the tax much lower if an asset has been held for a long time, saying that would be a return to a system that had to be abandoned by the previous Labour government "because it didn't work".

Prime Minister David Cameron urged backbench critics to wait for the budget on 22 June and insisted all of their arguments were being taken into account.

He said a higher rate was needed to raise the "modest" sums needed to pay for income tax cuts for low and middle earners as part of the coalition deal with the Liberal Democrats.

He refused to be drawn on whether the changes would include safeguards to protect people who had invested for their retirement but he stressed that entrepreneurs would be protected, telling BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "We need a country that really fires up entrepreneurship."

Story from BBC NEWS:

真的無法可管嗎？

2010-04-27T14:25:00.004+01:00

現在央行公布了投資客的標準，我們來看看金管會主委兩天前的說法好了....

其實只是不想管！！什麼無法強制！

想想看當初連動債怎麼停賣的就好了。連動債什麼時候可以賣，什麼時候不能賣，可以賣給誰，不能買給誰，當初都是按照央行訂定的行政規則「特定金錢信託業務投資國外有價證券之種類及範圍」決定。後來央行廢止「特定金錢信託業務投資國外有價證券之種類及範圍」，連動債就只能先停賣；等到金管會訂定「境外結構型商品管理規則」以後，連動債才又開始可以賣。

按照金管會關於「境外結構型商品管理規則」的新聞稿：「其主要規範除將增訂結構型商品審查機制及加強銷售門檻之限制外，並研議客戶分類制度，未來銀行對於高風險複雜之金融商品，僅得銷售予專業投資人，不得銷售予一般投資人」

連動債是一種金融商品，房屋貸款也是一種金融商品。金管會可以對連動債訂定行政規則，規定要怎麼賣，當然也可以訂定行政規則，規定房屋貸款要怎麼賣。

陳沖只是在推卸責任而已。

金管會如果訂了行政規定，訂定投資客和豪宅的定義，定義投資客和豪宅貸款貸款成數和利率要加碼多少，所有的銀行都得照做，沒什麼無法規範民營銀行的道理。只是看有沒有膽量、願不願意做。

-----------------------------------------------------

取消投資客房貸寬限期？陳沖：無法強制

( 2010/03/10 14:36 中廣新聞網 )

投資客買房子，最在意貸款成數、利率，同時利用「只繳利息、不繳本金」的「寬限期」，儘量壓低投資的初期成本。立委要求金管會下令所有銀行，凡是投資客房貸，一律取消寬限。金管會主委陳沖說，持有第三戶，以及三戶以上的房子，可以對銀行宣導，但無法強制。（張雅惠報導）

央行和金管會限期金融機構繳交一般房貸戶和投資房貸戶的資料，包括利率、貸款成數、寬限期、以及負債比等，資料最快這幾天就會收到。立委賴士葆建議，直接取消投資客房貸的寬限期，降低房市週轉率。金管會主委陳沖說，可以對銀行道德勸說。

「陳：第一棟房屋沒有寬限期是不合理的；第二棟房屋，也很難講，如果有位南部的立委，他到北部來，也想買一棟房屋，這也有第二棟。賴：那從第三棟房屋做起？陳：如果有這樣的要求，我想只能透過像我們對總經理座談的時候宣導，法律上，很難強制銀行這樣做」

壽險業賣的是長年期保單，為了有固定收益，法律規定壽險業可以投資房地產，但銀行不行，銀行買房地產只限自有行舍使用，和房地產有關的是，銀行法規定，銀行的土地建築融資、以及房貸的放款上限，不得超過存款和發行金融債的三成。

陳沖說，到一月底為止，購置住宅貸款餘額四點八兆多元，只占存款和金融債的兩成一，距離三成的法定上限還有二點二兆元的額度，逾放比百分之零點九三、不到百分之一，低於平均逾放比一點一三，房貸目前並沒有過度擴張。

------------------------------------------------

台灣社會仇富嗎？

2010-03-29T10:08:00.005+01:00

這兩篇文章值得擺在一起看...就不用多做批評了。

台灣就是有很多這類「專家學者」在為富人說話，媒體也被財團操縱，讓很多中低階層都以為減稅一定會減到自己，加稅一定會加到自己。所以支持減稅、反對加稅，卻不曉得這些都是為富人設計的減稅管道。

真正對中低階層有幫助的租稅改革，反而都被放棄了。

--------------------------------------------------
仇富反知「民粹裹脅」馬能扭轉？
【聯合報╱林建山／環球經濟社社長（台北市）】
2010.03.25 01:42 am

今天在台灣，竟令人驚詫地在短短的廿年之間，讓「財富」成為社會上的原罪，讓「知識」成為社會上的不值與隱形。擁有財富的投資人或企業家，成為被排斥的「無祖國的外人」；知識成為無謂的廉價物件，知識分子也珍稀絕跡。

尤其是在國家大機器運轉中，任何激勵社會活力的誘因措施，或矯正市場失靈的補救措施，乃至新租稅制度的架構，或行政規範的檢討、採購法的實施，都必須優先設定排富條款、反商機制，以至揚棄專業、毋須知識，乃算得是符合「民粹政治」、「庶民經濟」的社會正確（當然也是一種政治正確）。在今天全球先進社會中，已經很難找得到類似台灣這般反知反商、敵學敵富的國家社會了。

對財富的不尊重，表現在對於擁有財富者的不尊重，也表現在對於有能力創造財富者，或有可能致富的不尊重，連帶引申對於投資與消費的不在乎。

對知識的不尊重，顯見於知識消費態度上，到處可見直觀上認定知識不值錢：第一、凡事只計算硬體要素成本及工程費用，軟體知識與服務不能列計為值錢的價格成分，服務品質與加值，早已成為無謂的東西，尤其在絕大多數政府採購競標場合；第二、知識移轉不能計費：在社會上豈敢有人向紡織工廠要求免費送一件襯衫？但卻處處可見大剌剌開口要求知識勞動者，免費盤托「訣竅」與「取決行動對錯的知識」；第三、對知識傳播者不願給予恰當的「市場價格」：學者專家諮詢出席費廿五年不變。

當中國崛起，邀請學者專家出席會議，一次至少人民幣一千元，在台灣則仍一如舊慣只給新台幣二千元；公務人員訓練講座每小時教授鐘點費，在中國已經人民幣二千元，台灣還是廿五年前的新台幣一千六百元，而且沒有知識新舊與高低層次差別，這也難怪迄今有二千五百多位台灣教授已經轉檯到中國任職授課。這般反知反商，也正是台灣經濟魅力與國家競爭力兩皆頹落的重要根源。

在敵知識仇財富的社會，投資勢必不會增加，消費無法進步，社會糾錯機制早已壓凌社會發展機制，終致必須鎖國自保，封閉而自我感覺良好。於是，曾經是經濟強盛、產業創新優越、企業家精神（中小企業）昌旺活潑的台灣，因為民粹政治與庶民經濟無限上綱，而在國際市場上漸趨衰敗。

過去五百年的歷史告訴我們，鄙視資本價值或否定私有財產的極端社會主義的社會，都是貧窮落後的社會，而尊重資本價值或肯定私有財產的社會，則無一不是文明有禮，經濟輝耀。中國大陸的變化發展，從一個社會倒懸，經濟退化的落魄國家，在短短二十年內，翻轉成為直逼美國的經濟強權，其實就是最為鮮明、反差極大的近例典型。

引人杞憂的是，在中國大陸六十年極端不尊重財富與知識的情境中，只要當家領導的一念之變，就能夠立時乾坤逆轉，局勢大開；但是當前台灣淪陷的死胡同，卻越發在既缺乏有膽有敢的勇者領導，又必須承受鋪天蓋地的民粹裹脅之下，看不出會有什麼特效機制或何方高人，可以驚天一力有效轍轉？真的要祈願天佑台灣了！

--------------------------------------------------

財政不能這樣玩
【經濟日報╱社論】
2010.03.28 02:27 am

最近提出了很多加稅或提高費率的方案，但幾乎全受到批評，連較少受批評的房屋稅分級課稅辦法，吳揆也擔心被認為是要加稅而決定暫緩。提高稅費這麼困難，除了選舉的考量之外，下述案例也顯示，各項政策都缺研究和整體規劃，所以理不直氣不壯。

馬政府剛上台就設立賦改會要做全面稅制改革，但結果卻幾乎和其中的學者不歡而散。政府沒照整體規劃的理想進行稅改，反而急著大降遺產稅，甚至想讓證交稅減半。這種先獨厚富人的做法，當然使目前要對一般人加稅的政策被認為是很不公平。

政府現在即使要對富人加稅，也因缺乏其他減稅的方案來做交換的籌碼，而不易得到富人的支持。而且現在對富人零星加稅也已難被一般人認為足夠公平。例如，政府想課豪宅稅或對高價的房屋課較高的房屋稅，表面上雖是對富人加稅，但所加的不過是公告房價的千分之四甚至千分之一；而降遺產稅的政策卻一口氣降了房價的百分之四十。換言之，一次遺產稅省下的稅金夠納新增的房屋稅一百年甚至四百年，怎麼算也對富人很有利。而我們也曾指出，豪宅稅並無助於平抑房價。因此一般人很難認為政府在努力追求租稅公平。

台北市政府提出的景觀稅和三角窗房屋加稅，則因不講道理且不可行而難被接受。各種廣告設施破壞景觀的程度不一，有些甚至還算美觀或成為都市特色，因此很難客觀公平課稅。而比大部分廣告設施更破壞市容的違章建築和公共建設工地卻不必課稅，也很不公平。三角窗店面的價值並不在房屋，而在地點，也就是土地，但政府已對三角窗土地核定較高地價而課較多地價稅。政府若認為不夠，應該再調高地價，而不是便宜行事而調高三角窗房屋的房屋稅。

健保費調漲的問題在一番辭職風波之後，以政府補貼低收入者來打圓場。但這種用政府補貼使帳面上虧損減少的做法，一方面是掩耳盜鈴來隱藏實際上由政府承擔的虧損，以致使人民更感受不到健保該改革的壓力。另一方面，這每年121億的補貼，也將成為一部分人的既得利益，未來的改革若不將這補貼持續下去，也將更難得到足夠的民意支持。所以一個顧全高官面子的草率政策，不只擴大長期的政府赤字，也使未來健保更難合理改革。至於費率調漲的負擔都落在薪資所得的不公平性，雖然我們一再批評，政府卻像完全聽不見。

加稅費既然困難，政府就想到要賣祖產。朱立倫副院長日前說，國有地有194萬公頃，市值達21兆，這些土地若好好開發將創造很大利益。政府確有一些土地可以利用，但朱副院長講的這些國有地占全國土地一半以上，朱副院長應該知道其中很多是不能開發利用的山林河川地，或已當道路和機關用地，甚至是畸零地，真正可以在短期內開發變賣的不多。朱副院長若誤以為政府還有21兆土地可支持財政，不只低估以後執政者變賣祖產的意願和能力，也將誤導政府和人民進入無法承擔的政府赤字與負債。

朱副院長也不當地主張成立公共建設基金，不受政府舉債上限而拿郵儲等四大基金的資金，來從事有還本來源的公共建設。若有那麼多公共建設可以真有自償性，以前的政府為何不做？民間為何不投資？政府又為何無法由以後大量公共建設取得收入來還債？馬政府已多次想用不當的方法逃避法律明定的政府舉債上限，並要挪用人民儲蓄的四大基金。有會計背景的朱副院長豈可跟著拿虛構的自償性來支持這種會讓財政甚至四大基金崩潰的做法！

Affordable? Housing

2010-01-27T19:42:00.003Z

先不講倫敦的好野人，一般受薪階級好了

。英國銀行房貸，最多貸款到年薪的 3 到 4 倍，還要 10% to 15% 的頭期款。

大學畢業生，倫敦的薪水比較高，假設年薪三萬英鎊，可以買到 30,000*3.5/0.85=123,529，大概 12 萬英鎊的 One-bedroom flat，房間裡面有一間臥室、客廳、廚房和一個衛浴，室內空間會比台灣的小套房大。價格大約新台幣 6 百萬。

工作幾年以後結婚了，假設夫妻年薪都在四萬英鎊左右，通常會買 80,000*3.5/.85=329,411，大約 30 萬英鎊的 Two-bedroom flat，有兩間臥室，客廳、廚房和一或兩個衛浴，室內空間大概在 20 到 30 坪之間。價格以新台幣換算大約一千五百萬。

有小孩以後，通常會搬到郊區的 House，獨棟的「別墅」，前後有花園，價格通常也在 30 萬英鎊以上，看大小還有房間數。

以上所有的公寓和「別墅」，都在往市區交通時間 45 分鐘的距離內。一般來說大概走路加等車 10 到 15 分鐘，搭車(火車、捷運或公車)加上轉車 20 到 30 分鐘，離開車站再走10 到 15 分鐘到上班地點。

----------------------------------------------------------

台灣的大學畢業生，假設在台北，月薪三萬，年薪 40 萬，以英國的房貸標準，可以買 40*3.5/.85= 164,705，大概 160 萬的「套房」。

工作幾年結婚了，假設夫妻加起來年薪 100 萬，可以買 100*3.5/.85 = 411,764，大概 400 萬的兩房公寓。

有小孩以後，在距離市區交通時間 45 分鐘以內的距離，買六百萬以內的「別墅」。

請問以上有沒有可能發生在台北？距離市區交通時間 45 分鐘以內的地區？

------------------------------------------------------

台北市或台北縣當然還有這種價格的舊公寓，只不過市區的屋況比較不好；郊區屋況比較好的，數量上也談不是「主流」。但是在倫敦，這上述這些價格的房子，是市場上的主流，市場上絕大多數的產品都是這些，狀況也不會太差。

不可能的原因除了房價以外，還有都市規劃和交通建設。台北市區搭捷運或火車 20 分鐘(假設扣掉市區轉車時間)可以到的地方？淡水線、中和線捷運班次比較密集，但是房價已經很貴，不在上面講的合理範圍內了。還在蓋的新莊線沿線房價也早超過了。台鐵沿線的話可能還有機會，但是房屋的數量還談不上是市區主流。而且倫敦通勤電車路線很多，不像台北只有一條鐵路，通勤範圍只能在這一條鐵路沿線步行範圍內。在倫敦，在同一個郊區火車站，有到不同市區火車站的火車，通勤範圍擴大很多。用比喻的方式來說，在樹林火車站搭車，不是只能到台北火車站或松山而已，還可以直接搭到北投、三重或新店，不用轉車。

還有一點要說的是，以上所講的公寓(flat)，很少是大樓。倫敦很少大樓。像台灣這麼多大樓，棟距又超近，客廳看出去可以看別人的客廳，對他們來說是相當不可思議的。

Buy to Let Mortgage

2010-01-23T07:01:00.015Z

英國的一般的銀行房屋貸款分為下面三種：

首購自用住宅貸款 (FTB: First Time Buyer)

一般自用住宅貸款

「包租公」住宅貸款 (BTL: Buy to Let)

FTB 和一般的自用住宅貸款，貸款成數可以到 85% 到 90%；「包租公」(BTL) 住宅貸款，最多只到 60%。也就是說，包租公想買房投資，最少得拿出 40% 的自備款。「包租公」(BTL)貸款利率也比自用住宅貸款利率要高。

英國的房屋登記似乎沒有像台灣一樣，要向政府登記為自用住宅之用。但是如果想要申請首購或一般自用住宅貸款，在貸款人跟銀行的合約上，必須聲明房屋係作為自用住宅之用。如果買來以後出租給別人，不論是分租或是整戶出租，都算是違約。可能會依合約被罰款，或被銀行要求立即償還所有貸款，強制轉為「包租公」(BTL) 貸款，甚至被銀行法拍。

投資客想申請「包租公」(BTL) 貸款也沒那麼容易。基本上銀行會把投資客當作企業經營者評估，投資標的的租金收入是核貸的關鍵因素。因此，投資客必須有「營運計畫」，說明未來打算收多少租金、每個月花多少錢維護和管理所購買的房屋、在房屋未出租期間，投資客如何負擔每個月還款本金和利息，還有如何以租金收入償還銀行貸款，例如通常會要求每月租金收入至少要在利息收入的 125% 以上；銀行也會以當地的房價和租金水準評估房東的「營運計畫」是否合理。英國政府對於房東的法律要求也很高，要買包租公(BTL)保險，定期維護水電瓦斯，還要出具水電瓦斯安全無疑的證明。

跟台灣的銀行相較之下，英國的銀行非常注意對於貸款人的還款能力。貸款購買自用住宅的，銀行放款最多不會超過貸款人年薪的 3 倍到 4 倍；在最近經濟衰退、失業率大幅上升的情況下，有些銀行還會要求貸款人每個月提供薪資條，證明還在職且有還款能力。對於投資客，，除了貸款金額一樣不能超過年收入 3 倍 (如果還有其他貸款未清償會更低)，也要證明來自所購買房屋的租金收入，足以支應維護管理房屋的支出和銀行貸款。

台灣的銀行放款，一直過於偏重擔保品(房屋)的價值。在房屋和土地價格持續上升的狀況下，投資客賺到價差，也有錢可以提前償還貸款。皆大歡喜。可是如果房價下跌，運用人頭戶購買的投資客斷頭，銀行拿到的只是一堆市價低於貸款的房屋，賠一屁股。

如果台灣的銀行承作房屋貸款，是按照英國的方式分為上面三種，並限制放款不得超過貸款人年薪的 4 倍，投資客就不會像現在這樣有這麼多的「發揮空間」。基本上以台灣的租金水準，不可能負擔的起銀行貸款；以年租金收入換算的租金收入報酬率，一直都比貸款利率低。更不用說不可能一整年 12 個月都租得出去。投資客申請「包租公」(BTL) 貸款，就不可能過關。

就算投資客不在乎租金收入，申辦自用住宅貸款買來閒置轉差價。在台灣的戶籍登記制度下，登記為自用住宅必須要有直系親屬把戶籍登記在房屋內。父母和配偶的父母、成年子女，一個投資客能有多少的直系親屬可以用？就算用人頭申辦自用住宅貸款，在辦理貸款時，人頭的年收入也會影響貸款的額度。

如果申請自用住宅貸款，登記為自用住宅，但是私下出租使用？這就要靠銀行持續追蹤房屋的狀況了。不過台灣的銀行都把貸款當「當鋪」來經營，只要擔保品價值超過貸款，就不怎麼管的情況下，就很難說了。但是能登記為自用住宅的房屋有限，投資客或多或少還是會受到限制。

不動產交易價格將透明化

2010-01-22T09:56:00.001Z

不知道未來要求仲介提供交易價格算不算登載公文書。但是如果這算是公文書的話，作假會觸犯刑法第 214 條「使公務員登載不實罪」:

「明知為不實之事項，而使公務員登載於職務上所掌之公文書，足以生損害於公眾或他人者，處三年以下有期徒刑、拘役或五百元以下罰金」

作假申報是要坐牢的！

最好的方法是規定要求買賣雙方於移轉登記時，申報交易價格並提供契約影本。這樣買賣雙方都有法律責任誠實申報。

----------------------------------------

不動產交易價格將透明化

自由時報╱自由時報 2010-01-09 06:00 〔記者林美芬、黃宣弼／台北報導〕根據最新出爐的不動產經紀業管理條例修正草案，未來透過不動產經紀人買賣交易成功的案件，都會登錄到相關單位的資料庫中，建立透明的不動產交易資訊，也就是，若修法成功，台灣不動產交易價格將全面透明化，建立台灣不動產交易的新里程碑。

內政部地政司昨舉辦不動產經紀業管理條例修正草案公聽會，希望將來所有房地產交易，都能將成交案件資訊登錄至政府的不動產資訊系統，以促進房價資訊透明化，公聽會由地政司長羅光宗主持，全台房仲公會、代銷公會及建築開發公會都派員出席，各個有備而來，群起反對這項交易資訊公開化的修法。

業者指出，不動產交易的個別差異性大，沒有標準價格，很可能登錄了一些假資料，引發更多錯誤訊息，且不動產經紀業者無權透露客戶的財產訊息，尤其是代銷業者，只是受建商委託而銷售，資訊擁有者是建商而非代銷，卻要代銷填價格資料，讓代銷及房仲都有難以承受的道德壓力。

業者︰恐涉個資保密爭議

與會的不動產業者更認為，國人對購置不動產認為屬重要隱私，如強制業者提供或登錄成交價格，恐引致個人資料保密爭議，易造成當事人不安，且買方在交易價格方面通常會比低不比高，將影響賣方權益及經紀業銷售上的困難度，因此反對立法強制規範；並公開向羅光宗嗆聲，如果硬要通過這項修法版本，當中絕對沒有業者的贊同部分，他們不會為這個版本背書。

而與會的玄奘大學財金系副教授花敬群表示，房地產價格不透明，不僅對消費者沒有保障，對銀行端來說，也會擔心貸款額度高於擔保品的價值；另外消費者疑慮降低，能加快交易速度，等於也降低了業者的成本，應可創造消費者與業者雙贏的局面。

與會學者的說法，並不能獲得業者認同，業者搶著發言，反對這項修法草案內容。

即使業者同聲反對，但羅光宗在會後受訪時表示，這項草案溝通很久了，業者態度一向強硬反對，但消費者的保護還是要兼顧，地政司除了繼續溝通之外，原有修正草案版本還是會送到行政院審議，但在條文文字上會做部分修正，以求更圓滿。

地政司與業者對立的條文重點，就是修正條文第四章有關業務及責任的部分，經營仲介業務者，應在委託案件成交後十五日內，向中央主管機關或其委託之機關（構）或團體辦理資訊登錄，以建立不動產資訊系統，經營代銷業務者，應於委託代銷契約屆滿十五日內，將成交案件依前項規定辦理資訊登錄。

Find sold house prices in your area

2010-01-21T23:45:00.003Z

英國房屋交易，產權移轉登記時，必須向地政機關申報交易價格。

不動產說明書裡，賣方必須註明前次買進時間及價格。亂寫會有法律責任。

英格蘭 (England) 的房屋交易價格沒有在地政機關 (Land Regitry) 的網站公開，不過很多房屋網站都向地政機關買使用執照，所以上網站就可以查。只要在網站上輸入你家的郵遞區號，就可以看到你那條街上，那個門牌號碼什麼時間賣掉，用多少錢賣掉：

http://www.nethouseprices.com/index.php

蘇格蘭 (Scotland) 的地政機關 (Registers of Scotland) 則有公開房價，一樣輸入自家的郵遞區號或地址，就可以到看那條街上所有房屋在查詢期間內出售的價格和日期，連門牌號碼都有：

http://www.ros.gov.uk/

BBC 網站上可以查到各城市鄉鎮每季的平均房價和交易件數：

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/uk_house_prices/html/houses.stm

大概只有台灣最不透明吧！

How much will you pay to live in a castle?

2010-01-21T19:25:00.012Z

上圖中像古堡的建築物，是 1870 年興建的愛丁堡皇家醫院 (Royal Infirmary Edinburgh)。RIE 搬遷到愛丁堡郊區以後，這些舊病房就被開發商買下來，改建成高級住宅和辦公室。外觀看起來就是非常漂亮的古建築物，裡面卻是全新的現代化設備。兩房的公寓，網站上開價要 37 萬到 50 萬英鎊之間，大概是新台幣 1850 萬到 2500 萬之間。

英國市區公寓主要都是兩房，如果有超過兩房以上的需求，大概都會搬到郊區買獨棟的 House。這個地段非常的好，往南五百公尺有一個大安森林公園兩倍大的超大公園，從窗戶看出去就可以看到，中間除了樹林沒有其他建築物；往北不到五百公尺，就是愛丁堡最熱鬧的觀光景點 Edinburgh Castle 和 Royal Mile 和百貨公司商店區 Princes Street。如果這個案子擺到台北，大概建商會開價每坪三百萬吧！

這個房子每坪大概多貴？以這個開價 43 萬英鎊的兩房公寓來看。每個房間，包括廚房和客廳，都有標示室內的尺寸，完全不含雨遮、公設和水泥牆，計算出來的淨室內面積，是 17.1 坪。以淨室內面積來算，每坪大概是台幣 126 萬。如果按台灣的算法，假設公設加上雨遮加上水泥牆壁的厚度有 40%，那「銷售面積」就是 28.4 坪，每坪價格是台幣 75 萬。貴嗎？

這個建案地點好，建築物又是百年古蹟，價格以台北的標準來講又不貴，英國人的年收入又比台灣人高，大學一畢業年薪至少百萬台幣 (2 萬英鎊)，應該賣得很好吧？

錯了，賣得很差。這個價錢對英國人來說，非常非常的貴。英國的房屋買賣，通常要 10% 到 15 % 的頭期款，剩下的部分貸款。不過這裏的銀行貸款遠比台灣謹慎，貸款的額度和房屋的價值雖然有關，但是絕對不會超過年薪的 3.5 倍到 4 倍。一般剛畢業開始工作沒幾年的人，年薪通常不會超過 3 萬英鎊，購買的住宅也不會超過 10 萬磅；結婚以後生了小孩，考慮要買的人，才負擔得起 20 萬英鎊的房子。不過有能力出得起 30 萬英鎊的人，大多數都直接搬去郊區買獨棟的 House，不會考慮在市區買間又貴又小的公寓。

前幾年開發商還跑去北京，打算把這些英國人不想買的房子，賣給愛炒房地產的中國人。

Double Entry Bookkeeping

Q&A: Mortgage lending rules

'Occupy' is a response to economic permafrost

England riots: The return of the underclass

人才宣言：十年內 台灣恐無人才可用

US AAA credit rating downgraded

US AAA credit rating downgraded

How much private sector in NHS?

投7千億 總統：建設活絡南台 vs Lyon learns how to play second fiddle

夸夸其談的英國政客

府重申：媒體披露 馬蕭才知邵燕玲爭議

The Problem With Value: Professor Bob Graff

How warm is your home?

證交稅挹注健保財源 財部反對

台灣的個人所得稅率低嗎？

G20: Why we all want to be Canadian now

倫敦的房子有多貴: Commutefrom.com告訴你

What Mr Jobs doesn't know, or intentionally ignores...

房市透明化 學者籲政府擔責任

財政部長的良知呢？

真的無法可管嗎？

台灣社會仇富嗎？

Affordable? Housing

Buy to Let Mortgage

不動產交易價格 將透明化

Find sold house prices in your area

How much will you pay to live in a castle?

人才宣言：十年內台灣恐無人才可用

投7千億總統：建設活絡南台 vs Lyon learns how to play second fiddle

府重申：媒體披露馬蕭才知邵燕玲爭議

證交稅挹注健保財源財部反對

房市透明化學者籲政府擔責任

不動產交易價格將透明化