熱門Ptt文章

[爆卦]withdrawal中文是什麼？優點缺點精華區懶人包

雖然這篇withdrawal中文鄉民發文沒有被收入到精華區：在withdrawal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 withdrawal中文產品中有7篇Facebook貼文，粉絲數超過23萬的網紅綠角財經筆記，也在其Facebook貼文中提到， 本文回顧2021八月綠角財經筆記的狀況。 2021八月，部落格最熱門的十篇文章分別是: 1. 綠角財經筆記總目錄 2. 台灣ETF完整列表與費用總整理(List of All ETFs in Taiwan，2021) 3. 什麼是Make-Whole Call? 4. FIRE早退休族，你...

　同時也有3部Youtube影片，追蹤數超過878的網紅時事英文 Podcast by ssyingwen，也在其Youtube影片中提到，4/14，美國總統Joe Biden 對全美國人發表演說，將在今年 9/11 之前從阿富汗撤出所有美軍，終止這場 20 年的戰爭。阿富汗戰爭為美國史上最漫長的戰爭。美軍離開之後，神學士 Taliban 將重掌權力嗎？ 📝 單字筆記 & 所有平台連結: https://ssyingwen.com...

「withdrawal中文」的推薦目錄
  • 綠角財經筆記

    withdrawal中文 在 綠角財經筆記 Facebook 的最讚貼文

    2021-09-01 06:12:53
    有 601 人按讚

    本文回顧2021八月綠角財經筆記的狀況。

    2021八月，部落格最熱門的十篇文章分別是:

    1. 綠角財經筆記總目錄

    2. 台灣ETF完整列表與費用總整理(List of All ETFs in Taiwan，2021)

    3. 什麼是Make-Whole Call?

    4. FIRE早退休族，你還在用4%提領率嗎?(4% Withdrawal Rate is Dangerous for Early Retirement)

    5. “你要如何衡量你的人生”(How Will You Measure Your Life)讀後感3---教養陷阱

    6. 綠角開課計畫(Greenhorn’s Investment Class)

    7. The Long Win(長勝心態)讀後感1---輸贏二分法的根本問題

    8. “過去績效不代表未來”的反智運用(Irrational Attitudes toward Financial History)

    9. “一人創富”讀後感—網路創作與創業的完整指引

    10. 2021台灣股市結構(Structure of Taiwan Stock Market)

    看過Vanguard退休研究報告寫成的FIRE早退休族，你還在用4%提領率嗎?成為本月最熱門的新文章。

    “你要如何衡量你的人生”(How Will You Measure Your Life)讀後感3---教養陷阱則是最熱門的書籍讀後感。“你要如何衡量你的人生”這本書寫得相當好，我將其列入綠角中文書局。

    台灣本土新冠肺炎確診人數在八月，有三天是零確診，其它天數多為個位數確診。雖狀況持續好轉，但代表仍有潛在傳染鍊，需小心應對。

  • 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong

    withdrawal中文 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最佳解答

    2020-11-22 11:31:35
    有 1,599 人按讚

    【Joshua Wong speaking to the Italian Senate】#意大利國會研討會演說 —— 呼籲世界在大學保衛戰一週年後與香港人站在同一陣線

    中文、意大利文演說全文：https://www.patreon.com/posts/44167118

    感謝開創未來基金會（Fondazione Farefuturo）邀請，讓我透過視像方式在意大利國會裡舉辦的研討會發言，呼籲世界繼續關注香港，與香港人站在同一陣線。

    意大利作為絕無僅有參與一帶一路發展的國家，理應對中共打壓有更全面的理解，如今正值大學保衛戰一週年，以致大搜捕的時刻，當打壓更為嚴峻，香港更需要世界與我們同行。

    為了讓各地朋友也能更了解香港狀況，我已在Patreon發佈當天演說的中文、英文和意大利文發言稿，盼望在如此困難的時勢裡，繼續讓世界知道我們未曾心息的反抗意志。

    【The Value of Freedom: Burning Questions for Hong Kongers】

    Good morning. I have the privilege today to share some of my thoughts and reflections about freedom, after taking part in social activism for eight years in Hong Kong. A movement calling for the withdrawal of the extradition law starting from last year had escalated into a demand for democracy and freedom. This city used to be prestigious for being the world’s most liberal economy, but now the infamous authoritarian government took away our freedom to election, freedom of assembly, freedom of expression and ideas.

    Sometimes, we cannot avoid questioning the cause we are fighting for, the value of freedom. Despite a rather bleak prospect, why do we have to continue in this struggle? Why do we have to cherish freedom? What can we do to safeguard freedom at home and stay alert to attacks on freedom? In answering these questions, I hope to walk through three episodes in the previous year.

    Turning to 2020, protests are not seen as frequently as they used to be on the media lens, partly because of the pandemic, but more importantly for the authoritarian rule. While the world is busy fighting the pandemic, our government took advantage of the virus to exert a tighter grip over our freedom. Putting the emergency laws in place, public assemblies in Hong Kong were banned. Most recently, a rally to support press freedom organized by journalists was also forbidden. While many people may ask if it is the end of street activism, ahead of us in the fight for freedom is another battleground: the court and the prison.

    Freedom Fighters in Courtrooms and in Jail

    Part of the huge cost incurred in the fight for freedom and democracy in Hong Kong is the increasing judicial casualties. As of today, more than 10 thousand people have been arrested since the movement broke out, more than a hundred of them are already locked up in prison. Among the 2,300 protestors who are prosecuted, 700 of them may be sentenced up to ten years for rioting charges.

    Putting these figures into context, I wish to tell you what life is like, as a youngster in today’s Hong Kong. I was humbled by a lot of younger protestors and students whose exceptional maturity are demonstrated in courtrooms and in prison. What is thought to be normal university life is completely out of the question because very likely the neighbour next door or the roommate who cooked you lunch today will be thrown to jail on the next.

    I do prison visits a few times a month to talk to activists who are facing criminal charges or serving sentences for their involvement in the movement. It is not just a routine of my political work, but it becomes my life as an activist. Since the movement, prison visits has also become the daily lives of many families.

    But it is always an unpleasant experience passing through the iron gates one after one to enter the visitors’ room, speaking to someone who is deprived of liberty, for a selflessly noble cause. As an activist serving three brief jail terms, I understand that the banality of the four walls is not the most difficult to endure in jail. What is more unbearable is the control of thought and ideas in every single part of our daily routine enforced by the prison system. It will diminish your ability to think critically and the worst of it will persuade you to give up on what you are fighting for, if you have not prepared it well. Three years ago when I wrote on the first page of prison letters, which later turned into a publication called the ‘Unfree Speech’, I was alarmed at the environment of the prison cell. Those letters were written in a state in which freedom was deprived of and in which censorship was obvious. It brings us to question ourselves: other than physical constraints like prison bars, what makes us continue in the fight for freedom and democracy?

    Mutual Support to activists behind-the-scene

    The support for this movement is undiminished over these 17 months. There are many beautiful parts in the movement that continue to revitalise the ways we contribute to this city, instead of making money on our own in the so-called global financial centre. In particular, it is the fraternity, the mutual assistance among protestors that I cherished the most.

    As more protestors are arrested, people offer help and assistance wholeheartedly -- we sit in court hearings even if we don’t know each other, and do frequent prison visits and write letters to protesters in detention. In major festivals and holidays, people gathered outside the prison to chant slogans so that they won’t feel alone and disconnected. This is the most touching part to me for I also experienced life in jail.

    The cohesion, the connection and bonding among protestors are the cornerstone to the movement. At the same time, these virtues gave so much empowerment to the mass public who might not be able to fight bravely in the escalating protests. These scenes are not able to be captured by cameras, but I’m sure it is some of the most important parts of Hong Kong’s movement that I hope the world will remember.

    I believe this mutual support transcends nationality or territory because the value of freedom does not alter in different places. More recently, Twelve Hongkong activists, all involved in the movement last year, were kidnapped by China’s coastal guard when fleeing to Taiwan for political refugee in late-August. All of them are now detained secretly in China, with the youngest aged only 16. We suspect they are under torture during detention and we call for help on the international level, putting up #SAVE12 campaign on twitter. In fact, how surprising it is to see people all over the world standing with the dozen detained protestors for the same cause. I’m moved by activists in Italy, who barely knew these Hong Kong activists, even took part in a hunger strike last month calling for immediate release of them. This form of interconnectivity keeps us in spirit and to continue our struggle to freedom and democracy.

    Understanding Value of freedom in the university battle
    A year ago on this day, Hong Kong was embroiled in burning clashes as the police besieged the Polytechnic University. It was a day we will not forget and this wound is still bleeding in the hearts of many Hong Kongers. A journalist stationed in the university at that time once told me that being at the scene could only remind him of the Tiananmen Square Massacre 31 years ago in Beijing. There was basically no exit except going for the dangerous sewage drains.

    That day, thousands of people, old or young, flocked to districts close to the university before dawn, trying to rescue protestors trapped inside the campus. The reinforcements faced grave danger too, for police raided every corner of the small streets and alleys, arresting a lot of them. Among the 800+ arrested on a single day, 213 people were charged with rioting. For sure these people know there will be repercussions. It is the conscience driving them to take to the streets regardless of the danger, the conscience that we should stand up to brutality and authoritarianism, and ultimately to fight for freedoms that are guaranteed in our constitution. As my dear friend, Brian Leung once said, ‘’Hong Kong Belongs to Everyone Who Shares Its Pain’’. I believe the value of freedom is exemplified through our compassion to whom we love, so much that we are willing to sacrifice the freedom of our own.

    Defending freedom behind the bars

    No doubt there is a terrible price to pay in standing up to the Beijing and Hong Kong government. But after serving a few brief jail sentences and facing the continuing threat of harassment, I learnt to cherish the freedom I have for now, and I shall devote every bit what I have to strive for the freedom of those who have been ruthlessly denied.

    The three episodes I shared with you today -- the courtroom, visiting prisoners and the battle of university continue to remind me of the fact that the fight for freedom has not ended yet. In the coming months, I will be facing a maximum of 5 years in jail for unauthorized assembly and up to one ridiculous year for wearing a mask in protest. But prison bars would never stop me from activism and thinking critically.

    I only wish that during my absence, you can continue to stand with the people of Hong Kong, by following closely to the development, no matter the ill-fated election, the large-scale arrest under National Security Law or the twelve activists in China. To defy the greatest human rights abusers is the essential way to restore democracy of our generation, and the generation following us.

    ．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．
    💪小額支持我的獨家分析及文章：https://bit.ly/joshuawonghk
    ╭────────────────╮
    ╞🌐https://twitter.com/joshuawongcf
    ╞📷https://www.instagram.com/joshua1013
    ╞📧joshua@joshuawongcf.com
    ╞💬https://t.me/joshuawonghk
    ╰────────────────╯

  • 曹長青

    withdrawal中文 在 曹長青 Facebook 的精選貼文

    2019-10-30 14:28:07
    有 257 人按讚

    我沒辦法騙自己蔡英文是正常管道取得博士

    By Juno N. Chou

    前言：此篇雖然主角是政治人物，但不是政治文也沒有選舉目的，因為我也不希望韓草包當總統。可以當成一個推理文看待。

    然後也不是所謂「信者恆信,不信者恆不信」，而且剛好相反，因為我一開始是覺得怎麼可能有人能造假論文跟博士學歷，但後來看到太多矛盾的地方，讓我邏輯潔癖的頭快炸掉了，所以必須整理出來。

    先不討論論文內容的問題，我只列出了簡單時間軸，把一些有紀錄的歷史、總統府說法、洋蔥炒蛋裡、賴幸媛受訪提到的都放進去，就已經有太多矛盾。

    首先最大也最明顯的時間矛盾就是：蔡在東吳跟政大的第一個研究生（簡燕子、林恆）都是1981-1984畢業，蔡說自己1984. 02 才畢業，怎麼可能同時當他們的指導教授？ 但是事實上，83-84時候的蔡確實有可能人在台灣，蔡在1982. 11因為Financial difficulties 退學（根據LSE規定，withdrawal 是不可逆轉的「永久退學」，interruption才是暫時的「休學」）， 國際學生沒有學籍以後應該很快就要出境回台灣了。 今年蔡在某次造勢場合中，脫口說出她當時從台灣去倫敦口試，代表她確實當時人在台灣。後來沒有再復學的紀錄，可是沒有復學紀錄後來又怎麼畢業？

    然後蔡在1983 的 6月跟8月就已經以「LSE經濟法學博士」的title 在政大法學評論期刊27期 28 期發表文章（他說自己1984. 02畢業），後來又陸續發表了總共七篇中文，但內容幾乎跟現在在LSE或國圖的論文有８０％以上一模一樣，合理懷疑是先有中文 才翻成英文，因為英文論文８０％以上使用了1990年以後才發明的Microsoft Word 格式編輯（兩邊對稱）。只有不到２０％是確實以當年的打字機製作。這種自我抄襲的問題也違反學術倫理，嚴重情節可以取消degree。

    另外論文也有APA格式的規定，蔡聲稱畢業時間正好在第二版（1974-1983）跟第三版（1983-1994）的轉折點之間，也就是他的五篇小論文，包括在政大法學評論期刊的文章，都必須符合第二版APA格式，但是論文必須以第三版APA格式撰寫，因為蔡說他在1984年畢業，但是蔡所謂的論文用的是1994年 ，甚至2001年以後的APA格式，當中應該有六種版本的演進。

    再來，蔡在1983 的《聯合報》投稿上寫自己是倫敦政經學院「國際經濟法博士」，事實上並沒有這種學位名稱，並且她說自己1984才畢業。

    蔡在「洋蔥炒蛋」裡說論文完成以後等了半年才能口試，如果照總統府說1983. 10口試，那就是1983. 04就寫完論文，但是1983. 01 才被改了新題目，有可能只花了三個月就寫完論文了嗎？ 書裡又說蔡的姊姊來陪她口試 ，但書裡照片兩人跟路人都穿著夏天衣服， 又跟總統府的說法1983. 10（冬天） 口試時間不合。賴幸媛在某次訪問裏說蔡在1981. 10就已經在寫論文也快畢業了，然後在1983的夏天畢業，又是一個新說法…

    後來蔡在政大期間，1985就申請升等為副教授，這有兩個問題，第一是她不滿３年就升等成功，這違反了大學法規定。第二，基本上她需要「升等」才能當上副教授，也就代表了蔡當時根本沒有博士，因為當時只要有博士就是直接成為副教授，如果需要升等就代表沒有博士畢業證書。另外，當年她在政大的升等資料，現在全部被她設成國家絕對機密，封存30年才能在 2049 年解密，全世界我只想的到還有習近平也把自己的論文設成國家機密不讓人看。

    蔡的紐約律師執照取得的時間點也有出入，她說自己1980年從康乃爾碩士班畢業以後，為了考律師執照，所以在紐約又多待了一年多，但是事實上她是1987才又回到紐約拿到律師資格，並且最高學歷寫的是「康乃爾大學法學院碩士」，而不是「倫敦政經學院法學博士」。 如果真的照她說的是在1984年拿到LSE博士資格，不用最高學歷來申請律師資格不合理。

    其他跟時間軸衝突比較無關的不合理的地方，也都是非常明確的證據：

    １、蔡的補發論文不是她一個人寫的，還有一位「共同作者」叫做Michael John Elliott，沒有一個論文有可能有兩個作者，這個事情被質疑以後，Elliott的名字就被移除了。
    ２、 Elliot同時也擔任她的advisor，姑且不論Elliot只有學士學位，重點是Elliot 在1983以後就離開學校，蔡之後就再也沒有advisor，怎麼可能博士生沒有指導教授可以獨力完成論文研究？
    ３、 所有LSE博士畢業，當年論文就要交給三個圖書館，LSE、IALS、Senate House library。但LSE圖書館員跟IALS圖書館員都證實，過去35年從來沒有出現在LSE圖書館，也從來沒有出現在圖書目錄裡，所以也並非遺失，如果是遺失 目錄不會消失，只會標註「遺失」。 反而在2009年要求「ProQuest」增加書目，卻不送書本身，並要求標註「非賣品」。 2011年試圖送了一本論文給Senate House library 然後希望被轉給IALS ，但是IALS 還是沒有接受、沒有建立蔡的論文書目。
    ４、 2019. 06 送了一本到LSE圖書館，但是不能收納在專門放論文的地方，只能當作一般圖書放在婦女圖書館 （Women’s library），並且在上面印上 personal copy of Ing-Wen Tsai。
    ５、 口試通知沒有口試委員簽名
    ６、 論文沒有學校版權頁　
    ７、 論文其中有三百多頁 （~80%） 用了1990年以後才發明的電腦Word Justified對齊格式
    ８、 註釋號碼不連貫
    ９、 同屆同學的論文是單面印刷，她的是雙面印刷
    １０、同屆同學的論文有防偽造抽換設計，蔡的沒有
    １１、論文很多手改痕跡 （鉛筆。 立可白） 跟頁碼不完全
    １２、沒有總結論，只有每個單篇小結論
    １３、畢業證書補發一次為限，但蔡有三個版本的畢業證書，三張都不一樣，其中一張的鋼印還歪掉。
    １４、 LSE在2019.10.08的所謂官方聲明是一個叫施芳瓏的台灣人，在「LSE台灣研究室」轉發的，但是LSE台灣研究室已經在2016.03年被撤掉了，並且2007~2014年施芳瓏收了匿名捐款兩千多萬新台幣給她個人，還沒有任何單位出來說明這個捐款的來路。

    反正關於蔡真的太多謎題，沒有一個線索追得到最後找到答案，不是不回應就是被機密。但至少我沒辦法騙自己她是正常管道取得博士跟後來的教授。我甚至可以接受她說她是被頒發榮譽博士或者公關形博士，但明明那麼多兜不攏的東西，卻還要用更多的謊來包裝，硬要我們相信，我真的做不到。寫到這裡雖然不到臨表涕泣的地步，但真的很沉重，好像沒人關心這個事情，反而每天更愛看另一個小丑蔣幹畫、覺得很好笑，唉阿，為什麼我們只有草包跟騙子可以選啊？

    這是一個兩邊得罪的文章，但我還是想寫，不知道黑白可不可以高於藍綠。資料真的很雜，我整理的頭超昏，如果有不正確的地方歡迎指教。

    【今天line上朋友傳來這篇文章（沒有寫作者背景），覺得這是一個正常的知識人留心蔡英文的論文和博士學位爭議之後，自然有的反應和得出的結論，就是無法接受蔡英文的博士和論文為真。如果拋開藍綠意識形態，從真實和誠信的原則檢驗，蔡英文絕對沒有資格再擔任總統，她在論文和博士學位上都有作弊，而且長達35年！】

你可能也想看看

搜尋相關網站