IPO China Ag Bank

[Plane]

When measuring assets under management -- cash deposits, money market funds, listed securities, and onshore and offshore assets, but not wealth attributed to investors' own businesses, residences, or luxury goods -- the U.S. continued to lead with more than 4.7 million "millionaire households," followed by Japan and China. More from BusinessWeek.com:


Singapore, a country with a population of about 5.1 million, had the greatest concentration of millionaire households: 11.4 percent of the country's total. Wealth may have returned to precrisis levels last year, but confidence has not yet. BCG expects global wealth to grow an average 6 percent annually through 2014, led by robust economies in the Asia-Pacific, but Peter Damisch, a BCG partner and a co-author of the report, says people are still


[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]

Of course the recession has closed the gap between rich and poor considerably , yet the US is still the best off , China may soon have more millionaires but it will be a while before they have more per capata.

[Plane]

Increasing prosperity among the Chinese populace is creating a new market for Western retailers who previously envisioned China solely as a supplier of goods. The burgeoning Chinese middle class also creates opportunities for Western financial services providers and insurance companies, automobile manufacturers, and affordable luxury goods producers, such as cosmetics companies.

A new expression among Chinese social science researchers is "Zhong Chan," meaning "middle class" or "middle property” in Chinese. For now, it is a term used by statisticians and sociologists, rather than the general populace. For Western and Chinese companies, the middle class signifies a large and still growing market of those with enough disposable income to make discretionary purchases, ranging from brand name shampoo to a luxury purchase of a new Lexus sedan to a widescreen television. For investors, the middle class signifies those Chinese with their own capital to invest – a phenomenon that is heating stock markets around the world. See Table 1.
http://www.wikinvest.com/concept/Rise_of_China's_Middle_Class

[][][][][][][][][][][][][]
Ah Ha!

Are they talking about the flea or the dog?

Who can tell the diffrence between the flea and the dog?

[Xavier_Onassis]

For contradictory evidence, I suggest you show me, as one of the people, how much control you have over one or more "public" corporations.

I could invest in common stock, and that would give me the right, I suppose, to sound off at some annual shareholders' meeting for a small period of time decided upon by the board. That is not governance, that is not control. Control would only happen when I hold enough shares to sway the majority. A million dollars would not do this, and, although from the standpoint of even a relatively wealthy middle-class investor, a million would be far too much to invest in one company for one shareholder, and yet not enough to control any company of any size. It would not be enough to allow me to control whomever it is that makes Screaming Yellow Zonkers or Tootsie Rolls.

So no, I have this exactly right.

[Plane]

I see that we were talking about diffrent things.

The biggest chunks of investment come from investment companys like Vangaurd which pools the large and small into huge. At the level the investment companys invest some controll and influence can accrue.

Only a few persons have the swag to buy controlling intrest in a major company , you are totally right about that.


What I was talking about is what most investors are , most investors are small timers who put major portions of their nest egg into Mutual funds or common stocks , not to gain much influence , but to leverage their hope for comfortable retirement.

For example ,if BP collapses it would slash deeply into almost every pensioner in England's time to be retired.

Another Example is Enron which fell over ,harming a few millionaires , but most millionaires have diversity in investment , especially multimillionaires , most of the really harmed were Enron Employees who had taken advantage of an employee stock buying plan to accrue what to them were large amounts , hundreds of thousands in some accounts ,.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The biggest chunks of investment come from investment companys like Vangaurd which pools the large and small into huge. At the level the investment companys invest some controll and influence can accrue.
===================
Vanguard and other mutual fund companies may own a lot of large corporations, but they are limited in the percentage of each company that they may own, and they do not have the power to affect corporate decisions: they vote with the actual controlling majority. Their shareholders may benefit from dividends and rises in prices, but have no say about how the company is run, not legally or otherwise.

Corporations are controlled by a relatively tiny number of people.

[Plane]

The biggest chunks of investment come from investment companys like Vangaurd which pools the large and small into huge. At the level the investment companys invest some controll and influence can accrue.
===================
Vanguard and other mutual fund companies may own a lot of large corporations, but they are limited in the percentage of each company that they may own, and they do not have the power to affect corporate decisions: they vote with the actual controlling majority. Their shareholders may benefit from dividends and rises in prices, but have no say about how the company is run, not legally or otherwise.

Corporations are controlled by a relatively tiny number of people.

Simply by chooseing to buy or not to a company the size of Vangaurd can be influential.


Corporations come in all sizes , as many of them as there are, each has a person or persons in charge.

[Xavier_Onassis]

If you own shares in some Vanguard fund, then you may have influence with Vanguard, but I really question that even a large shareholder could convince a Vanguard fund manager to divest itself or buy Exxon or change the amount of Exxon that he held in the fund.

I am sure that if one had a Vanguard Index Fund such as one investing in the S&P 500 or the Wilshire 5000 and asked the Vanguard Fund adviser to divest itself of BP or whatever, you would get a polite explanation suggesting that you were clueless about what an index fund is, and no action at all would be taken.

Fund shareholders have no say in running the companies held by the funds they own. It says so in every prospectus I have read. They have minimal participation in running the fund. After all, if you want participation in Exxon or BP or whatever, then you buy shares in that company.

For most small investors (and by "small" I mean those with under $50 million) the advantages of the fund often outweigh the cost and disadvantages of that fund.

The same is true of those with money invested in pension funds. The crap about how the middle class owns the stock market is just that: crap, because the middle class has no actual control of power. The fatcats have the control and the power and probably the glory forever, too. Amen.

[Plane]

If you own shares in some Vanguard fund, then you may have influence with Vanguard, but I really question that even a large shareholder could convince a Vanguard fund manager to divest itself or buy Exxon or change the amount of Exxon that he held in the fund.

I am sure that if one had a Vanguard Index Fund such as one investing in the S&P 500 or the Wilshire 5000 and asked the Vanguard Fund adviser to divest itself of BP or whatever, you would get a polite explanation suggesting that you were clueless about what an index fund is, and no action at all would be taken.

Fund shareholders have no say in running the companies held by the funds they own. It says so in every prospectus I have read. They have minimal participation in running the fund. After all, if you want participation in Exxon or BP or whatever, then you buy shares in that company.

For most small investors (and by "small" I mean those with under $50 million) the advantages of the fund often outweigh the cost and disadvantages of that fund.

The same is true of those with money invested in pension funds. The crap about how the middle class owns the stock market is just that: crap, because the middle class has no actual control of power. The fatcats have the control and the power and probably the glory forever, too. Amen.

If controll is the main point of ownership.

Then is ti correct to say that Fidel Castro owns Cuba?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Control is more important than ownership. Fidel is no longer in control of Cuba, and obviously does not have the power to sell Cuba, so no, he does not own it in any real sense, though I don't think he wishes to or lacks for anything to satisfy any real need he has.

[Plane]

Control is more important than ownership. Fidel is no longer in control of Cuba, and obviously does not have the power to sell Cuba, so no, he does not own it in any real sense, though I don't think he wishes to or lacks for anything to satisfy any real need he has.

So it would also be incorrect to say that the people of Cuba own Cuba also , because they don't controll it much.

[Plane]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Companies-brace-for-end-of-apf-2437567795.html?x=0

Factory workers demanding better wages and working conditions are hastening the eventual end of an era of cheap costs that helped make southern coastal China the world's factory floor.

A series of strikes over the past two months have been a rude wakeup call for the many foreign companies that depend on China's low costs to compete overseas, from makers of Christmas trees to manufacturers of gadgets like the iPad.

Where once low-tech factories and scant wages were welcomed in a China eager to escape isolation and poverty, workers are now demanding a bigger share of the profits. The government, meanwhile, is pushing foreign companies to make investments in areas it believes will create greater wealth for China, like....

[Xavier_Onassis]

So it would also be incorrect to say that the people of Cuba own Cuba also , because they don't controll it much.

====================================
Just how much control do you think you have, as an American, over this country?
Every two years you get a choice about a representative between two  parties, whose platforms you are unable to change.
Every six years, you get to choose a senator.
Every four years, there are presidential primaries, followed by a presidential election.

Most of what the representative, senator and president does is not subject to your input.

The fact is, we have very little control over this country, just like Cubans have very little control over theirs.

[Plane]

Tell me about the Cuban tea party?

[Xavier_Onassis]

I suppose that would be the Ladies in White, who dress in white and protest that their sons and husbands and other relations have been thrown in jail a political prisoners. It looks like soon, about 60 of these prisoners will be released and deported.

The Tea Party has done little in the US other than demonstrate that old ignorant hicktown loser codgers can all get together, carry a bunch of illiterate signs and convince others that they are fools.

[Plane]

I suppose that would be the Ladies in White, who dress in white and protest that their sons and husbands and other relations have been thrown in jail a political prisoners. It looks like soon, about 60 of these prisoners will be released and deported.

The Tea Party has done little in the US other than demonstrate that old ignorant hicktown loser codgers can all get together, carry a bunch of illiterate signs and convince others that they are fools.

Thanks for reminding me of them!

I admire such extreme courage.

Last time I heard a report on them it was on NPR. Their little march was inturrupted by a mob who shouted them down.

The Pro-government mob arrived on a cupple of busses along with government handlers who had gathered them and who ensured that their rage was loud but not violent.

There is a good civil servant job , mob wrangler.

The tea party is quite light hearted in comparison to the ladies in white , the diffrence is a diffrence in the seriousness of motivation and consequence.