原帖由 anny_shi 于 2007-8-22 16:11 发表 我是3年前就存在那里了。 当时没有你的帖子。 而且当时美国的经济还很好。 才0.70左右。 一直认为奥援不会这么走强的。谁知道呀。 3年过去了，不但没有利息，而且还缩水了。
原帖由 nngn 于 2007-8-20 22:03 发表 老妖。。。 Can I ask if I had open account with broker, can I trade online myself or do I have to submit paperwork to broker each time I wanna trade? thanks mate
原帖由 intel5858 于 2007-8-18 12:39 发表 我也郁闷 当时出国上学，准备申请的时候1：4.5，等我拿到签证成了1:6.2 前些天澳元一直竖挺，怕会再涨，把家里的RMB底子换了大部分，结果。。亏啊
原帖由 albertzhou 于 2007-8-18 02:57 发表 今天宽带终于通了（停了快1个月了）， 却发现美金飞涨！！！！ 痛失机会啊，悲叹
原帖由 zigzag 于 2007-8-14 22:51 发表 也许对你有所帮助。 http://www.dailyfx.com/story/dai ... _1187092430742.html
原帖由 Sarah可可 于 2007-8-14 13:22 发表 我以前在荷兰做future，老板说全世界的股市或多或少都受美国影响，加拿大就不用说了，欧洲离得这么远也很根美国的，我一共做了2年多，发现德国DAX70%也都是跟美国走势一样的，荷兰90%跟德国，当时就想全世界应该就 ...
Crunch we had to have David Potts August 5, 2007 OFTEN a market meltdown has little to do with what were the jitters du jour. To this day, for example, nobody can point a finger at just why the sharemarket decided to have its biggest single-day slump back in October 1987, only that it was a bubble waiting to burst. And so it is with the US-induced global credit crunch that's put the wind up sharemarkets. The sub-prime disaster, where borrowers got loans they couldn't afford to repay, has been the first symptom of what's gone wrong, but it may not prove the real problem. Rather, there was a hint of it last week when a respectable US lender said some of its good customers were having trouble meeting their debt repayments. That's where the alarm bells should be ringing: if we've moved from a sub-prime to a prime disaster in the US, then the worst is still to come. That's because mainstream borrowers who took out their mortgages when interest rates were at the ludicrously low level of 3per cent or so are coming out of the honeymoon period during which there were 12 rate rises. Those low rates caused the subsequent global glut of liquidity and soaring asset prices which are starting to unwind. One thing's for sure, this "repricing" of their mortgages just as the equity in their homes is dropping away will be as painful to the banks as it is to them. Considering the sub-prime fallout wasn't even in the banking system but among spruikers selling loans from the boot of a car, imagine what would happen if the market lost confidence in, gasp, an American bank. Anyway, these dubious loans have been bundled up and sold to hedge funds by what the red-braces brigade called collateralised debt obligations (CDOs). More like collateral damage in overdrive. The junk is hidden behind the good stuff, taking advantage of the fact that the market, in reality them selling to each other, would spread the debt around so far that it wouldn't matter. Worse, the funds that bought them were borrowing as well, so it was really debt buying debt. No wonder it's all unravelling now, except that perfectly safe debt, such as corporate bonds, is being swept into the maelstrom as well. And while corporations, both in the US and here, have been cleaning up their balance sheets by paying off debt, the banks have been running up theirs, cleverly disguised as derivatives, which is a debt on a debt over a debt. So, to coin a phrase, this is the credit crunch we had to have. Just nobody panic.
原帖由 ivy_cn 于 2007-7-23 12:44 发表 老妖，你说的股票持有不到一年的，获利交一半的税，这是什么意思啊？是获利的一半需要交税还是说获的利要交出一半作为税？
本版积分规则 发表帖子
