熱門Ptt文章

[爆卦]exact中文是什麼？優點缺點精華區懶人包

雖然這篇exact中文鄉民發文沒有被收入到精華區：在exact中文這個話題中，我們另外找到其它相關的精選爆讚文章

在 exact中文產品中有16篇Facebook貼文，粉絲數超過8,093的網紅貓的成長美股異想世界，也在其Facebook貼文中提到， 🌻年報導讀 之前提過, 本來想秋天來做這樣的導讀, 但台灣疫情太嚴重, 這個時候做, 或許比較好, 這樣有興趣的人可以利用在家的時間來學習, 也可以轉移對疫情的注意力. 美國上市公司的年報資訊很透明. 通常看完一份年報, 就能掌握八成的公司狀態了. 公司給的官方資訊也比網路上的優質&有系統. ...

　同時也有4部Youtube影片，追蹤數超過11萬的網紅Lukas Engström，也在其Youtube影片中提到，Checkout @Wes Davies 衛斯理 books on Amazon here: https://www.amazon.com/WJ-Davies/e/B00B2YDGS6/ref=dp_byline_cont_pop_ebooks_1 If you want to try this ...

「exact中文」的推薦目錄

exact中文 在 Foodie Taiwan | 台北美食 | 台灣美食 Instagram 的最佳解答

2021-08-18 12:17:45

📍台北市 | 公館站 ❤️賢夫美食 👉🏻 @seanpeacefuland ⠀ 🌐台北市 | Taipei City ⠀ 🇹🇼(中文) 公館站附近的水源市場內好多好吃的🤩 快來第79攤的✨賢夫美食✨找陽光的 老闆大哥吃美味傳統芋頭點心！🔆 ⠀ 手工製作的紫米芋頭是來到 店內的必吃人氣王！👑 用料實在...

exact中文 在 Foodie Taiwan | 台北美食 | 台灣美食 Instagram 的最佳貼文

2021-02-20 10:20:17

📍台北市 南京復興站 ❤️吳二麻辣鴨血 👉🏻 @wuer.2020 ⠀ 🌐台北市 Taipei City ⠀ 🇹🇼(中文) 10月中開幕的吳二麻辣鴨血😍 精心熬煮的湯頭 迷人香氣 美味呈現軟嫩鴨血與臭豆腐！💯 ⠀ 從湯頭開始就下功足功夫！💪 店內湯頭分紅湯與白湯 🔴紅湯使用牛油、中藥材、 乾辣椒...

  • 貓的成長美股異想世界

    exact中文 在 貓的成長美股異想世界 Facebook 的精選貼文

    2021-06-03 07:24:41
    有 73 人按讚

    🌻年報導讀

    之前提過, 本來想秋天來做這樣的導讀, 但台灣疫情太嚴重, 這個時候做, 或許比較好, 這樣有興趣的人可以利用在家的時間來學習, 也可以轉移對疫情的注意力.

    美國上市公司的年報資訊很透明. 通常看完一份年報, 就能掌握八成的公司狀態了. 公司給的官方資訊也比網路上的優質&有系統.

    這次會以一家成長型公司的年報為主軸, 其他公司的為輔, 來帶大家看年報, 並分享自己是如何抓公司的營運重點. 屆時也會有有看年報經驗的股友一起做分享.

    (By the way, 我說的年報導讀, 是說看10-K(以下以PINS為例). 主要是知道公司的業務, 還有該注意的營運關鍵數字:

    https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001506293/0c811ec8-0109-4e9a-8f81-974b15595671.pdf

    Anyway. 只是想先溝通一下會比較好. 要參加的人, 也比較有心理準備.)

    年報導讀
    🎯目的: 推廣看年報的好處,並藉此了解公司營運核心, 以掌握財富; 推廣疫情期間在家自學.
    🎯對象: 想要了解個股基本面的美股投資人.英文能力不是問題: 可透過這次的導讀, 讓您之後找中文資料時, 能夠進入狀況. 或是之後可利用Google Translator來做輔助.
    🎯時間: 台灣時間本周日(06/06)早上10點. 美國的朋友也歡迎(美東時間周六晚上10點, 美西時間晚上7點). 計畫1~1個半小時.
    🎯進行方式 : Zoom (抱歉我不會露臉😅)
    請用這連結加入會議: https://www.zoom.us/join
    Meeting ID: 490 064 3121
    Meeting passcode: 4n0tRe(輸入的時候請注意大小寫. 中間那個是數字"0")
    (如果屆時不方便, 我會將影片錄下來, 之後可以觀看)

    🌻本周做的功課與閱讀
    https://makingsenseofusastocks.blogspot.com/2021/05/blog-post_27.html

    🌻曾獲諾貝爾經濟學獎的美國心理學家 Daniel Kahneman, 最近接受了Barron's的專訪, 談了一下他的新書"Noise".

    https://www.barrons.com/articles/economist-daniel-kahneman-says-noise-is-wrecking-your-judgment-heres-why-and-what-to-do-about-it-51622228892

    印象比較深的幾段有:

    1. 討論也是會帶來所謂的噪音("in some cases, discussions can cause noise.")
    -->This makes me wonder: 大家在一起討論個股時, 是否真的對自己有幫助?

    一位財經名嘴的方法挺好: 他會自己先把公司的資料看過一遍後, 歸納出自己的想法. 也讓自己不受到媒體的報導所影響.

    2. Overconfidence spins from the fact that we tend to latch onto one interpretation of a situation. We do not see alternatives.
    過於自信其實是只看到一種情境的展現, 因為這表示自己沒有看到另外幾種情境.

    3. One way to discipline your thinking is independence—making sure that if you’re consulting different people, they are independent of each other. Or if you are looking at different characteristics of an investment, that you evaluate them independently of each other.
    一種讓自己思考能夠有紀律的方法是獨立--也就是在跟不同的人徵詢意見時, 這些人的思考也是要互相獨立的. 不是同溫層.
    運用在投資上就是, 在考量一家公司的各種特點時, 要獨立去看這些特點.

    4. 這段也寫的挺好. 可用在挑股上. 也就是, 挑股時, 不能只把眼光侷限在單一個股上. 而是要把公司拿來跟其他公司一起做比較.
    Aggregate judgements wherever possible. Making judgements comparatively, rather than absolutely, is [also] a very good procedure. People are much better at saying that A is riskier than B, rather than putting an exact number on how risky A is and how risky B is. Use comparative risk and relative risk, rather than putting absolute numbers on things. Simple rules tend to be very good; people who are not governed by rules tend to be extremely noisy in their judgements. When you become conscious of the problem of noise, you become conscious of the value of rules and of discipline.

    Picture: 花栗鼠(chipmunk)

  • 君子馬蘭頭 - Ivan Li 李聲揚

    exact中文 在 君子馬蘭頭 - Ivan Li 李聲揚 Facebook 的最讚貼文

    2020-06-04 17:30:01
    有 189 人按讚

    ［甜美地邂逅　十指想緊扣　為何今天掩著耳走　不敢深究］地產霸權玩完，迎嚟另一霸權。

    1. TLDR：係咁架啦。借來的地方，借來的時間。人生嘅嘢，都係咖喱味嘅屎，或者屎味嘅咖喱。你移民，咪或者可以唔揀。

    2. 極不政治正確一句，地產霸權時代，咪就係過去N咁多年唯一真係「香港人話事」嘅年代。係咪要懷念下？

    3. 六四，友人Himson貼返 2013年 Now 台嘅圖。少講政治，希望唔會受壓力。Now台犯險云云，不用多討論（而Viu台一樣part 大陸拍劇）。不過友人提供咗個角度好有趣。當時螢幕呢堆嘢，而家點？

    4. 長實，重組過，難比較。恒基 當年54.6, 而家30，跌超過三份一。新世界 當年12.12, 而家8.4，跌三成。信和 當年11.46, 而家9.5，好啲，跌唔夠兩成。

    5. 更頂癮嘅係，唔好以為個市冇升到。當年22,285（其實張圖左上角見到22270），今日24,260。都升9%。地產股大幅跑輸。

    6. 任你點演繹。不過想講嘅係：照計，2020年樓價，點都高過2013年一大截？埃汾正好就係2013年咁上下時間買樓，當時268萬，已經創屋苑新高（多得我老母十分均真，堅持market price）．而家460萬左右。冇理由其他區唔係，只有升多升少。

    7. 住宅租金，明顯都係高過當年掛？商場，寫字樓就難講。懶睇。但低檔場明顯租金高過當年。太古廣場寫字樓租都仲高過當年（咁你話下星期核爆貼錢都冇人要就不用討論，其實你未睇到呢個post已經核爆了）。高檔商場呢？難講，計埋分收入嘅，而家可能低過當年。但整體租金（乜都計晒），點都冇可能低過當年掛？

    8. 利息云云，如果聯邦基金利率，就當年係零（0-0.25% to be exact），而家都係。10年美債呢？當年兩厘幾，而家0.75%。唯獨係HIBOR，當年可能0.4%，而家1厘咁。

    9. 樓價貴咗租金貴咗息平咗，但股價低過當年一大截，點計數？英文我地叫de-rating．中文就叫，「狗也不X」

    10. 都係嗰句，任你點演繹。當年亦係地產霸權講得比較旺之時。留意「地產霸權」一書，以及龐一鳴講唔幫襯地產商，都係嗰幾年嘅事。亦係佔中之前嘅事。

    11. 事隔7年，地產商股價就大幅跑輸大市。騰訊就60蚊升到400幾。冇乜點賺錢嘅美團（3690）就市值大過友邦匯控。

    12. 都真係政治不正確，得罪晒所有人都要講，前門拒狼 後門進虎。當然可以係why not both。拒狼嘅過程不見得你真係搵隻虎，而唔拒狼隻虎都可以照嚟。分分鐘背後兩個好好朋友呢？you never know

    13. 華資地產商X大家族（說個笑話：華資地產五虎將大昌），正係英殖霸權，轉到去紅色霸權，中間嘅一個產物。借來的地方借來的時間。

    14. 事實亦係好多人講過，地產商嘅嘢，第一代當然仲有影響力，上面扮都扮到畀下面你。但大將軍一去，就冇呢回事了。未必要抄家咁殘忍（唏我地嘅社會係文明的），錢可以照賺，但唔再係嗰回事了。亦等於英資太古同渣甸之類，回歸後當然仲可以賺錢，唔使抄家。但政治影響力呢？近乎零了。

    15. For those interested，話搵笨實冇人買嘅A股，上證當年2287，而家2919，升咗28%。點計及人民幣貶值，都賺錢，跑贏晒以上嗰堆嘢

    16. 好得閒嘅，當年瑞郎對港紙8.16，而家都差不多。

    ———————
    版務：收費專欄已減價。支持埃汾高質文章。
    一星期三篇，$175睇到6月22號，加埋過去兩個幾月所有文章。

    請去呢度訂：bit.ly/2wVXndj
    課程編號填: CC01
    報完會有email通知，繳費後有Login及Password
    逢一三五入去 homebloggerhk.com （入到去就睇到《事先張揚》）
    亦睇得返以前嘅文。一般我都係會黃昏出文嘅。

  • 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong

    exact中文 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最讚貼文

    2020-04-08 18:22:53
    有 400 人按讚

    【After Winning Majority in LegCo: Beijing's Crackdown May Trigger International Intervention】

    ***感謝Hong Kong Columns - Translated，將我早前撰寫『議會過半想像：以「#國際攬炒」反制「臨立會2.0」』長文（https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.313299448762570/2887650867994069/）翻譯成英文，鼓勵國際社會關注立會選舉一旦過半的沙盤推演，在最惡劣形勢下的制衡策略。***

    中文精簡版本：https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.564294826996363/2888641404561682/

    Hongkongers have experienced our revolution for over half a year. They no longer take a consequentialist view to the effectiveness of their movement as they did years ago, or waste time second-guessing the intentions and background of fellow activists. Following the defensive battles at CUHK and PolyU, November’s District Council election saw a great victory of unity. More marvellous is the union between peaceful and “valiant” protesters.

    In the process of resisting tyranny, the people have realised that one cannot prioritize one strategy over another. This is also how the common goal of “35+” came into being—the hope that we will win over half of the seats in the Legislative Council (LegCo) this September, such that the political spectrum that represents the majority of Hongkongers is able to gain control of legislative decisions. The political clout of Hongkongers will increase if 35 or more seats are successfully secured on our side. It is certainly one vital step to achieve the five demands within the system.

    The possibility of realizing legislative majority

    Technically it is not unrealistic to win a majority even under the current undemocratic system. Back in the 2016 LegCo election, we already won 30 seats. In addition to the District Council (First) functional constituency seat that is already in the pocket of the pan-democrats, as long as the candidates in Kowloon East and New Territories West do not start infighting again, we could safely secure 33 seats based on the number of pan-dem votes in 2016.

    The other 3 seats required to achieve a majority depend on democrats’ breakthrough among the functional constituencies by dispersing the resources of the Liaison Office. They also count on whether the turnout this September could exceed 71.2% — that of last year’s District Council elections. Some of the factors that could affect the turnout include: will the epidemic persist into the summer? Will there be potential violent repression of protests in the 2 weeks preceding the election? Will Hong Kong-US relations be affected by the downturn of the global economy?

    Therefore, the ambition of “35+” is to be prioritised by the resistance as both a means and an end. I have already expressed my support for an intra-party primary at the coordination meeting. In the meantime, it is pleasing to see the ongoing debates reaching a consensus of maximising the seats among geographical constituencies in the upcoming election.

    Whilst enthusiastic coordination, we should also assess the post-election landscape and gauge Beijing’s reactions: if we do not reach 35 seats, Hong Kong will be subject to tighter control and more severe repression by China; but if the democratic parties successfully form a majority in LegCo, CCP’s fears of a “constitutional crisis” would become imminent. Hence, the key questions are how the Pan-Democrats should deal with the volatile political situation in Hong Kong and how they are going to meet Beijing’s charge head-on.

    Watching out for Beijing’s dismissal of LegCo after reaching majority

    To take back control of LegCo such that it faithfully reflects the majority’s principles and needs is the definition of a healthy democracy. Recently, however, DAB’s Tam Yiu-chung has warned that the plan of the Pan-Dems to “usurp power” in the LegCo would only lead to Beijing’s forceful disqualification of certain members or the interpretation of the Basic Law. This proves that winning a majority in LegCo is not only a popular conception but also a realistic challenge that would get on the nerves of Beijing. Could Beijing accept a President James To in LegCo? These unknown variables must be addressed upon achieving a majority.

    While there is no telltale sign as to Beijing’s exact strategy, we are already familiar with the way CCP manipulated the Basic Law in the past 4 years. Having experienced three waves of disqualifications in LegCo, twice kicked out of LegCo with my team, and thrice locked up in jail, I have no false hopes of an easy compromise from Beijing: they would not let Pan-Dems control LegCo for half a year and wait (as is the proper procedure) until after having negatived the Budget to dissolve the legislature, and thereby giving them an easy victory in the re-elections. The greater the Pan-Dems threaten Beijing’s rule in Hong Kong, the more likely that it will trigger Beijing’s repression.

    Since the disqualification and arrest of lawmakers have already become “normalised”, one can even imagine the police stepping into the LegCo building to force Pan-Dems into voting. Neither is it beyond our imagination to expect the CCP to kick out all 70 lawmakers in a fit of rage and replace them with a provisional LegCo “2.0” [HKCT note: The first was from 25 Jan 1997 to 30 Jun 1998]. To depend on a majority that could lead to a chapter of a “new testament” for One Country, Two Systems is perhaps what many elites long for, but they are overly optimistic:for a ticket to the promised land will not be available at the Chief Executive election campaign a year and a half later.

    Admittedly, the Pan-Dems cannot unilaterally initiate “Laam-chaau” [HKCT note: mostly translated into “scorched-earth” mentality or “mutual destruction”; some even translated into “If I burn, you burn with us”]. The most they can do is to force a standstill of the government, and not for long the LegCo will have been eliminated from the equation to make the wheels turn again. It all leaves the plan of “Negativing the motion → Dissolving LegCo → Re-election after re-election → the stepping down of Carrie Lam” merely as overly positive speculation, probably resulting from their overestimate of CCP's capacity for rational calculation. The Pan-Dems must guard their frontlines and recognise what the biggest threat from Hong Kong to China could be. In this case, should LegCo sessions be disrupted or suspended, the Pan-Dems would have to be well prepared to surmount the expected obstacles and prevent the disqualification crisis 4 years ago—a Catch-22 indeed.

    Productive tension from global intervention: Using Laam-chaau against the CCP

    What aggravates the CCP the most is the potential threat to Hong Kong’s unique status as the one and only “separate customs territory”. Any miscalculation will compromise its role as the Chinese economy’s “white gloves”. Imagine if CCP were to disqualify all 70 elected lawmakers and convene a meeting north of the Shenzhen River to pass a resolution to Hong Kong’s affairs (much like the Provisional Legislative Council “1.0" in 1997), how great will the shock be in a world with an effective Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act? However hard it is to predict the future one thing is certain: With the US presidential election just around the corner, blows to the separation of powers would not be tolerated, and the West would necessarily effect countermeasures against the Hong Kong government.

    Beijing has been relying upon Hong Kong to navigate the international community for decades. While clamping down on the political freedom of the cosmopolitan city, Beijing desires to maintain the financial centre’s economic freedom. Hence, we started lobbying for the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act four years ago, and today we are determined to promote “Laam-chaau” on an international scale.

    The will of the voters must be reflected in an election. If a “35+” legislature were to be dismissed and replaced, such flagrant violation of democracy would assuredly cause a greater backlash than the infamous extradition bill. Knowing what the reality ahead of us could be, we have to combine our election and international strategies to oppose the placement of a 35+ LegCo with an “Emergency Legislative Council 2.0”, to advance an international “Laam-chaau” to Hong Kong’s status as “separate customs territory”. Only then will we stand a chance to resist the regime and to realise the five demands.

    Adjusting our mindset: Overcoming the “constitutional crisis” to reach a resolution

    Upon the realization of the “35+” LegCo, it is expected that the CCP will launch a devastating counterattack. The Pan-Dems should not expect LegCo to run normally; neither can the lawmakers realise their governing blueprints they have for Hong Kong. Rather, candidates will be able to compete against one another with visions of a liberated Hong Kong through popular vote. Bringing this point up has nothing to do with undermining the common goal of reaching a majority in LegCo, but rather channels the battle of LegCo to positive use upon the rule of law’s death and a “constitutional crisis” ahead. Knowing that Hongkongers have nothing to fall back on, all Pan-Dems should not miss the only way to the realization of “35+”.

    Thus, be they partisans, nonpartisans, incumbent politicians, amateur politicians, or the civil society as a whole – if we stay in the political discourse of 2016 and continue to perpetuate old stereotypes, that is to deal with the divisions on the pan-democratic camp by favouring the most “local” faction; to consider only resource allocation and self-aggrandizement as the purpose of a LegCo campaign; to ignore how potential lawmakers are fitted to what specific roles; to turn a blind eye to the journey of resistance since last summer (extending indefinitely into the future)—They would lead as astray and cost us lose a precious opportunity for change by winning a 35+ majority.

    The extent to which the pan-democrats can stay united in light of the political atmosphere since last summer is another problem that our side must to address. Before the watershed moment of 12th June 2019, many democratic delegates were trapped in the mentality of needing to “preserve people’s livelihood”, “be content of what we have accomplished”, and other strategies that favours stability. As the government refuses to heed to the five demands, whether the democrats, especially those in the functional constituencies, have the political will to go all-in is the real difficult question that confronts us in the upcoming LegCo election.

    All in all, if “35+” cannot be realised, it is unsurprising to see LegCo being more heavily suppressed in the next 4 years; even if "35+" is achieved, it is questionable whether the pan-democrats are able to weather multiple attacks, verbal or physical, from the regime (judging from its power in the last four years) and utilise the international Laam-chaau strategy against the displacement of LegCo. Adhering to the motto of “we fight on, each in his own way”, I can only hope that Hongkongers in elections, street confrontations and international front can reconcile with each other, so that we may collectively compel the government to yield to our demands in the next six months. It is only by reaching a resolution before a real constitutional crisis that we can combat the institutional violence of the regime and not be devoured by it.

    https://hkcolumn.blogspot.com/2020/04/joshua-wong-after-winning-majority-in.html?fbclid=IwAR216gf53pG_j9JOpDfr2GItvjLfrFSekKTPzoEs3-s9KBqvPEwz865P8vw

你可能也想看看

搜尋相關網站